44 research outputs found
Longitudinal outcomes indicators for Type 2 Diabetes Cohort.
<p>Longitudinal outcomes indicators for Type 2 Diabetes Cohort.</p
Challenges, Opportunities, and Solutions for Implementation of Diabetes Programs in Guatemala.
<p>Challenges, Opportunities, and Solutions for Implementation of Diabetes Programs in Guatemala.</p
Clinical profile of Type 2 Diabetes Cohort.
<p>Clinical profile of Type 2 Diabetes Cohort.</p
Cross-sectional outcomes indicators for Type 2 Diabetes Cohort.
<p>Cross-sectional outcomes indicators for Type 2 Diabetes Cohort.</p
Additional file 1: Table S1. of Exploring mechanisms of food insecurity in indigenous agricultural communities in Guatemala: a mixed methods study
Qualitative coding scheme for key informant interviews. Table S2. Price comparison of food items in corner stores. (DOCX 19 kb
Characteristics of facilities included in the study.
Characteristics of facilities included in the study.</p
Missing facilities by country and type.
Number of facilities that did not complete the survey, by country and by facility type. 3.5% of facilities did not complete surveys. (XLSX)</p
Disease specific deaths and service readiness.
Cardiovascular disease risk factors (CVDRF), in particular diabetes and hypertension, are chronic conditions which carry a substantial disease burden in Low- and Middle-Income Countries. Unlike HIV, they were neglected in the Millenium Development Goals along with the health services required to manage them. To inform the level of health service readiness that could be achieved with increased attention, we compared readiness for CVDRF with that for HIV. Using data from national Service Provision Assessments, we describe facility-reported readiness to provide services for CVDRF and HIV, and derive a facility readiness score of observed essential components to manage them. We compared HIV vs CVDRF coverage scores by country, rural or urban location, and facility type, and by whether or not facilities reported readiness to provide care. We assessed the factors associated with coverage scores for CVDRF and HIV in a multivariable analysis. In our results, we include 7522 facilities in 8 countries; 86% of all facilities reported readiness to provide services for CVDRF, ranging from 77–98% in individual countries. For HIV, 30% reported of facilities readiness to provide services, ranging from 3–63%. Median derived facility readiness score for CVDRF was 0.28 (IQR 0.16–0.50), and for HIV was 0.43 (0.32–0.60). Among facilities which reported readiness, this rose to 0.34 (IQR 0.18–0.52) for CVD and 0.68 (0.56–0.76) for HIV. Derived readiness scores were generally significantly lower for CVDRF than for HIV, except in private facilities. In multivariable analysis, odds of a higher readiness score in both CVDRF or HIV care were higher in urban vs rural and secondary vs primary care; facilities with higher CVDRF scores were significantly associated with higher HIV scores. Derived readiness scores for HIV are higher than for CVDRF, and coverage for CVDRF is significantly higher in facilities with higher HIV readiness scores. This suggests possible benefits from leveraging HIV services to provide care for CVDRF, but poor coverage in rural and primary care facilities threatens Sustainable Development Goal 3.8 to provide high quality universal healthcare for all.</div
Facility reported readiness to provide services.
Cardiovascular disease risk factors (CVDRF), in particular diabetes and hypertension, are chronic conditions which carry a substantial disease burden in Low- and Middle-Income Countries. Unlike HIV, they were neglected in the Millenium Development Goals along with the health services required to manage them. To inform the level of health service readiness that could be achieved with increased attention, we compared readiness for CVDRF with that for HIV. Using data from national Service Provision Assessments, we describe facility-reported readiness to provide services for CVDRF and HIV, and derive a facility readiness score of observed essential components to manage them. We compared HIV vs CVDRF coverage scores by country, rural or urban location, and facility type, and by whether or not facilities reported readiness to provide care. We assessed the factors associated with coverage scores for CVDRF and HIV in a multivariable analysis. In our results, we include 7522 facilities in 8 countries; 86% of all facilities reported readiness to provide services for CVDRF, ranging from 77–98% in individual countries. For HIV, 30% reported of facilities readiness to provide services, ranging from 3–63%. Median derived facility readiness score for CVDRF was 0.28 (IQR 0.16–0.50), and for HIV was 0.43 (0.32–0.60). Among facilities which reported readiness, this rose to 0.34 (IQR 0.18–0.52) for CVD and 0.68 (0.56–0.76) for HIV. Derived readiness scores were generally significantly lower for CVDRF than for HIV, except in private facilities. In multivariable analysis, odds of a higher readiness score in both CVDRF or HIV care were higher in urban vs rural and secondary vs primary care; facilities with higher CVDRF scores were significantly associated with higher HIV scores. Derived readiness scores for HIV are higher than for CVDRF, and coverage for CVDRF is significantly higher in facilities with higher HIV readiness scores. This suggests possible benefits from leveraging HIV services to provide care for CVDRF, but poor coverage in rural and primary care facilities threatens Sustainable Development Goal 3.8 to provide high quality universal healthcare for all.</div
Stated readiness for HIV and CVDRF crosstabbed.
Number (%) of facilities which stated readiness to provide none, either or both CVDRF and HIV care. (XLSX)</p