| Literature DB >> 31795999 |
N Young1,2, M Taetgmeyer3,4, G Zulaika5, G Aol6, M Desai7, F Ter Kuile5, I Langley3.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Despite WHO advocating for an integrated approach to antenatal care (ANC), testing coverage for conditions other than HIV remains low and women are referred to distant laboratories for testing. Using point-of-care tests (POCTs) at peripheral dispensaries could improve access to testing and timely treatment. However, the effect of providing additional services on nurse workload and client wait times are unknown. We use discrete-event simulation (DES) modelling to understand the effect of providing four point-of-care tests for ANC on nurse utilization and wait times for women seeking maternal and child health (MCH) services.Entities:
Keywords: Anaemia; Antenatal care; Discrete-event simulation modelling; HIV; Human resources; Integration; Kenya; Malaria; Point-of-care testing; Syphilis
Mesh:
Year: 2019 PMID: 31795999 PMCID: PMC6892244 DOI: 10.1186/s12889-019-7739-4
Source DB: PubMed Journal: BMC Public Health ISSN: 1471-2458 Impact factor: 3.295
Fig. 1Facility floorplan
Estimated ideal times for antenatal first visit and antenatal revisit based on consultation times estimated from Tanzania in hours and minutes (hh:mm) [40]
| Activity | First visit | Revisit |
|---|---|---|
| Welcoming the woman | 00:01 | 00:01 |
| Registration | 00:05 | 00:00 |
| History taking/updating | 00:10 | 00:05 |
| Physical exam | 00:08 | 00:08 |
| Drug administration | 00:03 | 00:03 |
| Immunization | 00:01 | 00:01 |
| Pre-test counselling and set up | 00:05 | 00:00 |
| Health education and counselling while waiting for POCTs results | 00:20 | 00:15 |
| Post-test results counselling and treatment | 00:02 | 00:00 |
| Filling ANC book and register | 00:03 | 00:03 |
| TOTAL TIME | 00:58 | 00:36 |
POCTs point-of-care tests, ANC antenatal care
Fig. 2a: Facility client arrival times over 20 working days (24-h clock, N= 838). b: Facility client load by day of the week (N = 838)
Fig. 3a: Distribution of total wait times for MCH women. b: Distribution of total length-of-stay for MCH women
Wait times and length-of-stay in hh:mm under the three scenarios with mean differences
| Median (IQR, max) | Mean (95%CI) | Mean difference (95%CI) | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Wait times (N = 183) | ||||
| [0] Without integrated POCT | 00:22 (00:01–01:21, 04:31) | 00:50 (00:41–00:59) | reference | |
| [1] With integrated POCT | 00:24 (00:01–01:15, 04:31) | 00:52 (00:42–00:61) | 00:02 (00:00–00:04) | 0.026 |
| [2] With integrated POCT and adequate consult times | 00:31 (00:04–01:31, 05:35) | 00:59 (00:49–00:69) | 00:09 (00:04–00:14) | < 0.001 |
| Length-of-stay (N = 183) | ||||
| [0] Without integrated POCT | 00:52 (00:23–01:56, 05:54) | 01:18 (01:08–01:29) | reference | |
| [1] With integrated POCT | 00:55 (00:22–02:01, 05:54) | 01:20 (1:09–01:32) | 00:02 (00:00–00:04) | 0.015 |
| [2] With integrated POCT and adequate consult times | 01:08 (00:31–02:14, 07:03) | 01:34 (01:22–01:46) | 00:16 (00:10–00:21) | < 0.001 |
apaired t-test; IQR inter-quartile range
Nurse utilization under 3 scenarios
| Nurse 1 (OP) utilization | Nurse 2 (MCH) utilization | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Without integrated POCT [0] | With integrated POCT [1] | With integrated POCT & adequate consult times [2] | Without integrated POCT [0] | With integrated POCT [1] | With integrated POCT & adequate consult times [2] | |
| Tuesdaya | – | – | – | 323/480 (67%) | 345/480 (72%) | |
| Wednesday | – | – | – | 232/480 (48.3%) | 248/480 (52%) | 326/480 (68%) |
| Thursdaya | – | – | – | 186/480 (38.7%) | 186/480 (39%) | 227/480 (47%) |
| Friday | – | – | – | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Monday | 293/480 (61%) | 301/480 (63%) | 323/480 (67%) | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Tuesday | 0 | 0 | 0 | |||
| Wednesday | 295/480 (61%) | 295/480 (61%) | 295/480 (61%) | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Thursday | 0 | 0 | 0 | |||
| Friday | 378/480 (79%) | 378/480 (79%) | 378/480 (79%) | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Monday | 302/480 (63%) | 302/480 (63%) | 332/480 (69%) | 323/480 (67%) | 323/480 (67%) | 344/480 (72%) |
| Tuesday | 166/480 (35%) | 166/480 (35%) | 178/480 (37%) | 230/360 (64%) | 230/360 (64%) | |
| Wednesday | 293/480 (61%) | 293/480 (61%) | ||||
| Thursdaya | 0 | 0 | 0 | 303/480 (63%) | 314/480 (65%) | 377/480 (78%) |
| Friday | 62/120 (52%) | 62/120 (52%) | 62/120 (52%) | 331/480 (69%) | 331/480 (69%) | |
| Monday | ||||||
| Tuesday | 0 | 0 | 0 | 369/480 (77%) | ||
| Wednesday | 0 | 0 | 0 | 141/480 (30%) | 141/480 (30%) | 141/480 (30%) |
| Thursdaya | 0 | 0 | 0 | 195/480 (41%) | 195/480 (41%) | 211/480 (44%) |
| Friday | 0 | 0 | 0 | 301/480 (61%) | 301/480 (63%) | 301/480 (63%) |
| Monday | 216/360 (60%) | 216/360 (60%) | 216/360 (60%) | 275/360 (77%) | 283/360 (79%) | |
| OVERALL | 3331/4710 (71%) | 3339/4710 (71%) | 3517/4710 (75%) | 3885/6480 (60%) | 3956/6480 (61%) | 4555/6480 (70%) |
| p-value c | [1] vs [0] | [2] vs [1] | [1] vs [0] | [2] vs [1] | ||
Nurse 1 spent approximately 870 min (18.5%) and Nurse 2 spent approximately 1410 min (21.8%) of their utilization time on paperwork
OP out-patient clients, MCH maternal and child health clients, POCT point-of-care testing
a Clinical officer on duty- out of 390-min shifts, the clinical officer had less than 50% utilization each day. For scenario 3, the CO was modelled to help with child immunization when he was available
Nurse utilizations generated by the model can be over 100% because the resource is given an allowance to carry on processing any on-going activity after the shift has finished
c Wilcoxon sign-rank test