Effectiveness of in-service training plus the collaborative improvement strategy on the quality of routine malaria surveillance data: results of a pilot study in Kayunga District, Uganda.

BACKGROUND: Surveillance data are essential for malaria control, but quality is often poor. The aim of the study was to evaluate the effectiveness of the novel combination of training plus an innovative quality improvement method-collaborative improvement (CI)-on the quality of malaria surveillance data in Uganda. METHODS: The intervention (training plus CI, or TCI), including brief in-service training and CI, was delivered in 5 health facilities (HFs) in Kayunga District from November 2015 to August 2016. HF teams monitored data quality, conducted plan-do-study-act cycles to test changes, attended periodic learning sessions, and received CI coaching. An independent evaluation was conducted to assess data completeness, accuracy, and timeliness. Using an interrupted time series design without a separate control group, data were abstracted from 156,707 outpatient department (OPD) records, laboratory registers, and aggregated monthly reports (MR) for 4 time periods: baseline-12 months, TCI scale-up-5 months; CI implementation-9 months; post-intervention-4 months. Monthly OPD register completeness was measured as the proportion of patient records with a malaria diagnosis with: (1) all data fields completed, and (2) all clinically-relevant fields completed. Accuracy was the relative difference between: (1) number of monthly malaria patients reported in OPD register versus MR, and (2) proportion of positive malaria tests reported in the laboratory register versus MR. Data were analysed with segmented linear regression modelling. RESULTS: Data completeness increased substantially following TCI. Compared to baseline, all-field completeness increased by 60.1%-points (95% confidence interval [CI]: 46.9-73.2%) at mid-point, and clinically-relevant completeness increased by 61.6%-points (95% CI: 56.6-66.7%). A relative - 57.4%-point (95% confidence interval: - 105.5, - 9.3%) change, indicating an improvement in accuracy of malaria test positivity reporting, but no effect on data accuracy for monthly malaria patients, were observed. Cost per additional malaria patient, for whom complete clinically-relevant data were recorded in the OPD register, was $3.53 (95% confidence interval: $3.03, $4.15). CONCLUSIONS: TCI improved malaria surveillance completeness considerably, with limited impact on accuracy. Although these results are promising, the intervention's effectiveness should be evaluated in more HFs, with longer follow-up, ideally in a randomized trial, before recommending CI for wide-scale use.

Politics of disease control in Africa and the critical role of global health diplomacy: A systematic review.

Background: Africa is facing the triple burden of communicable diseases, non-communicable diseases (NCDs), and nutritional disorders. Multilateral institutions, bilateral arrangements, and philanthropies have historically privileged economic development over health concerns. That focus has resulted in weak health systems and inadequate preparedness when there are outbreaks of diseases. This review aims to understand the politics of disease control in Africa and global health diplomacy's (GHD's) critical role. Methods: A literature review was done in Medline/PubMed, Web of Science, Scopus, Embase, and Google scholar search engines. Keywords included MeSH and common terms related to the topics: "Politics," "disease control," "epidemics/ endemics," and "global health diplomacy" in the "African" context. The resources also included reports of World Health Organization, United Nations and resolutions of the World Health Assembly (WHA). Results: African countries continue to struggle in their attempts to build health systems for disease control that are robust enough to tackle the frequent epidemics that plague the continent. The politics of disease control requires the crafting of cooperative partnerships to accommodate the divergent interests of multiple actors. Recent outbreaks of COVID-19 and Ebola had a significant impact on African economies. It is extremely important to prioritize health in the African development agendas. The African Union (AU) should leverage the momentum of the rise of GHD to (i) navigate the politics of global health governance in an interconnected world(ii) develop robust preparedness and disease response strategies to tackle emerging and reemerging disease epidemics in the region (iii) address the linkages between health and broader human security issues driven by climate change-induced food, water, and other insecurities (iv) mobilize resources and capacities to train health officials in the craft of diplomacy. Conclusion: The AU, Regional Economic Communities (RECs), and African Centres for Disease Control should harmonize their plans and strategies and align them towards a common goal that integrates health in African development agendas. The AU must innovatively harness the practice and tools of GHD towards developing the necessary partnerships with relevant actors in the global health arena to achieve the health targets of the Sustainable Development Goals.

