| Literature DB >> 22435007 |
Taddese Geremew1, Challi Jira, Fitsum Girma.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Providing quality of care for infectious pulmonary tuberculosis patients is crucial in prevention and control of the disease. However, little is known about the existing quality of care in such services. The objective of the study was to assess the quality of care delivered for infectious pulmonary tuberculosis patient in Jimma Zone, South West Ethiopia.Entities:
Keywords: Jimma Zone; Quality; Tuberculosis care
Year: 2011 PMID: 22435007 PMCID: PMC3275880
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Ethiop J Health Sci ISSN: 1029-1857
Structural quality score of public health facilities pertaining to TB care, Jimma Zone, April 2008.
| Health facility | Drug, Diagnostic | Management | Infrastructure | Patient | Average score |
| JUSH | 4/9 | 5/9 | 2/4 | 2/4 | 13/26 (50) |
| Yebu | 5/9 | 6/9 | 2/4 | 1/4 | 14/26 (54) |
| Agaro | 6/9 | 7/9 | 1/4 | 1/4 | 15/26 (58) |
| Asendabo | 5/9 | 6/9 | 1/4 | 2/4 | 14/26 (54) |
| Sokoru | 6/9 | 6/9 | 2/4 | 0/4 | 14/26 (54) |
| Serbo | 4/9 | 8/9 | 2/4 | 1/4 | 15/26 (58) |
| Dedo | 6/9 | 6/9 | 1/4 | 2/4 | 15/26 (58) |
| JHC | 6/9 | 8/9 | 2/4 | 3/4 | 19/26 (73) |
| Shebe | 4/9 | 6/9 | 2/4 | 2/4 | 14/26 (54) |
| LG Health C. | 5/9 | 7/9 | 1/4 | 0/4 | 13/26 (50) |
Characteristics of patients with smear positive Pulmonary Tuberculosis patients attending public health facilities in Jimma Zone, April 2008.
| Characteristics | Total (n= 399) |
| Age(Years) | |
| 0<15 | 14 (3.5) |
| 15–60 | 371 (93.0) |
| >60 | 9 (2.3) |
| unrecorded | 5 (1.3) |
| Mean | 28.76 |
| Sex | |
| Male | 206 (51.6) |
| Female | 184 (46.1) |
| Unrecorded | 9 (2.3) |
| Diagnostic category | |
| New | 353 (88.5) |
| Relapse | 17(4.3) |
| Failure | 2 (0.5) |
| Return after default | 2 (0.5) |
| Transfer | 19 (4.8) |
| Not mentioned | 6 (1.5) |
| Treatment out come | |
| Cured | 202 (50.6) |
| Treatment completed | 74(18.5) |
| Died | 12 (3.0) |
| Failure | 3 (0.8) |
| Defaulter | 27(6.8) |
| Transfer Out | 44 (11.0) |
| Not Mentioned | 37(9.3) |
| Treatment Success | 276 (69.2) |
Compliance with performing required smear microscopy according to DOTS strategy at Public health facilities in Jimma Zone, April 2008.
| Smear microscopy | Total (n= 399) |
| Number of smears done | |
| proper number | 153 (38.3) |
| 1 smear omitted | 85 (21.3) |
| 2 smear omitted | 69 (17.3) |
| 3 smear omitted | 80 (20.1) |
| 4 smear omitted | 0 (0) |
| not applicable((death) | 12 (3.0) |
| Timeliness of smears | |
| On time | 384 (96.2) |
| 2 months late | 2 (0.8) |
| 3 months late | 0 (0) |
| 4 months late | 0 (0) |
| not applicable((death) | 12 (3.0) |
| Mean score(SD) | |
| Quality of smear microscopy | |
| No. of smears | 0.7 (0.29) |
| Timeliness of smear | 0.97 (0.17) |
| Over all quality | 0.67 (0.31) |
| Grading | Marginal |
Quality of anti-Tuberculosis drug therapy according to DOTS strategy at public health facilities in Jimma Zone, April 2008 (n= 399).
