| Literature DB >> 25520794 |
Clare Strachan1, Alexandra Wharton-Smith1, Chomba Sinyangwe2, Denis Mubiru3, James Ssekitooleko3, Joslyn Meier3, Miatta Gbanya4, James K Tibenderana1, Helen Counihan1.
Abstract
Numerous studies highlight the effectiveness of an integrated approach for the management of malaria, pneumonia and diarrhoea at the community level. There has however been little study on lessons learnt from implementation in practice and stakeholder experiences which could inform future programmatic planning and evaluation frameworks. A participatory, qualitative evaluation was conducted in the three varied settings of South Sudan, Uganda and Zambia, which have seen the scale up of integrated community case management (iCCM) over the last five years. All key in-country stakeholders were consulted on study design, with a particular focus on scope and methodology. Data collection methods included stakeholder consultations (key informant interviews, focus group discussions), and a review of project and Ministry of Health documentation. Data analysis followed the Framework Approach. Results suggest that iCCM implementation generally followed national pre-agreed guidelines. Overarching key programmatic recommendations included: collaboration with implementing partners in planning stages to positively impact on community acceptance and ownership; adoption of participatory training methods adapted to low literacy populations; development of alternative support supervision methods such as peer support groups; full integration of community level data into the health management information system and emphasizing data analysis, use and feedback at all levels; strengthened supply chains through improved quantification and procurement of commodities in conjunction with the national distribution network; community engagement to establish a support system for community health workers to increase their motivation; enhanced sensitisation and behaviour change communication to raise awareness and usage of appropriate health services; and advocacy at the national level for funding and logistical support for the continuation and integration of iCCM. This qualitative study is a valuable contribution in understanding the 'hows' of iCCM implementation with key insights for improved feasibility and acceptability. Main findings show how community support to iCCM and community health workers is necessary for sustained health benefits coupled with a focus on strengthening and 'enabling' the public health system. The participatory study design and methodologies used enabled the scope of the research enquiry to effectively capture various stakeholder perspectives.Entities:
Year: 2014 PMID: 25520794 PMCID: PMC4267083 DOI: 10.7189/jogh.04.020404
Source DB: PubMed Journal: J Glob Health ISSN: 2047-2978 Impact factor: 4.413
Selection criteria for study inclusion by target group
| Target Group | Selection criteria |
|---|---|
| Played a key role in iCCM implementation | |
| Supported iCCM planning, implementation | |
| Supported iCCM planning, implementation | |
| District Medical Officers, Pharmacists, DHMT members involved in iCCM | |
| Clinical staff who are involved in managing referred outpatient and inpatient cases of malaria, pneumonia and diarrhoea and were available on the day of interview from one central and one rural clinic in each district | |
| Village chiefs, headmen, church elders, village committee chairmen, who have been involved in iCCM implementation. In each district, one FGD of purposively selected community leaders from rural and urban areas | |
| iCCM trained CHWs. In each district: one FGD with CHWs attached to each of the two selected health facilities | |
| Caregivers of children under the age of five. In each district two FGDs of beneficiaries residing in the catchment areas of the selected health facilities were randomly selected |
iCCM – integrated community case management, MOH – Ministry of Health, CHW – community health worker, FGD – focus group discussion
Thematic areas of enquiry
| Thematic area | Subtheme |
|---|---|
| | • Policy and guidelines development process
• Introduction of programme to different levels of health system
• Other preparation for implementation |
| | • Steps of introduction and start up
• Issues and proposed solutions
• Recommendations |
| | • Process for recruitment of CHWs for iCCM (agreed approach vs practice)
• Appropriateness of selection criteria
• Issues which arose, proposed solutions, recommendations |
| | • Training models including levels of training ie, cascade
• Training approaches ie, practical vs theoretical
• Training tools
• Scope of training in terms of technical content and related learning capacity of CHWs
• Evaluation of training
• Refresher training
• Issues which arose, proposed solutions, recommendations |
| | • Models developed, application at different levels
• Support supervision tools used
• Effectiveness
