Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 8 de 8
Filtrar
Mais filtros

Base de dados
Intervalo de ano de publicação
1.
AIDS Care ; 32(6): 744-748, 2020 06.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-31298566

RESUMO

In South Africa, high attrition rates throughout the care continuum present major barriers to controlling the HIV epidemic. Mobile health (mHealth) interventions may provide innovative opportunities for efficient healthcare delivery and improving retention in care. In this formative research, we interviewed 11 patients and 28 healthcare providers in North West Province, South Africa, to identify perceived benefits, concerns and suggestions for a future mHealth program to deliver HIV Viral Load and CD4 Count test results directly to patients via mobile phone. Thematic analysis found that reduced workload for providers, reduced wait times for patients, potential expanded uses and patient empowerment were the main perceived benefits of an mHealth program. Perceived concerns included privacy, disseminating distressing results through text messages and patients' inability to interpret results. Participants felt that an mHealth program should complement face-to-face interactions and educational information to interpret results is needed. Providers identified logistical considerations and suggested protocols be developed. An mHealth program to deliver HIV test results directly to patients could mitigate multiple barriers to care but needs to be tested for efficacy. Concerns identified by patients and providers must be addressed in designing the program to successfully integrate with health facility workflow and ensure its sustainability.


Assuntos
Telefone Celular , Infecções por HIV , Telemedicina , Continuidade da Assistência ao Paciente , Infecções por HIV/terapia , Humanos , África do Sul
2.
Res Social Adm Pharm ; 19(6): 889-895, 2023 06.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-36872191

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: Demonstrating the value of comprehensive medication management (CMM) within clinical faculty sites is a challenge when balancing patient volume with academic responsibilities. Utilizing an evidence-based implementation system for CMM, faculty primary care clinical pharmacists (PCCPs) standardized CMM within their practice sites. OBJECTIVE: The primary objective of this project was to define the value of faculty PCCPs. METHODS: An Ambulatory Care Summit was hosted to identify opportunities for consistency of CMM. Following the summit, the CMM implementation team (faculty PCCPs and project manager) utilized CMM implementation tools from the Comprehensive Medication Management in Primary Care Research Team. Additionally, a strategic plan was developed to enhance practice management, improve fidelity, and determine key performance indicators (KPIs). Five faculty-mentored student projects assessed value of faculty-delivered CMM in primary care clinics. Data included medication adherence metrics, clinic quality metrics, diabetes metrics, acute healthcare utilization rates, and a physician satisfaction survey. RESULTS: Among those receiving CMM, adherence improved 14% (P = 0.022), 119 clinic quality metrics were achieved, HbA1c ≤ 9% improved 45% (p < 0.001), average HbA1c decreased by 1.73% (p < 0.001), and medication preventable acute care utilization within the referral reason decreased. Over 90% of physicians surveyed agreed the faculty PCCP is a valuable team member, improved patients' health, and improved effectiveness/efficiency. Four student posters were presented at national conferences and 18 student pharmacists were engaged in various aspects of the project. CONCLUSION: Incorporating CMM at faculty primary care clinics provides value. To demonstrate this value, faculty must align KPIs with institution-specific payer contracts.


Assuntos
Conduta do Tratamento Medicamentoso , Farmacêuticos , Humanos , Hemoglobinas Glicadas , Assistência Ambulatorial , Atenção Primária à Saúde , Docentes
3.
J Patient Cent Res Rev ; 10(3): 111-120, 2023.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-37483554

RESUMO

Purpose: The study purpose was to learn and describe 1) where homeless shelter residents receive health care, 2) what contributes to positive or negative health care experiences among shelter residents, and 3) shelter resident perceptions toward health care. Methods: Semi-structured interviews (SSIs) utilizing purposive sampling and focus group discussions (FGDs) utilizing convenience sampling were conducted at 6 homeless shelters in Seattle-King County, Washington, during July-October 2021. All residents (age ≥18) were eligible to participate. SSIs were conducted with 25 residents, and 8 FGDs were held. Thematic analysis was conducted using Dedoose. Results: Participants received health care in settings ranging from no regular care to primary care providers. Four elements emerged as contributing positively and negatively to health care experiences: 1) ability to access health care financially, physically, and technologically; 2) clarity of communication from providers and staff about appointment logistics, diagnoses, and treatment options; 3) ease of securing timely follow-up services; and 4) respect versus stigma and discrimination from providers and staff. Participants who felt positively toward health care found low- or no-cost care to be widely available and encouraged others to seek care. However, some participants described health care in the United States as greedy, classist, discriminatory, and untrustworthy. Participants reported delaying care and self-medicating in anticipation of discrimination. Conclusions: Findings demonstrate that while people experiencing homelessness can have positive experiences with health care, many have faced negative interactions with health systems. Improving the patient experience for those experiencing homelessness can increase engagement and improve health outcomes.