| Drug regimen | Initial phase of therapy | Continuation phase of therapy |
| Type & No. of prescribed drugs | 331 (83.0) | 247 (61.9) |
| Duration of therapy complete | 315 (78.9) | 258 (64.7) |
| Regimen conforming to DOTS | 276 (69.2) | 187 (46.9) |
| Mean Number of drugs per | 2.96 | 2.42 |
Overall quality of TB care in Public health facilities, Jimma Zone, April 2008
| Name of health facility | Over all quality product | Quality score | Grade |
| JUSH | 16.4/75 | 0.22 | Poor |
| Yebu | 6.7/23 | 0.29 | Poor |
| Agaro | 40.7/80 | 0.51 | Good |
| Asendabo | 5.6/30 | 0.19 | Poor |
| Sokoru | 6.7/16 | 0.42 | Poor |
| Serbo | 4.1/14 | 0.29 | Poor |
| Dedo | 14.5/29 | 0.50 | Good |
| JHC | 33.1/60 | 0.55 | Good |
| Shebe | 0.9/30 | 0.03 | Poor |
| LG Health C. | 5.7/42 | 0.14 | Poor |
| Total | 135.5/399 | 0.34 | Poor |
Quality score Grading: poor (0-<5); good (0.5–0.9) and excellent (0.9–1).
Results of association of Tuberculosis treatment success and some explanatory variables at Jimma Zone public health facilities, April 2008
| Variables | Successful | Un successful | Total |
| Sex | |||
| Male | 131(63.6) | 75(36.4) | 206(100) |
| Female | 138 (75.0) | 46 (25.0) | 184 (100) |
| Significance | Chi- squared test p= 0.023 | ||
| Conformity to drug regimen initial phase | |||
| Conforming | 212 (76.8) | 64 (23.2) | 276 (100) |
| Non conforming | 63 (51.2) | 60 (48.8) | 123 (100) |
| Significance | Chi- squared test p < 0.001 | ||
| Conformity to drug regimen continuation | |||
| Conforming | 176 (94.1) | 11 (5.9) | 187 (100) |
| Non conforming | 99 (46.6) | 113 (53.4) | 212 (100) |
| Significance | Chi- squared test p < 0.001 |
Results of logistic regression analysis (Back ward steep wise) with treatment success and five variables found to be significantly associated in bivariate analysis at Jimma Zone public health facilities, April 2008.
| Variables | p- value | Exp(B) | 95 % CI | |
| Initial model | ||||
| 1 | −0.780 | 0.045 | 0.46 | 0.21–0.98 |
| 2 | 1.95 | < 0.001 | 7.05 | 3.15–15.79 |
| 3 | 4.07 | < 0.001 | 58.81 | 9.99– 346.07 |
| 4 | 0.358 | 0.009 | 1.43 | 1.09– 1.87 |
| 5 | 0.136 | 0.659 | 1.15 | 0.63– 2.09 |
| constant | −5.712 | < 0.001 | 0.003 | |
| Final model | ||||
| 1 | −0.785 | 0.043 | 0.46 | 0.21–0.98 |
| 2 | 1.98 | < 0.001 | 7.14 | 3.20–15.96 |
| 3 | 4.06 | < 0.001 | 58.16 | 9.97– 339.38 |
| 4 | 0.362 | 0.008 | 1.44 | 1.09– 1.88 |
| constant | −5.545 | < 0.001 | 0.004 |
Significant at p- value < 0.05
Variable 1 Conformity to drug regimen initial phase
Variable 2 Conformity to drug regimen continuation phase
Variable 3 Conformity to recommended schedule of sputum smear microscopy
Variable 4 Quality of registration of patient's medical records
Variable 5 Sex of the patient's
CI Confidence Interval
Performance of General Health Worker in TB care in Public Health facilities, Jimma Zone, April, 2008.
| Health F | Quality of | Drug Regimen | Drug Regimen | Sputum smear | Overall |
| JUSH | 0.79 | 0.61 | 0.35 | 0.64 | 0.22 |
| Yebu | 0.82 | 0.65 | 0.52 | 0.52 | 0.32 |
| Agaro | 0.93 | 0.83 | 0.64 | 0.76 | 0.51 |
| Asendabo | 0.88 | 0.60 | 0.43 | 0.63 | 0.24 |
| Sokoru | 0.85 | 0.69 | 0.50 | 0.59 | 0.48 |
| Serbo | 0.88 | 0.71 | 0.43 | 0.57 | 0.29 |
| Dedo | 0.94 | 0.79 | 0.52 | 0.84 | 0.50 |
| JHC | 0.97 | 0.85 | 0.63 | 0.88 | 0.58 |
| Shebe | 0.76 | 0.33 | 0.13 | 0.34 | 0.09 |
| LG Health C. | 0.86 | 0.62 | 0.33 | 0.58 | 0.16 |
| Total | 0.88 | 0.69 | 0.47 | 0.67 | 0.42 |
Performance of GHW overall score = 0-< 0,5(poor); 0.5- < 0.9 (good); 0.9–1 (excellent)