Developing Mobile Graphic Reminders for Reinforcing Compliance in Tuberculosis Treatment in Africa

A mobile graphic reminder is part of an application that reminds a patient about the need to follow the routine of taking medicine, and helps to monitor this process. The program is especially helpful for patients with limited literacy, language barriers or deaf. The purpose of this paper is to present and discuss (1) the benefit potential of visual-based communication in the medical context; (2) how graphics as reminder interventions to support tuberculosis (TB) treatment were designed and developed; and (3) how these graphics were evaluated. Thirty-four people, including TB patients, TB health workers and academics from the University of Cape Town, South Africa and Zanzibar, Tanzania participated in the evaluation exercise. The findings revealed that participants interpreted the meaning of most of the graphics correctly. It also found that the applications of images in the medical context might have potential to support patient treatment compared to other mobile interventions. The developed graphics are then embedded with mobile application on supporting TB patients to adhere to treatment through reminder methods. The paper contributes to mobile health (ICT4D) of developing an approach of mobile graphic-based reminder applications with literacy level, language and resource constraints

Evaluating the effectiveness of mobile graphic-based reminders to support treatment of tuberculosis patients

Low adherence rates to tuberculosis (TB) treatment are one of the major barriers to improving TB cure rates. Developing regions such as sub-Saharan Africa are adversely affected for a number of reasons, such as low patient follow-up, limited medical, and treatment resources. The use of mobile graphic-based reminders potentially offers a cost-effective, easy to use and time efficient strategy to increase adherence in order to improve cure rates among patients with TB. This paper shows the results of a study in Zanzibar, Tanzania, which investigated the effectiveness of graphic-based reminders in supporting TB patients with low literacy levels to adhere to treatment. Participants were randomly selected from a group of TB patients and assigned into three groups: control (no reminder) group, graphic-based reminder group and speech-based reminder group. A total of 29 participants were analysed. The treatment adherence rates of the control group, speech-based group and graphic-based group were 41.7%, 60% and 85.7%, respectively. The rates in the graphic-based group were significantly higher than in the speech-based and the control groups. Results also show that there were high efficacy and acceptability of mobile reminders in the graphic-based group, with the average response rates of 76.8% compared with 67.1% in the speech-based group (p<0.001 of 95% confidence intervals). The findings highlight that mobile phone reminders are improving treatment adherence of TB patients. The graphic-based reminder was more beneficial, cost-effective and accepted for use by the majority of patients including those with limited education

Development of a Mobile Image-Based Reminder Application to Support Tuberculosis Treatment in Africa

This paper presents the design, development and evaluation of an application prototype developed to support tuberculosis (TB) patients’ treatment adherence. The system makes use of graphics and voice reminders as opposed to text messaging to encourage patients to follow their medication routine. To evaluate the effect of the prototype applications, participants were given mobile phones on which the reminder system was installed. Thirty-eight people, including TB health workers and patients from Zanzibar, Tanzania, participated in the evaluation exercises. The results indicate that the participants found the mobile image-based application is useful to support TB treatment. All participants understood and interpreted the intended meaning of every image correctly. The study findings revealed that the use of a mobile visual-based application may have potential benefit to support TB patients (both literate and illiterate) in their treatment processes

Variation and implications of treatment decisions in early rheumatoid arthritis: results from a nationwide cohort study

Objectives Trial data have provided an evidence base to guide early treatment in RA. Few studies have investigated rheumatologists’ adherence to guidelines, and subsequent impact on outcomes. The objectives of this study are to characterize baseline prescribing for patients with RA across the National Health Service, identifying treatment decisions that associate with patient outcomes. Methods A nationwide audit of RA collected information on treatment choices, DAS and sociodemographic factors at baseline. Treatment response was assessed at 3 months. Multilevel regression models were used to characterize departmental variations in prescribing. Heat maps were used to visualize geographical variation. Mixed effects regression models were constructed to assess the relationship between treatment decisions and disease outcomes, adjusting for patient and department level covariates. Results A total of 7154 patients with a diagnosis of RA were recruited from 136 departments. There was broad variation in prescribing choices, even between departments close to one another, with evidence of substantial deviation from guidelines. Over 75% of patients received glucocorticoids, fewer than half received combination conventional DMARDs. Early glucocorticoid therapy associated with achieving a good treatment response [odds ratio 1.93 (95% CI 1.31, 2.84), P-value = 0.001]. The association was maintained following propensity modelling and imputation. Conclusion Guideline adherence varies between departments and cannot be explained by case-mix alone. Departments that prescribe early adjunctive steroid achieve better short-term outcomes. Further research should work to ensure that the early arthritis evidence base translates into better outcomes for patients

Effectiveness of a national quality improvement programme to improve survival after emergency abdominal surgery (EPOCH): a stepped-wedge cluster-randomised trial

