23 research outputs found

    An assessment of health facility service readiness and the quality of care provided to patients with diabetes and hypertension in Lagos State, Nigeria

    No full text
    BACKGROUND: More than 70% of the global premature mortality from NCDs occurs in low- and middle-income countries. These countries, including Nigeria, also have varied but mostly limited health system capacity to respond to cardiovascular disease and diabetes mellitus. Substantial gaps exist in our understanding of the subnational capacity to respond to these conditions in Nigeria. This encompasses a variety of issues, perhaps most importantly the readiness of facilities to provide care and the quality of care provided to patients with these conditions. As the Lagos State government accelerates the rollout of its mandatory state-based health insurance scheme, the number of patients with diabetes and hypertension receiving care will increase, poor management of which can threaten the scheme's financial sustainability. This mixed-methods study was conducted as part of the baseline activities of an impact evaluation of the health insurance program and was designed to answer three questions: 1) What is the capacity and readiness of health facilities in Lagos State to provide hypertension (HTN) and diabetes (DM) care? 2) What is the level of the quality of care provided to patients with HTN and DM, and how does it vary by patient and facility characteristics? 3) What are the barriers to providing diabetes and hypertension care from providers' perspectives? METHODS: The data for this study were collected using three approaches. We conducted a facility survey among public and private facilities (n=84) in Lagos State to assess facility readiness and the functionality of systems required for diabetes and hypertension care. Linear mixed-effects models were used to determine the level and factors associated with the process quality of care provided to patients in 2019 by analyzing clinical data collected via medical chart abstraction. Finally, in-depth interviews were conducted with health care providers (n=20) to explore their practices and the barriers faced in providing care to patients with diabetes and hypertension. RESULTS: The essential inputs needed for diabetes and hypertension care were mostly available; the mean HTN readiness score was 66%, and the DM readiness score was 68.9%. At the same time, systems to facilitate longitudinal care were mostly lacking; 35% had a mechanism for tracking patients who missed appointments, and 52% assigned unique patient identification numbers to NCD patients. Based on the clinical records, the quality of care provided to patients was very low; overall, patients with diabetes and hypertension received less than 30% of recommended care processes. Less than a third of the patients had their blood pressure or blood glucose controlled. There was substantial variation in the mean quality score by patient and across care processes, with lifestyle modification counseling (LSM) counseling the least likely to be delivered. According to providers, the inability to pay for laboratory tests and medications and non-compliance with medications and clinic visits are key barriers to delivery of high-quality services. Barriers at the organizational level included poorly functioning two-way referrals, non-availability of LSM counseling materials, and lack of recall and follow-up systems. CONCLUSION: While the service readiness scores for diabetes and hypertension are moderately high among these health facilities, there are critical deficits in their ability to provide long-term, integrated care of high quality to patients. Addressing these deficits will require the implementation of a comprehensive model of care co-created by providers, health system managers, patients, and insurers. Lessons can be drawn from the implementation of other chronic disease programs to kick start this process.2024-08-30T00:00:00

    Cost analysis of the WHO-HEARTS program for hypertension control and CVD prevention in primary health facilities in Ethiopia

    No full text
    Background: In 2020, Ethiopia launched the Ethiopia Hypertension Control Initiative (EHCI) program to improve hypertension care using the approach described in the WHO HEARTS technical package. Objective: To estimate the costs of implementing the HEARTS program for hypertension control and cardiovascular disease (CVD) prevention in the primary care setting in Ethiopia for adult primary care users in the catchment area of five examined facilities. Study design: This study entails a program cost analysis using cross-sectional primary and secondary data. Methods: Micro-costing facility surveys were used to assess activity costs related to training, counselling, screening, lab diagnosis, medications, monitoring, and start-up costs at five selected health facilities. Cost data were obtained from primary and secondary sources, and expert opinion. Annual costs from the health system perspective were estimated using the Excel-based HEARTS costing tool under two intervention scenarios – hypertension-only control and a CVD risk management program, which addresses diabetes and hypercholesterolemia in addition to hypertension. Results: The estimated cost per adult primary care user was USD 5.3 for hypertension control and USD 19.3 for integrated CVD risk management. The estimated medication cost per person treated for hypertension was USD 9.0, whereas treating diabetes and high cholesterol would cost USD 15.4 and USD 15.3 per person treated, respectively. Medications were the major cost driver, accounting for 37% of the total cost in the hypertension control program. In the CVD risk management scenario, the proportions of medication and lab diagnostics of total costs were 18% and 64%, respectively. Conclusions: The results from this study can inform planning and budgeting for HEARTS scale-up to prevent CVD across Ethiopia

    Effect of PEPFAR funding policy change on HIV service delivery in a large HIV care and treatment network in Nigeria.

    No full text
    The transition to PEPFAR 2.0 with its focus on country ownership was accompanied by substantial funding cuts. We describe the impact of this transition on HIV care in a large network of HIV clinics in Nigeria. We surveyed 30 comprehensive HIV treatment clinics to assess services supported before (October 2013-September 2014) and after (October 2014-September 2015) the PEPFAR funding policy change, the impact of these policy changes on service delivery areas, and response of clinics to the change. We compared differences in support for staffing, laboratory services, and clinical operations pre- and post-policy change using paired t-tests. We used framework analysis to assess answers to open ended questions describing responses to the policy change. Most sites (83%, n = 25) completed the survey. The majority were public (60%, n = 15) and secondary (68%, n = 17) facilities. Clinics had a median of 989 patients in care (IQR: 543-3326). All clinics continued to receive support for first and second line antiretrovirals and CD4 testing after the policy change, while no clinics received support for other routine drug monitoring labs. We found statistically significant reductions in support for viral load testing, staff employment, defaulter tracking, and prevention services (92% vs. 64%, p = 0.02; 80% vs. 20%, 100% vs. 44%, 84% vs. 16%, respectively, p<0.01 for all) after the policy change. Service delivery was hampered by interrupted laboratory services and reduced wages and staff positions leading to reduced provider morale, and compromised quality of care. Almost all sites (96%) introduced user fees to address funding shortages. Clinics in Nigeria are experiencing major challenges in providing routine HIV services as a result of PEPFAR's policy changes. Funding cutbacks have been associated with compromised quality of care, staff shortages, and reliance on fee-based care for historically free services. Sustainable HIV services funding models are urgently needed

    Clinical and virologic outcomes over duration on ART, ARV-naïve patients.

    No full text
    <p>A) median CD4+ cell count (cells/mm<sup>3</sup>) over time on ART; and, B) percentage of patients with virologic suppression (≤400 copies/mL) over time on ART.</p

    Baseline patient status by enrollment year, ARV-naïve patients.

    No full text
    <p>A) median baseline CD4+cell count (cell/mm<sup>3</sup>); and, B) percentage patients by WHO clinical stage.</p
    corecore