Evaluation of the rapid, multi-country, parallel process, multi-tasking approach to startup of short-term technical assistance to improve service delivery in newborn and child health in the context of USAID's Zika response in four Eastern and Southern Caribbean countries.

Background: In 2018, the USAID Applying Science to Strengthen and Improve Systems (ASSIST) Project started a new partnership with four Eastern and Southern Caribbean countries impacted by the Zika virus: Antigua and Barbuda, Dominica, St. Kitts and Nevis, and St. Vincent and the Grenadines.  The goal of the project was to provide short-term technical assistance (STTA) to strengthen the health systems' capacity to detect newborns and young children potentially affected by Zika and to address their health needs.  To meet these objectives, ASSIST developed an innovative approach based on its existing model for service delivery improvement. This novel approach is known as Rapid, Multi-country, Parallel Process, Multi-tasking Approach for a Project Startup (RMPP-MAPS).  An evaluation was conducted to document the STTA startup activities, to identify enabling and constraining factors, and to capture lessons learned. Methods: An external consultant conducted remote in-depth interviews with individuals involved in the startup using semi-structured interview guides and retrieved data from the review of project documents. Results: Using RMPP-MAPS, the ASSIST Project successfully implemented the startup for complex STTA in four countries within less than four months, spanning mid-May to early September 2018. Project milestones included achieving buy-in from stakeholders, co-developing the technical scope and materials, and rapidly executing critical operational functions.  Dedicated project teams, country leaderships, and local champions were essential to overcoming the main challenges, which included a condensed timeframe, lack of in-country offices, and country-level factors such as a shortage of health care workers and a weak health infrastructure.  Conclusions: The RMPP-MAPS is a feasible and resource-efficient mechanism of interest to implementers, donors, and low and middle-income countries facing temporal and financial limitations to rapidly addressing public health priorities.

Do Quality Improvement Initiatives Improve Outcomes for Patients in Antiretroviral Programs in Low- and Middle-Income Countries? A Systematic Review.

BACKGROUND: There have been a range of quality improvement (QI) and quality assurance initiatives in low- and middle-income countries to improve antiretroviral therapy (ART) treatment outcomes for people living with HIV. To date, these initiatives have not been systematically assessed and little is known about how effective, cost-effective, or sustainable these strategies are in improving clinical outcomes. METHODS: We conducted a systematic review adhering to PRISMA guidelines (PROSPERO ID: CRD42017071848), searching PubMed, MEDLINE, Embase, Web of Science, and the Cochrane database of controlled trials for articles reporting on the effectiveness of QI and quality assurance initiatives in HIV programs in low- and middle-income countries in relation to ART uptake, retention in care, adherence, viral load suppression, mortality, and other outcomes including cost-effectiveness and long-term sustainability. RESULTS: One thousand eight hundred sixty articles were found, of which 29 were included. QI approaches were categorized as follows: (1) health system approaches using QI methods; (2) QI learning networks including collaboratives; (3) standard-based methods that use QI tools to improve performance gaps; and (4) campaigns using QI methods. The greatest improvements were seen in ART uptake [median increase of 14.0%; interquartile range (IQR) -9.0 to 29.3], adherence [median increase of 22.0% (IQR -7.0 to 25.0)], and viral load suppression [median increase 26.0% (IQR -8.0 to 26.0)]. CONCLUSIONS: QI interventions can be effective in improving clinical outcomes; however, there was significant variability, making it challenging to identify which aspects of interventions lead to clinical improvements. Standardizing reporting and assessment of QI initiatives is needed, supported by national quality policies and directorates, and robust research.

What initiatives do healthcare leaders agree are needed for healthcare system improvement? Results of a modified-Delphi study.

