Integrated care as a means to improve primary care delivery for adults and adolescents in the developing world: a critical analysis of Integrated Management of Adolescent and Adult Illness (IMAI).

BACKGROUND: More than three decades after the 1978 Declaration of Alma-Ata enshrined the goal of 'health for all', high-quality primary care services remain undelivered to the great majority of the world's poor. This failure to effectively reach the most vulnerable populations has been, in part, a failure to develop and implement appropriate and effective primary care delivery models. This paper examines a root cause of these failures, namely that the inability to achieve clear and practical consensus around the scope and aims of primary care may be contributing to ongoing operational inertia. The present work also examines integrated models of care as a strategy to move beyond conceptual dissonance in primary care and toward implementation. Finally, this paper examines the strengths and weaknesses of a particular model, the World Health Organization's Integrated Management of Adolescent and Adult Illness (IMAI), and its potential as a guidepost toward improving the quality of primary care delivery in poor settings. DISCUSSION: Integration and integrated care may be an important approach in establishing a new paradigm of primary care delivery, though overall, current evidence is mixed. However, a number of successful specific examples illustrate the potential for clinical and service integration to positively impact patient care in primary care settings. One example deserving of further examination is the IMAI, developed by the World Health Organization as an operational model that integrates discrete vertical interventions into a comprehensive delivery system encompassing triage and screening, basic acute and chronic disease care, basic prevention and treatment services, and follow-up and referral guidelines. IMAI is an integrated model delivered at a single point-of-care using a standard approach to each patient based on the universal patient history and physical examination. The evidence base on IMAI is currently weak, but whether or not IMAI itself ultimately proves useful in advancing primary care delivery, it is these principles that should serve as the basis for developing a standard of integrated primary care delivery for adults and adolescents that can serve as the foundation for ongoing quality improvement. SUMMARY: As integrated primary care is the standard of care in the developed world, so too must we move toward implementing integrated models of primary care delivery in poorer settings. Models such as IMAI are an important first step in this evolution. A robust and sustained commitment to innovation, research and quality improvement will be required if integrated primary care delivery is to become a reality in developing world.

Approaches to ensuring and improving quality in the context of health system strengthening: a cross-site analysis of the five African Health Initiative Partnership programs.

BACKGROUND: Integrated into the work in health systems strengthening (HSS) is a growing focus on the importance of ensuring quality of the services delivered and systems which support them. Understanding how to define and measure quality in the different key World Health Organization building blocks is critical to providing the information needed to address gaps and identify models for replication. DESCRIPTION OF APPROACHES: We describe the approaches to defining and improving quality across the five country programs funded through the Doris Duke Charitable Foundation African Health Initiative. While each program has independently developed and implemented country-specific approaches to strengthening health systems, they all included quality of services and systems as a core principle. We describe the differences and similarities across the programs in defining and improving quality as an embedded process essential for HSS to achieve the goal of improved population health. The programs measured quality across most or all of the six WHO building blocks, with specific areas of overlap in improving quality falling into four main categories: 1) defining and measuring quality; 2) ensuring data quality, and building capacity for data use for decision making and response to quality measurements; 3) strengthened supportive supervision and/or mentoring; and 4) operational research to understand the factors associated with observed variation in quality. CONCLUSIONS: Learning the value and challenges of these approaches to measuring and improving quality across the key components of HSS as the projects continue their work will help inform similar efforts both now and in the future to ensure quality across the critical components of a health system and the impact on population health.

Baseline assessment of adult and adolescent primary care delivery in Rwanda: an opportunity for quality improvement.

BACKGROUND: As resource-limited health systems evolve to address complex diseases, attention must be returned to basic primary care delivery. Limited data exists detailing the quality of general adult and adolescent primary care delivered at front-line facilities in these regions. Here we describe the baseline quality of care for adults and adolescents in rural Rwanda. METHODS: Patients aged 13 and older presenting to eight rural health center outpatient departments in one district in southeastern Rwanda between February and March 2011 were included. Routine nurse-delivered care was observed by clinical mentors trained in the WHO Integrated Management of Adolescent & Adult Illness (IMAI) protocol using standardized checklists, and compared to decisions made by the clinical mentor as the gold standard. RESULTS: Four hundred and seventy consultations were observed. Of these, only 1.5% were screened and triaged for emergency conditions. Fewer than 10% of patients were routinely screened for chronic conditions including HIV, tuberculosis, anemia or malnutrition. Nurses correctly diagnosed 50.1% of patient complaints (95% CI: 45.7%-54.5%) and determined the correct treatment 44.9% of the time (95% CI: 40.6%-49.3%). Correct diagnosis and treatment varied significantly across health centers (p = 0.03 and p = 0.04, respectively). CONCLUSION: Fundamental gaps exist in adult and adolescent primary care delivery in Rwanda, including triage, screening, diagnosis, and treatment, with significant variability across conditions and facilities. Research and innovation toward improving and standardizing primary care delivery in sub-Saharan Africa is required. IMAI, supported by routine mentorship, is one potentially important approach to establishing the standards necessary for high-quality care.

Nurse mentorship to improve the quality of health care delivery in rural Rwanda.