4.
Glob Public Health ; 17(12): 3981-3992, 2022 12.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-36194811

RESUMO

The global Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has resulted in public health, political, scientific and private sector response at an unprecedented scale. However, this shift in focus has caused widespread disruption to global health services and has the potential to reverse gains made in efforts to control malaria. If health systems are not able to maintain malaria control interventions while managing the response to the COVID-19 pandemic, malaria cases will increase, thereby placing even more strain on already overtaxed systems. Using a Narrative Review Approach, this commentary explores the impact of COVID-19 on progress made with malaria control and prevention strategies in Africa; and discusses possible mitigation steps to aid community resilience building, through proactive planning and implementation of integrated, inclusive and sustainable strategies to re-shift the focus to attain the malaria elimination goals. We propose strengthening community partnerships, where academia and communities should collaborate and these knowledge-sharing strategies be implemented in order for awareness and interventions to become more networked, inclusive, resilient and effective. Communities should be viewed as 'thought partners', who challenge conventional strategies and aid in developing innovative approaches to community resilience building.


Assuntos
COVID-19 , Malária , Humanos , COVID-19/epidemiologia , COVID-19/prevenção & controle , Pandemias/prevenção & controle , Malária/epidemiologia , Malária/prevenção & controle , África/epidemiologia , Saúde Global
5.
Lancet Public Health ; 7(4): e356-e365, 2022 04.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-35276093

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: Face mask wearing has been an important part of the response to the COVID-19 pandemic. As vaccination coverage progresses in countries, relaxation of such practices is increasing. Subsequent COVID-19 surges have raised the questions of whether face masks should be encouraged or required and for how long. Here, we aim to assess the value of maintaining face masks use indoors according to different COVID-19 vaccination coverage levels in the USA. METHODS: In this computational simulation-model study, we developed and used a Monte Carlo simulation model representing the US population and SARS-CoV-2 spread. Simulation experiments compared what would happen if face masks were used versus not used until given final vaccination coverages were achieved. Different scenarios varied the target vaccination coverage (70-90%), the date these coverages were achieved (Jan 1, 2022, to July 1, 2022), and the date the population discontinued wearing face masks. FINDINGS: Simulation experiments revealed that maintaining face mask use (at the coverage seen in the USA from March, 2020, to July, 2020) until target vaccination coverages were achieved was cost-effective and in many cases cost saving from both the societal and third-party payer perspectives across nearly all scenarios explored. Face mask use was estimated to be cost-effective and usually cost saving when the cost of face masks per person per day was ≤US$1·25. In all scenarios, it was estimated to be cost-effective to maintain face mask use for about 2-10 weeks beyond the date that target vaccination coverage (70-90%) was achieved, with this added duration being longer when the target coverage was achieved during winter versus summer. Factors that might increase the transmissibility of the virus (eg, emergence of the delta [B.1.617.2] and omicron [B.1.1.529] variants), or decrease vaccine effectiveness (eg, waning immunity or escape variants), or increase social interactions among certain segments of the population, only increased the cost savings or cost-effectiveness provided by maintaining face mask use. INTERPRETATION: Our study provides strong support for maintaining face mask use until and a short time after achieving various final vaccination coverage levels, given that maintaining face mask use can be not just cost-effective, but even cost saving. The emergence of the omicron variant and the prospect of future variants that might be more transmissible and reduce vaccine effectiveness only increases the value of face masks. FUNDING: The Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality, the National Institute of General Medical Sciences, the National Science Foundation, the National Center for Advancing Translational Sciences, and the City University of New York.


Assuntos
COVID-19 , Cobertura Vacinal , COVID-19/prevenção & controle , Vacinas contra COVID-19 , Humanos , Máscaras , Pandemias/prevenção & controle , SARS-CoV-2
6.
Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol ; 42(11): 1318-1326, 2021 11.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33427134

RESUMO

OBJECTIVE: Due to shortages of N95 respirators during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, it is necessary to estimate the number of N95s required for healthcare workers (HCWs) to inform manufacturing targets and resource allocation. METHODS: We developed a model to determine the number of N95 respirators needed for HCWs both in a single acute-care hospital and the United States. RESULTS: For an acute-care hospital with 400 all-cause monthly admissions, the number of N95 respirators needed to manage COVID-19 patients admitted during a month ranges from 113 (95% interpercentile range [IPR], 50-229) if 0.5% of admissions are COVID-19 patients to 22,101 (95% IPR, 5,904-25,881) if 100% of admissions are COVID-19 patients (assuming single use per respirator, and 10 encounters between HCWs and each COVID-19 patient per day). The number of N95s needed decreases to a range of 22 (95% IPR, 10-43) to 4,445 (95% IPR, 1,975-8,684) if each N95 is used for 5 patient encounters. Varying monthly all-cause admissions to 2,000 requires 6,645-13,404 respirators with a 60% COVID-19 admission prevalence, 10 HCW-patient encounters, and reusing N95s 5-10 times. Nationally, the number of N95 respirators needed over the course of the pandemic ranges from 86 million (95% IPR, 37.1-200.6 million) to 1.6 billion (95% IPR, 0.7-3.6 billion) as 5%-90% of the population is exposed (single-use). This number ranges from 17.4 million (95% IPR, 7.3-41 million) to 312.3 million (95% IPR, 131.5-737.3 million) using each respirator for 5 encounters. CONCLUSIONS: We quantified the number of N95 respirators needed for a given acute-care hospital and nationally during the COVID-19 pandemic under varying conditions.


