132 research outputs found

    Evaluation of baseline data

    Get PDF

    Laboratory-based clinical audit as a tool for continual improvement: an example from CSF chemistry turnaround time audit in a South-African teaching hospital.

    Get PDF
    Introduction: Timeliness of laboratory results is crucial to patient care and outcome. Monitoring turnaround times (TAT), especially for emergency tests, is important to measure the effectiveness and efficiency of laboratory services. Laboratory-based clinical audits reveal opportunities for improving quality. Our aim was to identify the most critical steps causing a high TAT for cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) chemistry analysis in our laboratory. Materials and methods: A 6-month retrospective audit was performed. The duration of each operational phase across the laboratory work flow was examined. A process-mapping audit trail of 60 randomly selected requests with a high TAT was conducted and reasons for high TAT were tested for significance. Results: A total of 1505 CSF chemistry requests were analysed. Transport of samples to the laboratory was primarily responsible for the high average TAT (median TAT = 170 minutes). Labelling accounted for most delays within the laboratory (median TAT = 71 minutes) with most delays occurring after regular work hours (P < 0.05). CSF chemistry requests without the appropriate number of CSF sample tubes were significantly associated with delays in movement of samples from the labelling area to the technologist’s work station (caused by a preference for microbiological testing prior to CSF chemistry). Conclusion: A laboratory-based clinical audit identified sample transportation, work shift periods and use of inappropriate CSF sample tubes as drivers of high TAT for CSF chemistry in our laboratory. The results of this audit will be used to change pre-analytical practices in our laboratory with the aim of improving TAT and customer satisfaction

    Incident HIV among pregnant and breast-feeding women in sub-Saharan Africa: a systematic review and meta-analysis

    Get PDF
    OBJECTIVES: A previous meta-analysis reported high HIV incidence among pregnant and breast-feeding women in sub-Saharan Africa (SSA), but limited evidence of elevated risk of HIV acquisition during pregnancy or breast-feeding when compared with nonpregnant periods. The rapidly evolving HIV prevention and treatment landscape since publication of this review may have important implications for maternal HIV incidence. DESIGN: Systematic review and meta-analysis. METHODS: We searched four databases and abstracts from relevant conferences through 1 December 2018, for literature on maternal HIV incidence in SSA. We used random-effects meta-analysis to summarize incidence rates and ratios, and to estimate 95% prediction intervals. We evaluated potential sources of heterogeneity with random-effects meta-regression. RESULTS: Thirty-seven publications contributed 100 758 person-years of follow-up. The estimated average HIV incidence rate among pregnant and breast-feeding women was 3.6 per 100 person-years (95% prediction interval: 1.2--11.1), while the estimated average associations between pregnancy and risk of HIV acquisition, and breast-feeding and risk of HIV acquisition, were close to the null. Wide 95% prediction intervals around summary estimates highlighted the variability of HIV incidence across populations of pregnant and breast-feeding women in SSA. Average HIV incidence appeared associated with age, partner HIV status, and calendar time. Average incidence was highest among studies conducted pre-2010 (4.1/100 person-years, 95% prediction interval: 1.1--12.2) and lowest among studies conducted post-2014 (2.1/100 person-years, 95% prediction interval: 0.7--6.5). CONCLUSION: Substantial HIV incidence among pregnant and breast-feeding women in SSA, even in the current era of combination HIV prevention and treatment, underscores the need for prevention tailored to high-risk pregnant and breast-feeding women

    Two strategies for partner notification and partner HIV self-testing reveal no evident predictors of male partner HIV testing in antenatal settings: A secondary analysis

    Get PDF
    BackgroundTo meet global targets for the elimination of mother-to-child HIV transmission, tailored approaches to HIV testing strategies need prioritizing. Herein, we sought to identify individual-level factors associated with male partner HIV testing.MethodsWe conducted a secondary analysis of data from two parallel randomized trials of pregnant women living with HIV and those HIV-negative in Lusaka, Zambia. Across both trials, control groups received partner notification services only, while intervention groups received partner notification services plus HIV self-test kits for their partners. Associations between baseline factors and male partner testing were estimated using a probability difference. The outcome of interest was uptake of male partner HIV testing of any kind within 30 days of randomization.ResultsThe parent study enrolled 326 participants. Among the 151 women in the control groups, no clear associations were noted between maternal or male partner characteristics and reported uptake of male partner HIV testing. There were positive trends favouring partner testing among women who completed primary school education, had larger households (>2 members), and whose partners were circumcised. Likewise, no clear predictors of male partner testing were identified among the 149 women in the intervention groups. However, negative trends favouring no testing were noted among older, multiparous women from larger households.ConclusionNo consistent predictors for male partner HIV testing across two compared strategies were observed. Our findings suggest that differentiated strategies for male partner HIV testing may not be necessary. Instead, consideration should be given to universal approaches when bringing such services to scale

    Combination adherence strategy to support HIV antiretroviral therapy and pre-exposure prophylaxis adherence during pregnancy and breastfeeding: protocol for a pair of pilot randomised trials.

    Get PDF
    INTRODUCTION To realise the expected gains from prevention of mother-to-child HIV transmission initiatives, adherence to preventative and therapeutic antiretroviral regimens is critical and interventions deployable in busy programmatic settings with a high HIV burden are needed. Based on formative research, we developed an approach that integrates patient-centred counselling and engagement of an adherence supporter for pregnant and breastfeeding women initiating HIV treatment (ie, antiretroviral therapy (ART)) or biomedical HIV prevention (ie, pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP)). METHODS Tonse Pamodzi 2 is a pilot study designed to provide acceptability, fidelity and clinical outcomes data on a set of behavioural interventions for adherence support. The study comprises two parallel randomised trials, enrolling HIV-positive pregnant women initiating ART (Trial 1, n=100) and HIV-negative pregnant women with risk of HIV acquisition and willing to initiate PrEP (Trial 2, n=200). Within each trial, participants are randomised 1:1 to either the intervention or control group. The Tonse Pamodzi adherence intervention comprises patient-centred counselling (adapted Integrated Next Step Counseling(iNSC)) and external adherence support tailored to the clinical context (ie, for ART or PrEP). Participants randomly assigned to the control group receive standard counselling based on local HIV guidelines. Participants are followed for 6 months. To assess intervention acceptability, we will employ a mixed method approach to describe participant engagement, satisfaction, and discussion content. We will audit and score recorded counselling sessions to evaluate the implementation fidelity of iNSC sessions. We will also assess clinical outcomes at 3 and 6 months for both Trial 1 (retention in care and viral suppression of HIV) and Trial 2 (retention in care, and plasma and intracellular tenofovir drug concentrations). ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION The study protocol was approved by the Malawi National Health Science Research Committee (19/05/2334) and the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill Institutional Review Board (19-1060). TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER NCT04330989
    corecore