PURPOSE: The purpose of this paper is to identify five quality improvement initiatives for healthcare system leaders, produced by such leaders themselves, and to provide some guidance on how these could be implemented. DESIGN/METHODOLOGY/APPROACH: A multi-stage modified-Delphi process was used, blending the Delphi approach of iterative information collection, analysis and feedback, with the option for participants to revise their judgments. FINDINGS: The process reached consensus on five initiatives: change information privacy laws; overhaul professional training and work in the workplace; use co-design methods; contract for value and outcomes across health and social care; and use data from across the public and private sectors to improve equity for vulnerable populations and the sickest people. RESEARCH LIMITATIONS/IMPLICATIONS: Information could not be gathered from all participants at each stage of the modified-Delphi process, and the participants did not include patients and families, potentially limiting the scope and nature of input. PRACTICAL IMPLICATIONS: The practical implications are a set of findings based on what leaders would bring to a decision-making table in an ideal world if given broad scope and capacity to make policy and organisational changes to improve healthcare systems. ORIGINALITY/VALUE: This study adds to the literature a suite of recommendations for healthcare quality improvement, produced by a group of experienced healthcare system leaders from a range of contexts.

A framework for learning about improvement: embedded implementation and evaluation design to optimize learning.

Improving health care involves many actors, often working in complex adaptive systems. Interventions tend to be multi-factorial, implementation activities diverse, and contexts dynamic and complicated. This makes improvement initiatives challenging to describe and evaluate as matching evaluation and program designs can be difficult, requiring collaboration, trust and transparency. Collaboration is required to address important epidemiological principles of bias and confounding. If this does not take place, results may lack credibility because the association between interventions implemented and outcomes achieved is obscure and attribution uncertain. Moreover, lack of clarity about what was implemented, how it was implemented, and the context in which it was implemented often lead to disappointment or outright failure of spread and scale-up efforts. The input of skilled evaluators into the design and conduct of improvement initiatives can be helpful in mitigating these potential problems. While evaluation must be rigorous, if it is too rigid necessary adaptation and learning may be compromised. This article provides a framework and guidance on how improvers and evaluators can work together to design, implement and learn about improvement interventions more effectively.

Salzburg Global Seminar Session 565-'Better Health Care: how do we learn about improvement?'

A fundamental question for the field of healthcare improvement is the extent to which the results achieved can be attributed to the changes that were implemented and whether or not these changes are generalizable. Answering these questions is particularly challenging because the healthcare context is complex, and the interventions themselves tend to be complex and multi-dimensional. The Salzburg Global Seminar Session 565-'Better Health Care: How do we learn about improvement?' was convened to address questions of attribution, generalizability and rigor, and to think through how to approach these concerns in the field of quality improvement. The Salzburg Global Seminar Session 565 brought together 61 leaders in improvement from 22 countries, including researchers, evaluators and improvers. The primary conclusion that resulted from the session was the need for evaluation to be embedded as an integral part of the improvement. We have invited participants of the seminar to contribute to writing this supplement, which consists of eight articles reflecting insights and learning from the Salzburg Global Seminar. This editorial serves as an introduction to the supplement. The supplement explains results and insights from Salzburg Global Seminar Session 565.

Managing hundreds of improvement teams.

Recognizing the notable scale of USAID Applying Science to Strengthen and Improve Systems (ASSIST) Project activities and sizable number of improvement teams, which in some cases is close to 1,000 improvement teams managed in one country at a point in time, we sought to answer the questions: How do we manage hundreds of improvement teams in one country alone? How do we manage more than 4,000 improvement teams globally? The leaders of our improvement programs manage such efforts as though they are second-nature, without pointing to the specific skills and strategies needed to manage thousands of teams. This paper was developed to capture the lessons, considerations, and insights shared in discussions with leaders on the USAID ASSIST Project, including country Chiefs of Party and Regional Directors. More specifically, this paper seeks to describe what is involved in scaling up and managing large numbers of improvement teams. Through focus group discussions and individual interviews, participants discussed the key skills, strategies, and lessons needed to successfully manage large numbers of teams on the USAID ASSIST Project. We concluded that the six key components in managing large numbers of teams are 1) leadership; 2) management structures and capacities; 3) clear and open communication; 4) shared learning, collaboration, and support; 5) ownership, engagement, and empowerment; and 6) partnerships. We further analyzed these six components as being interrelated to one another based on the relationship between culture, strategy, and technique in implementing quality improvement activities.

How do we learn about improving health care: a call for a new epistemological paradigm.

