| Literature DB >> 30910531 |
Fernando Althabe1, Elwyn Chomba2, Antoinette K Tshefu3, Ernest Banda2, María Belizán4, Eduardo Bergel4, Mabel Berrueta5, Jane Bertrand6, Carl Bose7, Maria Luisa Cafferata4, Waldemar A Carlo8, Alvaro Ciganda4, France Donnay6, Ezequiel García Elorrio4, Luz Gibbons4, Karen Klein4, Jerker Liljestrand9, Paul D Lusamba3, Arlette K Mavila3, Agustina Mazzoni4, Dalau M Nkamba3, Friday H Mwanakalanga2, Abigail Mwapule Tembo2, Musaku Mwenechanya2, Lee Pyne-Mercier9, Cintia Spira4, Jean D Wetshikoy3, Xu Xiong6, Pierre Buekens6.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Despite international recommendations, coverage of syphilis testing in pregnant women and treatment of those found seropositive remains limited in sub-Saharan Africa. We assessed whether combining the provision of supplies with a behavioural intervention was more effective than providing supplies only, to improve syphilis screening and treatment during antenatal care.Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2019 PMID: 30910531 PMCID: PMC6465956 DOI: 10.1016/S2214-109X(19)30075-0
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Lancet Glob Health ISSN: 2214-109X Impact factor: 26.763
Figure 1Trial profile
Characteristics of antenatal care clinics and women at baseline
| Number of clinics | 13 | 13 | |
| Number of women | 9282 | 9265 | |
| Number of women per clinic | 1412 (1461) | 1360 (1450) | |
| Country | |||
| Democratic Republic of the Congo | 8 (62%) | 8 (62%) | |
| Zambia | 5 (38%) | 5 (38%) | |
| Type of clinic | |||
| Public | 7 (54%) | 8 (62%) | |
| Private | 2 (15%) | 1 (8%) | |
| Faith-based | 4 (31%) | 4 (31%) | |
| Clinic with syphilis or HIV programme | 12 (92%) | 12 (92%) | |
| Number of first antenatal care clinic visits per clinic | 491 (194–894) | 337 (192–1225) | |
| Number of first antenatal care clinic visits per health provider | 129 (65–192) | 81 (64–153) | |
| Screened for syphilis | 41·4% (25·1–69·7) | 40·9% (15·5–74·2) | |
| Positive for syphilis | 1·2% (0·2–1·6) | 1·1% (0·0–2·5) | |
| Treated for syphilis | 0·0% (0·0–0·0) | 0·0% (0·0–21·7) | |
| Screened for anaemia | 27·9% (5·0–54·0) | 34·7% (4·0–53·5) | |
| Screened for proteinuria | 4·4% (0·2–10·7) | 0·8% (0·0–3·7) | |
| Screened for HIV | 97·9% (91·2–98·2) | 91·2% (82·8–97·6) | |
| Maternal age <20 years | 16·5% (12·4–19·0) | 17·6% (15·6–20·8) | |
| Incomplete primary school | 13·6% (10·1–27·3) | 22·4% (18·9–26·9) | |
| Married or with partner | 88·5% (86·2–91·2) | 89·1% (84·2–90·6) | |
| No previous pregnancies | 21·4% (19·2–22·9) | 25·9% (23·7–28·1) | |
| Previous abortion | 28·9% (14·7–30·6) | 21·8% (12·6–29·4) | |
| Previous preterm birth | 2·6% (1·6–4·3) | 3·1% (2·0–3·4) | |
| Previous low birthweight baby | 2·4% (0·7–5·1) | 5·1% (1·9–7·0) | |
| Previous babies with congenital anomalies | 0·0% (0·0–0·3) | 0·1% (0·0–1·1) | |
| Previous syphilis infection | 0·6% (0·0–1·8) | 0·4% (0·0–1·0) | |
| Gestational age at first visit ≤20 weeks | 48·0% (37·6–52·5) | 46·5% (42·6–53·6) | |
Data are N, mean (SD), n (%), or median (IQR). The clinic is the unit of analysis. Health provider is the antenatal health-care provider that works in each participating clinic attending the mothers for antenatal care during pregnancy.
Effect of the intervention on syphilis screening and treatment rates at the first antenatal care visit
| Women (n=18 357), n/N | Clinics (n=13), median proportion | Women (n=17 679), n/N | Clinics (n=13), median proportion | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Women screened for syphilis | 18 314/18 357 | 99·9% (99·0 to 100·0) | 17 036/17 679 | 93·8% (85·0 to 98·9) | 6·1% (1·1 to 14·1) | 0·00092 |
| Women treated (proportion of those positive for syphilis) | 889/894 | 100·0% (99·7 to 100·0) | 534/991 | 43·2% (2·6 to 83·2) | 56·8% (12·8 to 99·0) | 0·0028 |
| Women screened for anaemia at their first clinic visit | 8666/18 357 | 50·0% (22·3 to 75·8) | 8097/17 679 | 57·0% (27·7 to 70·5) | −7·0% (−24·9 to 30·8) | 0·72 |
| Women screened for proteinuria at their first clinic visit | 2171/18 355 | 0·8% (0·3 to 7·2) | 1458/17 677 | 0·1% (0·0 to 1·8) | 0·7% (−0·2 to 6·3) | 0·22 |
| Women screened for HIV at their first clinic visit | 15 422/18 320 | 86·5% (78·1 to 90·5) | 14 189/17 678 | 81·1% (68·4 to 84·8) | 5·4% (−2·4 to 15·9) | 0·10 |
Wilcoxon rank sum test.
The clinic is the unit of analysis.
For three clinics in the control group in the Democratic Republic of the Congo, the proportion of women screened positive for syphilis who were treated at the first visit could not be calculated because the clinic had no women who were positive for syphilis.
Figure 2Syphilis screening and treatment across the clinics
(A) Proportions of women screened at each of the 26 clinics. Numbers below bars are number of women screened over number of pregnant women attending clinic. (B) Proportions of women treated at the 23 clinics. Three clinics had no seropositive women, so proportion treated could not be calculated, and these clinics are not included on the graph. Numbers below bars are number of women treated over number of women who tested seropositive for syphilis.
Figure 3Syphilis screening and treatment by study month
Proportions of women screened of total number of pregnant women attending clinic (A) and proportions of women treated of total number of women who tested seropositive for syphilis (B) over the baseline and follow-up periods. The grey area indicates when the intervention was implemented, separating the baseline and post-intervention periods.