• Alternative supervision models
• Issues which arose, proposed solutions, recommendations |
| | • Routine data available, scope and gaps
• How data has been collected
• How data has been cleaned, stored, summarised, analysed
• How data has been used
• Extent and scope of feedback given to those involved in submitting and compiling data (including feedback system)
• Data quality
• Issues which arose, proposed solutions, recommendations |
| | • Push vs pull system
• Transport and storage
• Packaging
• Modes of distribution
• Acceptability
• Issues which arose, proposed solutions, recommendations |
| | • Initial community response and changes over time
• Community support for CHWs
• Role of CHWs and workload/time spent/ motivation, attrition
• Utilisation of community iCCM services
• Acceptability aspects
• Referral uptake
• Issues which arose, proposed solutions, recommendations |
| | • BCC strategy, including scope of BCC activities implemented and why
• Perceived/measured value/outcome and impact of activities
• Issues which arose, proposed solutions, recommendations |
| | • Project management and staffing structures
• Coordination with other projects
• Coordination and sharing at the central level and with MOH
• Involvement of MOH
• Issues which arose, proposed solutions, recommendations |
| | • How the iCCM programme has been integrated
• Management of severe cases at health facility level
• Support for iCCM among health facility staff
• Other aspects relating to sustainability |
| | • Scope of services offered and perception of how well this integration works
• Appropriate number of CHWs per village
• Scale up
• Issues which arose, proposed solutions, recommendations |
| | • Evaluation methods, process, value
• Pilot studies
• Other recommendations |
| | • Any other feedback |
CHW – community health worker, iCCM – integrated community case management, MOH – Ministry of Health
Figure 1Multi–level iCCM integration as described by respondents in Uganda.
Specific recommendations for future iCCM implementation
| Theme | Recommendations |
|---|---|
| • Clear timeframe for the development/ revision of guidelines with multiple stakeholders | |
| • Effective collaboration with the MOH at district level in the detailed planning for implementation start up | |
| • Contingency funds for unforeseen costs such as health promotion and disease prevention training prior to iCCM training for CHWs who have not received it | |
| • Close collaboration with districts and central level implementers from outset in terms of planning, costing and implementation | |
| • Sensitise all health facility staff (where possible) | |
| • Timely and enhanced sensitisation prior to CHW selection to promote familiarity with the guidelines, transparency on the voluntary nature of the role and community participation. | |
| • Involve districts, health facility staff in monitoring selection process | |
| • CHW selection criteria to include an age range (ie, 18–45) | |
| • Maintain a participatory and interactive approach to training, utilise videos, visits to health facilities where possible. Translate key terms into local languages | |
| • Adapt training materials to the context and participants’ level of comprehension/literacy and numeracy levels | |
| • Allocate more time during the training to focus on challenging areas, specifically pneumonia diagnosis and the use of respiratory timers, data management and stock management and for trainers, enhancing supervisory skills | |
| • More focus on the newborn care component where this is part of the national policy | |
| • Extend the CHW training from six to ten days to enable better digest of content and practice in application, particularly relating to challenging parts of the course | |
| • Conduct a standardised test at the end of the training and provide a certificate for those who have passed | |
| • Provide refresher training for CHWs which focuses on problem areas identified through supervision | |
| • Supervisors to visit CHWs (home visits) within one month of initial training to review application of new skills/knowledge in practice and to motivate CHWs | |
| • Regular support supervision at frequent intervals (quarterly) | |
| • Prioritise support supervision within the MOH so that logistical support is provided and sustained | |
| • Promote district ownership and logistical support for supervision activities as far as possible, including integrating with other activities such as data collection/management | |
| • Link support supervision to CHW register data to identify gaps in knowledge, stock and assess CHW performance | |
| • Move towards competency based supervision and tools
• Introduce supervisors for CHW supervisors– ie, another level of supervision | |
| • Sensitise CHWs, health facility staff and DHMTs on the importance and uses of iCCM data, for instance in quantifying stock, identifying missing data in CHW registers, assessing CHW performance, planning disease control/community health activities | |
