Geo-analysis: the distribution of community health workers in relation to the HIV prevalence in KwaZulu-Natal province, South Africa.

BACKGROUND: The South African Ward Based Primary Health Care Outreach Team (WBPHCOT) policy framework states that the distribution of community health workers (CHWs) should be proportional to levels of poverty and disease within the population. We aimed to describe the spatial distribution of CHWs in relation to the prevalence of the Human Immunodeficiency Virus (HIV) which has itself been associated with poverty in previous studies. METHODS: This was a descriptive, cross-sectional study in which secondary data was used for geospatial analysis. Based on the extrapolation from the norm of one WBPHCOT per 6000 individuals, we utilized geographic information system (GIS) methods to visualize the distribution of CHWs in relation to the prevalence of HIV in KwaZulu-Natal (KZN). Dot density mapping was used to visualize the random distribution of CHWs in relation to HIV prevalence and population in the districts. The districts' HIV prevalence, number of PLWH, ratio of CHW: people living with HIV (PLWH), ratio of CHW: population and poverty scores were mapped using choropleth mapping. MapInfo Pro 17.0 was used to map geospatial presentation of the data. RESULTS: Overall, KZN province showed under allocation of CHWs with a CHW: people ratio of 1: 1156 compared to the estimated norm of 1: 600-1000. At district level, only two of 11 districts met the suggested norm of CHW: PLWH (1: 109-181). This indicates shortages and misallocation of CHWs in the nine remaining districts. Furthermore, our findings showed extensive geospatial heterogeneity with no clear pattern in the distribution of CHWs. There was no relationship between CHW distribution and HIV prevalence or poverty scores in the districts. CONCLUSION: This study shows inequality in the distribution of CHWs which may be associated with inequalities in the provision of HIV related services. It is critical to strengthen the response to the HIV epidemic through the appropriate distribution of CHWs especially in those districts with high levels of HIV prevalence and poverty.

Mortality under early access to antiretroviral therapy vs. Eswatini's national standard of care: the MaxART clustered randomized stepped-wedge trial.

OBJECTIVES: Current WHO guidelines recommend the treatment of all HIV-infected individuals with antiretroviral therapy (ART) to improve survival and quality of life, and decrease infection of others. MaxART is the first implementation trial of this strategy embedded within a government-managed health system, and assesses mortality as a secondary outcome. Because primary findings strongly supported scale-up of the 'treat all' strategy (hereafter Treat All), this analysis examines mortality as an additional indicator of its impact. METHODS: MaxART was conducted in 14 Eswatinian health clinics through a clinic-based stepped-wedge design, by transitioning clinics from then-national standard of care (SoC) to the Treat All intervention. All-cause, disease-related, and HIV-related mortality were analysed using the Cox proportional hazards model, censoring SoC participants at clinic transition. Median follow-up time among study participants was 292 days. There were 36/2034 deaths in SoC (1.77%) and 49/1371 deaths in Treat All (3.57%). RESULTS: Between September 2014 and August 2017, 3405 participants were enrolled. In SoC and Treat All interventions, respectively, the multivariable-adjusted 12-month all-cause mortality rates were 1.42% [95% confidence interval (CI): 0.66-2.17] and 1.60% (95% CI: 0.78-2.40), disease-related mortality rates were 1.02% (95% CI: 0.40-1.64) and 1.10% (95% CI: 0.46-1.73), and HIV-related mortality rates were 1.03% (95% CI: 0.40-1.65) and 0.99% (95% CI: 0.40-1.58). Treat All had no impact on all-cause [hazard ratio (HR) = 1.12, 95% CI: 0.58-2.18, P = 0.73], disease-related (HR = 1.04, 95% CI: 0.52-2.11, P = 0.90), or HIV-related mortality (HR = 0.93, 95% CI: 0.46-1.87, P = 0.83). CONCLUSION: There was no immediate benefit of the Treat All strategy on mortality, nor evidence of harm. Longer follow-up of participants is needed to establish long-term consequences.

Prioritising health research in KwaZulu-Natal: has the research conducted met the research needs?

BACKGROUND: The KwaZulu-Natal (KZN) Health Act of 2009 mandates the Provincial Health Research and Ethics Committee to develop health research priorities for the province. During 2013, the KZN Department of Health embarked on a research prioritisation process for the province. Priority research questions were generated by an inclusive process, in which a variety of stakeholders in health research in the province were engaged. The aim of this study was to determine whether research conducted at public health facilities in KZN between 01 January 2014 and 31 March 2017 met the research priorities of the province developed through the provincial research prioritisation process of 2013. METHODS: This was a mixed methods study. Qualitative thematic analysis was used to categorise priority research questions generated in the priority-setting process and the titles of research projects conducted after that process into themes. Quantitative analysis was used to determine the correlation between themes of the priority questions, and those of the research projects conducted after the prioritisation exercise. Statistical Package for Social Science version 25 was used to analyse the data. RESULTS: In 72% of thematic areas, there were disproportionately more priority questions than there were research projects conducted. There is thus a large disjuncture between the priorities developed through the provincial research prioritisation process of 2013 and the research projects conducted after that process in terms of major research areas. CONCLUSIONS: Ensuring that research conducted responds to priority questions raised is important because it ensures that research responds to locally important issues and to the concerns of local actors. Local health managers, communities and researchers should work together to ensure that the research conducted in their areas respond to the research priorities of those areas. Health Research Committees and local ethics committees can play important roles in facilitating the responsiveness to research priorities.