| Literature DB >> 30016954 |
Humphrey Wanzira1, Richard Muyinda2, Peter Lochoro2, Giovanni Putoto2, Giulia Segafredo2, Henry Wamani3, Marzia Lazzerini4.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Arua district, in Uganda, hosts some of the largest refugee camps in the country. The estimated prevalence of moderate and severe acute malnutrition in children is higher than the national estimates (10.4 and 5.6% respectively, compared to 3.6 and 1.3%). This study aimed at assessing the quality of care provided to children with acute malnutrition at out-patient level in such a setting.Entities:
Keywords: Acute malnutrition; Children under 5 years; Health center; Quality assessment; Quality of care
Mesh:
Year: 2018 PMID: 30016954 PMCID: PMC6050688 DOI: 10.1186/s12913-018-3366-5
Source DB: PubMed Journal: BMC Health Serv Res ISSN: 1472-6963 Impact factor: 2.655
Fig. 1Study flow diagram
Key characteristics of the health facilities
| Variable | Health facility | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| HC 1 | HC 2 | HC 3 | HC 4 | HC 5 | HC 6 | Totals | |
| Health Center levela | IV | III | III | III | III | III | – |
| Estimated population coverage | 32,000 | 3960 | 22,548 | 13,779 | 2500 | 21,662 | 96,449 |
| Children diagnosed with acute malnutritionb | 318 | 292 | 116 | 151 | 82 | 61 | 1020 |
| Number of staff assigned to the nutritional unit | 2 | 2 | 3 | 1 | 3 | 2 | 13 |
| Nutritional staff qualification | |||||||
| Clinical officer | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 |
| Enrolled nurse/midwife | 1 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 3 | 2 | 8 |
| Nursing assistant | 0 | 1 | 2 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 4 |
| Staff trained in IMAM guideline | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 |
aLevels of primary health care in Uganda is tiered into health center I,II,III and IV
bHMIS data July 2015 – June 2016 (financial year)
Performance of health facilities in the selected capacity areas
| Capacity area | Health facility Scorea | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| HC 1 | HC 2 | HC 3 | HC 4 | HC 5 | HC 6 | |
| 1. General information on service implementation | Fair | Good | Fair | Fair | Fair | Fair |
| 2. Adequate human resources | Poor | Poor | Poor | Poor | Fair | Poor |
| 3. Provision of nutritional services | Fair | Fair | Fair | Poor | Fair | Poor |
| 4. Community Linkagetable | Fair | Fair | Fair | Poor | Poor | Good |
| 5. Quality improvement activities | Poor | Poor | Poor | Poor | Poor | Poor |
| 6. Materials and Supplies | Poor | Fair | Poor | Poor | Fair | Poor |
| 7. Nutrition unit requirements | Fair | Fair | Poor | Fair | Fair | Poor |
| 8. Store management | Poor | Fair | Fair | Poor | Fair | Fair |
| 9. Logistics Management for commodities | Poor | Poor | Fair | Poor | Fair | Poor |
| 10. Monitoring and evaluation | Poor | Poor | Poor | Poor | Poor | Poor |
aScore performance categories according to the NSDA tool: poor; fair; good; excellent [26]
Fig. 2Distribution of NSDA scores by facility
Gaps in quality of nutritional services observed by capacity area
| Capacity area | Observed issue |
|---|---|
| Organisation of services | Nutrition services delivered “under the tree” |
| Working hours unclear | |
| Frequent service delays if rain | |
| No triage | |
| Chaotic organisation, no clear roles and responsibilities | |
| No transport for children sent In-patient Therapeutic Care (ITC) | |
| Working hours unclear | |
| Case management | Triage not performed |
| Mid Upper Aram Circumference (MUAC) not routinely done at all entry points (Out patients department -OPD, Tuberculosis and Anti retroviral therapy - TB/ART) | |
| Mis-classification SAM/MAM | |
| Z-score never used (only MUAC used) | |
| No history taking | |
| Comprehensive clinical examination as per the Integrated Management of Childhood Illnesses (IMCI) not performed | |
| Treatment | Water with sugar not offered at admission |
| 10 key messages on RUTF not delivered | |
| Individual counselling never performed | |
| Amoxicillin, vitamine A, Iron and mebendazole not prescribed | |
| MAM and SAM usually treated the same | |
| Integrated Management of childhood Illnesses (IMCI) | HIV status often indicated as unknown despite availability of testing kits |
| TB rarely assessed | |
| Children at OPD not always assessed for nutritional status | |
| Children with malnutrition not assessed according to IMCI | |
| Staff working in out-patient care not trained in IMCI | |
| Old IMCI job aids in some facilities | |
| Supplies | Stock out of RUTF observed in many facilities |
| Lack of mean of transport to facilities | |
| Lack of timely request from facilities | |
| Staffing | Lack of staffing with some facilities having no nutritional focal person appointed |
| Lack of nutritional specific training | |
| Poor practices even among trained staff | |
| Village Health Teams (VHTs) usually not formally trained but doing the job at OTC in place of facility staff | |
| Community linkage | VHTs screening reports not readily available |
| Blank VHTs registers | |
| No effective means of communication between facilities and village health teams (VHTs) | |
| No incentives for the VHT | |
| Quality improvement | Several supportive supervision activities are conducted on a quarterly basis, at facilities but only few are specific to nutrition |
Abbreviations: ART Anti Retro-viral Therapy, HIV Human Immune-deficiency Virus, IMCI Integrated Management of Childhood Illness, ITC In-patient Therapeutic Care, MAM Moderate Acute Malnutrition, MUAC Mid-Upper Arm Circumference, OPD Out Patients Department, OTC Out-patient Therapeutic Care, RUTF Ready-to-Use Therapeutic Foods, SAM Severe Acute Malnutrition, TB Tuberculosis, VHT Village Health Teams
Fig. 3Distribution of health outcomes
Case management and data quality
| Variable | Health facility | |||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| HC 1 | HC 2 | HC 3a | HC 4 | HC 5 | HC 6 | Total | Chi | |
| Correct process outcomes | ||||||||
| Diagnosis | 30(15.5) | 125(91.2) | – | 88(29.2) | 95(41.7) | 6(4.5) | 344(34.6) | 0.001 |
| IMAM treatment | 0 | 0 | – | 151(50.0) | 28(12.3) | 12(9.0) | 191(19.2) | 0.001 |
| Evaluation of HIV | 158(81.4) | 90(65.7) | – | 175(58.1) | 208(91.2) | 100(74.6) | 731(73.5) | 0.001 |
| Counselling of patients | 39(20.1) | 136(99.3) | – | 172(57.1) | 111(48.7) | 15(11.2) | 473(47.6) | 0.001 |
| Exit outcome assigned | 19(9.8) | 104(75.9) | – | 31(10.3) | 12(5.3) | 0 | 166(16.7) | 0.001 |
| Data quality | ||||||||
| Data completeness | 0 | 44(32.1) | – | 0(0) | 0(0) | 0(0) | 44(4.4) | 0.001 |
| Data consistency | 0 | 120(87.6) | – | 74(25.6) | 11(4.8) | 1(0.8) | 206(20.7) | 0.001 |
Data source: Integrated Nutrition Register
aData not available in the integrated nutrition register
#p-value assessed against a pre-defined target of 80% achievement