| • Build the data analysis and management capacity of health facility staff and DHTs | |
| • Clarify and communicate roles and responsibilities among health facility staff to support better prioritisation of data management activities | |
| • Advocate for, and support the process for, the integration of community level iCCM data into the HMIS tool | |
| • Provide equipment to CHWs to facilitate data submission (eg, bicycles, gumboots, rain coats) | |
| • Document data submission systems that have worked and share with implementers | |
| • Encourage health facilities using data as feedback for mapping trends and quantifying stock, to share their experiences with facilities that do not do this | |
| • Create mechanisms and templates for districts to feedback relevant iCCM data summaries to health facilities and CHWs | |
| • Scale up mHealth for data management and as a means of supervision and motivation of CHWs in locations where mobile phone networks have sufficient reliability and capacity | |
| • Provide CHWs with solar panels where possible to establish a consistent power supply to charge phones | |
| • Integrate iCCM commodities into national public supply chain from outset | |
| • Support for improved commodity flow through the district, with an emphasis on integration with the district supply chain, where this can be properly supported | |
| • Adjust quantity of RDTs, artemisinin–based combination therapy and amoxicillin based on actual consumption data and continue to revise in line with data generated to avoid stock outs | |
| • Supply health facilities with buffer stock, especially during the rainy season (RDTs, artemisinin–based combination therapy) | |
| • Share distribution records with the district as needed to facilitate ownership of the process | |
| • Emphasise sensitisation and regular community consultation through community leaders and community health committees or similar; specifically on the role of CHWs, the scope of iCCM services and the role of the community in supporting CHWs | |
| • Encourage a more sustainable mechanism through which communities can support CHWs, for instance cultivating land, assisting with chores, or material contributions– positive examples could be shared with other communities | |
| • Roll out BCC activities prior to iCCM implementation in communities to raise awareness about CHWs, iCCM services to promote demand | |
| • Contextualise BCC activities as much as possible based on existing information and initiatives; special consideration for hard to reach areas so that the most effective methods for those locations are utilised (ie, community gatherings vs radio if coverage is poor) | |
| • Utilise interactive approaches such as community dialogues, storytelling/posters | |
| • Emphasise specific key messages during BCC activities:
▫ Promote timely and effective utilisation of iCCM services
▫ The importance of community participation in the CHW selection process
▫ The voluntary nature of the CHW role
▫ The role of the community in supporting CHWs
▫ Clarification on the purpose of RDTs, specifically what the blood is being tested for to avoid misconceptions | |
| • Enhance information sharing of results and surveys between implementing partners and DHTs | |
| • Document roles and responsibilities ie, through Memorandums of Understanding (MoUs) to serve as a record of agreed processes | |
| • Improve collaboration and more frequent communication between implementing partners, the district and the different levels of the health system to enable effective implementation and address challenges | |
| • Advocate for the MOH and donors to prioritise iCCM in terms of funding and logistical support | |
| • Facilitate visits from central MOH and donors both at start–up and during implementation to share experiences and promote the value of the programme | |
| • Prioritise addressing the gaps in support supervision and data management | |
| • Strengthen the supply chain to facilitate the timely and frequent delivery of iCCM commodities | |
| • More collaboration with the district during planning stage on how best to integrate iCCM activities into district level plans and budget | |
| • Strengthen current iCCM activities before widening the scope in terms of age or coverage | |
| • Continue to/ prioritise hard to reach locations | |
| • Gather and share more evidence to inform appropriate CHW/ population ratios | |
| • Evaluate programme impact and feedback findings to all levels of the MOH, partners and communities | |
| • Involve the districts closely in all monitoring and evaluation activities | |
| • Strengthen local capacity to undertake monitoring and evaluation activities |
CHW – community health worker, iCCM – integrated community case management, MOH – Ministry of Health, DH(M)T – district health (management) team, HMIS – health information management system, RDT – rapid diagnostic test