Background: Emergency abdominal surgery is associated with poor patient outcomes. We studied the effectiveness of a national quality improvement (QI) programme to implement a care pathway to improve survival for these patients. Methods: We did a stepped-wedge cluster-randomised trial of patients aged 40 years or older undergoing emergency open major abdominal surgery. Eligible UK National Health Service (NHS) hospitals (those that had an emergency general surgical service, a substantial volume of emergency abdominal surgery cases, and contributed data to the National Emergency Laparotomy Audit) were organised into 15 geographical clusters and commenced the QI programme in a random order, based on a computer-generated random sequence, over an 85-week period with one geographical cluster commencing the intervention every 5 weeks from the second to the 16th time period. Patients were masked to the study group, but it was not possible to mask hospital staff or investigators. The primary outcome measure was mortality within 90 days of surgery. Analyses were done on an intention-to-treat basis. This study is registered with the ISRCTN registry, number ISRCTN80682973. Findings: Treatment took place between March 3, 2014, and Oct 19, 2015. 22 754 patients were assessed for elegibility. Of 15 873 eligible patients from 93 NHS hospitals, primary outcome data were analysed for 8482 patients in the usual care group and 7374 in the QI group. Eight patients in the usual care group and nine patients in the QI group were not included in the analysis because of missing primary outcome data. The primary outcome of 90-day mortality occurred in 1210 (16%) patients in the QI group compared with 1393 (16%) patients in the usual care group (HR 1·11, 0·96–1·28). Interpretation: No survival benefit was observed from this QI programme to implement a care pathway for patients undergoing emergency abdominal surgery. Future QI programmes should ensure that teams have both the time and resources needed to improve patient care. Funding: National Institute for Health Research Health Services and Delivery Research Programme

Effectiveness of a national quality improvement programme to improve survival after emergency abdominal surgery (EPOCH): a stepped-wedge cluster-randomised trial

BACKGROUND: Emergency abdominal surgery is associated with poor patient outcomes. We studied the effectiveness of a national quality improvement (QI) programme to implement a care pathway to improve survival for these patients. METHODS: We did a stepped-wedge cluster-randomised trial of patients aged 40 years or older undergoing emergency open major abdominal surgery. Eligible UK National Health Service (NHS) hospitals (those that had an emergency general surgical service, a substantial volume of emergency abdominal surgery cases, and contributed data to the National Emergency Laparotomy Audit) were organised into 15 geographical clusters and commenced the QI programme in a random order, based on a computer-generated random sequence, over an 85-week period with one geographical cluster commencing the intervention every 5 weeks from the second to the 16th time period. Patients were masked to the study group, but it was not possible to mask hospital staff or investigators. The primary outcome measure was mortality within 90 days of surgery. Analyses were done on an intention-to-treat basis. This study is registered with the ISRCTN registry, number ISRCTN80682973. FINDINGS: Treatment took place between March 3, 2014, and Oct 19, 2015. 22 754 patients were assessed for elegibility. Of 15 873 eligible patients from 93 NHS hospitals, primary outcome data were analysed for 8482 patients in the usual care group and 7374 in the QI group. Eight patients in the usual care group and nine patients in the QI group were not included in the analysis because of missing primary outcome data. The primary outcome of 90-day mortality occurred in 1210 (16%) patients in the QI group compared with 1393 (16%) patients in the usual care group (HR 1·11, 0·96-1·28). INTERPRETATION: No survival benefit was observed from this QI programme to implement a care pathway for patients undergoing emergency abdominal surgery. Future QI programmes should ensure that teams have both the time and resources needed to improve patient care. FUNDING: National Institute for Health Research Health Services and Delivery Research Programme

Effect of angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor and angiotensin receptor blocker initiation on organ support-free days in patients hospitalized with COVID-19

IMPORTANCE Overactivation of the renin-angiotensin system (RAS) may contribute to poor clinical outcomes in patients with COVID-19. Objective To determine whether angiotensin-converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitor or angiotensin receptor blocker (ARB) initiation improves outcomes in patients hospitalized for COVID-19. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS In an ongoing, adaptive platform randomized clinical trial, 721 critically ill and 58 non–critically ill hospitalized adults were randomized to receive an RAS inhibitor or control between March 16, 2021, and February 25, 2022, at 69 sites in 7 countries (final follow-up on June 1, 2022). INTERVENTIONS Patients were randomized to receive open-label initiation of an ACE inhibitor (n = 257), ARB (n = 248), ARB in combination with DMX-200 (a chemokine receptor-2 inhibitor; n = 10), or no RAS inhibitor (control; n = 264) for up to 10 days. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES The primary outcome was organ support–free days, a composite of hospital survival and days alive without cardiovascular or respiratory organ support through 21 days. The primary analysis was a bayesian cumulative logistic model. Odds ratios (ORs) greater than 1 represent improved outcomes. RESULTS On February 25, 2022, enrollment was discontinued due to safety concerns. Among 679 critically ill patients with available primary outcome data, the median age was 56 years and 239 participants (35.2%) were women. Median (IQR) organ support–free days among critically ill patients was 10 (–1 to 16) in the ACE inhibitor group (n = 231), 8 (–1 to 17) in the ARB group (n = 217), and 12 (0 to 17) in the control group (n = 231) (median adjusted odds ratios of 0.77 [95% bayesian credible interval, 0.58-1.06] for improvement for ACE inhibitor and 0.76 [95% credible interval, 0.56-1.05] for ARB compared with control). The posterior probabilities that ACE inhibitors and ARBs worsened organ support–free days compared with control were 94.9% and 95.4%, respectively. Hospital survival occurred in 166 of 231 critically ill participants (71.9%) in the ACE inhibitor group, 152 of 217 (70.0%) in the ARB group, and 182 of 231 (78.8%) in the control group (posterior probabilities that ACE inhibitor and ARB worsened hospital survival compared with control were 95.3% and 98.1%, respectively). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE In this trial, among critically ill adults with COVID-19, initiation of an ACE inhibitor or ARB did not improve, and likely worsened, clinical outcomes. TRIAL REGISTRATION ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT0273570