Quality of care at rural health centers in Rwanda is often limited by gaps in individual nurses' knowledge and skills, as well as systems-level issues, such as supply and human resource management. Typically, nurse training is largely didactic and supervision infrequent. Partners In Health and the Rwandan Ministry of Health (MOH) collaborated to implement the nurse-focused Mentoring and Enhanced Supervision at Health Centers (MESH) program. Rwandan nurse-mentors trained in quality improvement and mentoring techniques were integrated into the MOH's district supervisory team to provide ongoing, on-site individual mentorship to health center nurses and to drive systems-level quality improvement activities. The program targeted 21 health centers in two rural districts and supported implementation of MOH evidence-based protocols. Initial results demonstrate significant improvement in a number of quality-of-care indicators. Emphasis on individual provider and systems-level issues, integration within MOH systems, and continuous monitoring efforts were instrumental to these early successes.

Evaluating process and clinical outcomes of a primary care mental health integration project in rural Rwanda: a prospective mixed-methods protocol.

INTRODUCTION: Integrating mental healthcare into primary care can reduce the global burden of mental disorders. Yet data on the effective implementation of real-world task-shared mental health programmes are limited. In 2012, the Rwandan Ministry of Health and the international healthcare organisation Partners in Health collaboratively adapted the Mentoring and Enhanced Supervision at Health Centers (MESH) programme, a successful programme of supported supervision based on task-sharing for HIV/AIDS care, to include care of neuropsychiatric disorders within primary care settings (MESH Mental Health). We propose 1 of the first studies in a rural low-income country to assess the implementation and clinical outcomes of a programme integrating neuropsychiatric care into a public primary care system. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: A mixed-methods evaluation will be conducted. First, we will conduct a quantitative outcomes evaluation using a pretest and post-test design at 4 purposively selected MESH MH participating health centres. At least 112 consecutive adults with schizophrenia, bipolar disorder, depression or epilepsy will be enrolled. Primary outcomes are symptoms and functioning measured at baseline, 8 weeks and 6 months using clinician-administered scales: the General Health Questionnaire and the brief WHO Disability Assessment Scale. We hypothesise that service users will experience at least a 25% improvement in symptoms and functioning from baseline after MESH MH programme participation. To understand any outcome improvements under the intervention, we will evaluate programme processes using (1) quantitative analyses of routine service utilisation data and supervision checklist data and (2) qualitative semistructured interviews with primary care nurses, service users and family members. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: This evaluation was approved by the Rwanda National Ethics Committee (Protocol #736/RNEC/2016) and deemed exempt by the Harvard University Institutional Review Board. Results will be submitted for peer-reviewed journal publication, presented at conferences and disseminated to communities served by the programme.

Mentoring and quality improvement strengthen integrated management of childhood illness implementation in rural Rwanda.

OBJECTIVE: Integrated Management of Childhood Illness (IMCI) is the leading clinical protocol designed to decrease under-five mortality globally. However, impact is threatened by gaps in IMCI quality of care (QOC). In 2010, Partners In Health and the Rwanda Ministry of Health implemented a nurse mentorship intervention Mentoring and Enhanced Supervision at Health Centres (MESH) in two rural districts. This study measures change in QOC following the addition of MESH to didactic training. DESIGN: Prepost intervention study of change in QOC after 12 months of MESH support measured by case observation using a standardised checklist. Study sample was children age 2 months to 5 years presenting on the days of data collection (292 baseline, 413 endpoint). SETTING: 21 rural health centres in Rwanda. OUTCOMES: Primary outcome was a validated index of key IMCI assessments. Secondary outcomes included assessment, classification and treatment indicators, and QOC variability across providers. A mixed-effects regression model of the index was created. RESULTS: In multivariate analyses, the index significantly improved in southern Kayonza (ß-coefficient 0.17, 95% CI 0.12 to 0.22) and Kirehe (ß-coefficient 0.29, 95% CI 0.23 to 0.34) districts. Children seen by IMCI-trained nurses increased from 83.2% to 100% (p<0.001) and use of IMCI case recording forms improved from 65.9% to 97.1% (p<0.001). Correct classification improved (56.0% to 91.5%, p<0.001), as did correct treatment (78.3% to 98.2%, p<0.001). Variability in QOC decreased (intracluster correlation coefficient 0.613-0.346). CONCLUSIONS: MESH was associated with significant improvements in all domains of IMCI quality. MESH could be an innovative strategy to improve IMCI implementation in resource-limited settings working to decrease under-five mortality.

Enhancing formal educational and in-service training programs in rural Rwanda: a partnership among the public sector, a nongovernmental organization, and academia.

Global disparities in the distribution, specialization, diversity, and competency of the health workforce are striking. Countries with fewer health professionals have poorer health outcomes compared with countries that have more. Despite major gains in health indicators, Rwanda still suffers from a severe shortage of health professionals.This article describes a partnership launched in 2005 by Rwanda's Ministry of Health with the U.S. nongovernmental organization Partners In Health and with Harvard Medical School and Brigham and Women's Hospital. The partnership has expanded to include the Faculty of Medicine and the School of Public Health at the National University of Rwanda and other Harvard-affiliated academic medical centers. The partnership prioritizes local ownership and-with the ultimate goals of strengthening health service delivery and achieving health equity for poor and underserved populations-it has helped establish new or strengthen existing formal educational programs (conferring advanced degrees) and in-service training programs (fostering continuing professional development) targeting the local health workforce. Harvard Medical School and Brigham and Women's Hospital have also benefited from the partnership, expanding the opportunities for training and research in global health available to their faculty and trainees.The partnership has enabled Rwandan health professionals at partnership-supported district hospitals to acquire new competencies and deliver better health services to rural and underserved populations by leveraging resources, expertise, and growing interest in global health within the participating U.S. academic institutions. Best practices implemented during the partnership's first nine years can inform similar formal educational and in-service training programs in other low-income countries.