Assuntos
COVID-19 , Pandemias , Pessoal de Saúde , Hospitais , Humanos , Máscaras , Respiradores N95 , Pandemias/prevenção & controle , SARS-CoV-2 , Estados Unidos/epidemiologia
7.
Vaccine ; 39(31): 4335-4342, 2021 07 13.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-34158215

RESUMO

INTRODUCTION: Single-dose rotavirus vaccines, which are used by a majority of countries, are some of the largest-sized vaccines in immunization programs, and have been shown to constrain supply chains and cause bottlenecks. Efforts have been made to reduce the size of the single-dose vaccines; however, with two-dose, five-dose and ten-dose options available, the question then is whether using multi-dose instead of single-dose rotavirus vaccines will improve vaccine availability. METHODS: We used HERMES-generated simulation models of the vaccine supply chains of the Republic of Benin, Mozambique, and Bihar, a state in India, to evaluate the operational and economic impact of implementing each of the nine different rotavirus vaccine presentations. RESULTS: Among single-dose rotavirus vaccines, using Rotarix RV1 MMP (multi-monodose presentation) led to the highest rotavirus vaccine availability (49-80%) and total vaccine availability (56-79%), and decreased total costs per dose administered ($0.02-$0.10) compared to using any other single-dose rotavirus vaccine. Using two-dose ROTASIIL decreased rotavirus vaccine availability by 3-6% across each supply chain compared to Rotarix RV1 MMP, the smallest single-dose vaccine. Using a five-dose rotavirus vaccine improved rotavirus vaccine availability (52-92%) and total vaccine availability (60-85%) compared to single-dose and two-dose vaccines. Further, using the ten-dose vaccine led to the highest rotavirus vaccine availability compared to all other rotavirus vaccines in both Benin and Bihar. CONCLUSION: Our results show that countries that implement five-dose or ten-dose rotavirus vaccines consistently reduce cold chain constraints and achieve higher rotavirus and total vaccine availability compared to using either single-dose or two-dose rotavirus vaccines.


Assuntos
Infecções por Rotavirus , Vacinas contra Rotavirus , Rotavirus , Benin , Humanos , Programas de Imunização , Índia , Lactente , Moçambique , Infecções por Rotavirus/prevenção & controle , Vacinas Atenuadas
8.
London J Prim Care (Abingdon) ; 9(3): 33-37, 2017 May.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-28539976

RESUMO

Palliative care provision varies by diagnosis, geography, and setting. The Minimum Data-set provides high-level data on provision, but comprehensive comparative information about specialist palliative care (SPC) provision is lacking. The London Cancer Alliance - now RM Partners' Accountable Cancer Network - palliative care group (West/South London) and PallE8 (North/East London), with Marie Curie, sought to address this gap. The aim was to provide comparative data on SPC provision across London to support commissioners and providers to assess provision, identify gaps, and reduce inequity. A data-collection template was developed through expert consensus. Demographic, diagnostic, and service data was collected, plus models of care, staffing levels, and use of clinical outcome/experience measures. Results were collated by organisation and CCG. Cleaned data was provided back to each organisation for verification before final analyses. RESULTS: All 50 adult SPC providers in London participated, representing hospitals, hospices and community services. •Patients in all 32 CCGs have access to hospice beds, with 322 beds from 15 providers (4 NHS) for a population of 9,323,570 (with 47,583 deaths annually).•SPC in London sees more non-cancer patients than is reported nationally; 79% of hospital advisory, 74% of community, and 88% of hospice in-patient services have higher proportions of non-cancer patients.•Considerable variation in out-of-hours availability of both hospital SPC and community SPC services across London; only 9 of 30 hospital and 17 of 26 community services provide seven-day visiting.•Wide variation in the models of community-based SPC; proportions of community patients attending day services vary from 1 in 4, to 1 in 17, just 13 CCGs have H@H-type provision, with few Rapid Response or Care Coordination services. CONCLUSIONS: This detailed survey demonstrates important gaps in availability and provision of SPC services. Recommendations are made for commissioners and providers to join together to address these. It also gives a comprehensive view of rapidly changing models of community-based care, to inform innovation and service development.

SELEÇÃO DE REFERÊNCIAS
DETALHE DA PESQUISA