PURPOSE: The field of improving health care has been achieving more significant results in outcomes at scale in recent years. This has raised legitimate questions regarding the rigor, attribution, generalizability and replicability of the results. This paper describes the issue and outlines questions to be addressed in order to develop an epistemological paradigm that responds to these questions. QUESTIONS: We need to consider the following questions: (i) Did the improvements work? (ii) Why did they work? (iii) How do we know that the results can be attributed to the changes made? (iv) How can we replicate them? (Note, the goal is not to copy what was done, but to affect factors that can yield similar results in a different context.) NEXT STEPS: Answers to these questions will help improvers find ways to increase the rigor of their improvements, attribute the results to the changes made and better understand what is context specific and what is generalizable about the improvement.

Improving care for patients on antiretroviral therapy through a gap analysis framework.

OBJECTIVE: To improve quality of care through decreasing existing gaps in the areas of coverage, retention, and wellness of patients receiving HIV care and treatment. DESIGN: The antiretroviral therapy (ART) Framework utilizes improvement methods and the Chronic Care Model to address the coverage, retention, and wellness gaps in HIV care and treatment. This is a time-series study. SETTING: The ART Framework was applied in five health centers in Buikwe District, Uganda. PARTICIPANTS: Quality improvement teams, consisting of healthcare workers and expert patients, were established in each of the five healthcare facilities. INTERVENTION: The intervention period was October 2010 to September 2012. It consisted of quality improvement teams analyzing their facility and systems of care from the perspective of the Chronic Care Model to identify areas of improvement. They implemented the ART Framework, collected data and assessed outcomes, focused on self-management support for patients, to improve coverage, retention, and wellness gaps in HIV care and treatment. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE(S): Coverage was defined as every patient who needs ART in the catchment area, receives it. Retention was defined as every patient who receives ART stays on ART, and wellness defined as having a positive clinical, immunological, and/or virological response to treatment without intolerable or unmanageable side-effects. RESULTS: Results from Buikwe show the gaps in coverage, retention, and wellness greatly decreased a gap in coverage of 44-19%, gap in retention of 49-24%, and gap in wellness of 53-14% during a 2-year intervention period. CONCLUSION: The ART Framework is an innovative and practical tool for HIV program managers to improve HIV care and treatment.

A promising approach to scale up health care improvements in low-and middle-income countries: the Wave-Sequence Spread Approach and the concept of the Slice of a System.

There are several examples of successes in improving health care. However, many of these tend to remain limited to the sites they were originally developed in. There are fewer examples of successes that have spread to the remainder of the systems they were developed in. This article discusses the wave-sequence approach, which is a type of spread focusing on spreading in a systematic, sequential manner, using spread agents-people who participated in the original demonstration sites-to spread to other parts of the systems. The paper also discusses the associated concept of the "slice" of a system. In addition, we describe a phenomenon related to the rate of adoption that we are seeing in the wave-sequence approach.

Charting the way forward to better quality health care: how do we get there and what are the next steps? Recommendations from the Salzburg Global Seminar on making health care better in low- and middle-income economies.

OBJECTIVE: In April 2012, the Salzburg Global Seminar (SGS) brought together 58 health leaders from 33 countries to review experiences in improving the quality and safety of health-care services in low- and middle-income countries, synthesize lessons learned from those experiences, discuss challenges and opportunities and recommend next steps to stimulate improvement in such countries. This work summarizes the seminar's key results, expressed as five shared challenges and five lessons learned. DESIGN: The seminar featured a series of interactive sessions with an all-teach, all-learn approach. Session topics were: introduction to the seminar, journey to date, challenges that lie ahead, overcoming the issues of confusion, sustaining execution, strengthening leadership and policy, the role of quality improvement in health systems strengthening and setting the agenda for learning and next steps. RESULTS: Key lessons from the SGS include reducing terminology and methodology confusion, strengthening the learning agenda, embracing improvement science as a means for strengthening health-care systems, developing leadership in improving health care and ensuring that health-care systems focus on patients and communities. A call to action was developed by SGS participants and presented at the 65th World Health Assembly in Geneva. CONCLUSION: There is an inarguable need to move improvement in health care to a new level to attain and exceed the Millennium Development Goals. The challenges can be overcome through concerted action of key stakeholders and the application of scientifically grounded management methods to enable the reliable implementation of high-impact interventions for every patient every time needed.