Capacity of community health centers to treat snakebite envenoming in indigenous territories of the Brazilian Amazon.

INTRODUCTION: The deaths from and morbidities associated with snakebites - amputations, loss of function in the limb, visible scarring or tissue damage - have a vast economic, social, and psychological impact on indigenous communities in the Brazilian Amazon, especially children, and represent a real and pressing health crisis in this population. Snakebite clinical and research experts have therefore proposed expanding antivenom access from only hospitals to include the community health centers (CHC) located near and within indigenous communities. However, there are no studies examining the capacity of CHCs to store, administer, and manage antivenom treatment. In response to this gap, the research team calling for antivenom decentralization developed and validated an expert-based checklist outlining the minimum requirements for a CHC to provide antivenom. METHODS: The objective of this study was thus to survey a sample of CHCs in indigenous territories and evaluate their capacity to provide antivenom treatment according to this accredited checklist. The checklist was administered to nurses and doctors from 16 CHCs, two per indigenous district in Amazonas/Roraima states. RESULTS: Our results can be conceptualized into three central findings: 1) most CHCs have the capacity to provide antivenom treatment, 2) challenges to capacity are human resources and specialized items, and 3) antivenom decentralization is feasible and appropriate in indigenous communities. CONCLUSION: Decentralization would provide culturally and contextually appropriate care accessibility to a historically marginalized and underserved population of the Brazilian Amazon. Future studies should examine optimal resource allocation in indigenous territories and develop an implementation strategy in partnership with indigenous leaders. Beyond the indigenous population, the checklist utilized could be applied to community health centers treating the general population and/or adapted to other low-resource settings.

Development and validation of a minimum requirements checklist for snakebite envenoming treatment in the Brazilian Amazonia.

BACKGROUND: Currently, antivenoms are the only specific treatment available for snakebite envenoming. In Brazil, over 30% of patients cannot access antivenom within its critical care window. Researchers have therefore proposed decentralizing to community health centers to decrease time-to-care and improve morbidity and mortality. Currently, there is no evidence-based method to evaluate the capacity of health units for antivenom treatment, nor what the absolute minimum supplies and staff are necessary for safe and effective antivenom administration and clinical management. METHODS: This study utilized a modified-Delphi approach to develop and validate a checklist to evaluate the minimum requirements for health units to adequately treat snakebite envenoming in the Amazon region of Brazil. The modified-Delphi approach consisted of four rounds: 1) iterative development of preliminary checklist by expert steering committee; 2) controlled feedback on preliminary checklist via expert judge survey; 3) two-phase nominal group technique with new expert judges to resolve pending items; and 4) checklist finalization and closing criteria by expert steering committee. The measure of agreement selected for this study was percent agreement defined a priori as ≥75%. RESULTS: A valid, reliable, and feasible checklist was developed. The development process highlighted three key findings: (1) the definition of community health centers and its list of essential items by expert judges is consistent with the Brazilian Ministry of Health, WHO snakebite strategic plan, and a general snakebite capacity guideline in India (internal validity), (2) the list of essential items for antivenom administration and clinical management is feasible and aligns with the literature regarding clinical care (reliability), and (3) engagement of local experts is critical to developing and implementing an antivenom decentralization strategy (feasibility). CONCLUSION: This study joins an international set of evidence advocating for decentralization, adding value in its definition of essential care items; identification of training needs across the care continuum; and demonstration of the validity, reliability, and feasibility provided by engaging local experts. Specific to Brazil, further added value comes in the potential use of the checklist for health unit accreditation as well as its applications to logistics and resource distribution. Future research priorities should apply this checklist to health units in the Amazon region of Brazil to determine which community health centers are or could be capable of receiving antivenom and translate this expert-driven checklist and approach to snakebite care in other settings or other diseases in low-resource settings.

Capacity of community health centers to treat snakebite envenoming in indigenous territories of the Brazilian Amazon

Introduction The deaths from and morbidities associated with snakebites - amputations, loss of function in the limb, visible scarring or tissue damage - have a vast economic, social, and psychological impact on indigenous communities in the Brazilian Amazon, especially children, and represent a real and pressing health crisis in this population. Snakebite clinical and research experts have therefore proposed expanding antivenom access from only hospitals to include the community health centers (CHC) located near and within indigenous communities. However, there are no studies examining the capacity of CHCs to store, administer, and manage antivenom treatment. In response to this gap, the research team calling for antivenom decentralization developed and validated an expert-based checklist outlining the minimum requirements for a CHC to provide antivenom. Methods The objective of this study was thus to survey a sample of CHCs in indigenous territories and evaluate their capacity to provide antivenom treatment according to this accredited checklist. The checklist was administered to nurses and doctors from 16 CHCs, two per indigenous district in Amazonas/Roraima states. Results Our results can be conceptualized into three central findings: 1) most CHCs have the capacity to provide antivenom treatment, 2) challenges to capacity are human resources and specialized items, and 3) antivenom decentralization is feasible and appropriate in indigenous communities. Conclusion Decentralization would provide culturally and contextually appropriate care accessibility to a historically marginalized and underserved population of the Brazilian Amazon. Future studies should examine optimal resource allocation in indigenous territories and develop an implementation strategy in partnership with indigenous leaders. Beyond the indigenous population, the checklist utilized could be applied to community health centers treating the general population and/or adapted to other low-resource settings.

Development and validation of a minimum requirements checklist for snakebite envenoming treatment in the Brazilian Amazonia

Background Currently, antivenoms are the only specific treatment available for snakebite envenoming. In Brazil, over 30% of patients cannot access antivenom within its critical care window. Researchers have therefore proposed decentralizing to community health centers to decrease time-to-care and improve morbidity and mortality. Currently, there is no evidence-based method to evaluate the capacity of health units for antivenom treatment, nor what the absolute minimum supplies and staff are necessary for safe and effective antivenom administration and clinical management. Methods This study utilized a modified-Delphi approach to develop and validate a checklist to evaluate the minimum requirements for health units to adequately treat snakebite envenoming in the Amazon region of Brazil. The modified-Delphi approach consisted of four rounds: 1) iterative development of preliminary checklist by expert steering committee; 2) controlled feedback on preliminary checklist via expert judge survey; 3) two-phase nominal group technique with new expert judges to resolve pending items; and 4) checklist finalization and closing criteria by expert steering committee. The measure of agreement selected for this study was percent agreement defined a priori as ≥75%. Results A valid, reliable, and feasible checklist was developed. The development process highlighted three key findings: (1) the definition of community health centers and its list of essential items by expert judges is consistent with the Brazilian Ministry of Health, WHO snakebite strategic plan, and a general snakebite capacity guideline in India (internal validity), (2) the list of essential items for antivenom administration and clinical management is feasible and aligns with the literature regarding clinical care (reliability), and (3) engagement of local experts is critical to developing and implementing an antivenom decentralization strategy (feasibility). Conclusion This study joins an international set of evidence advocating for decentralization, adding value in its definition of essential care items; identification of training needs across the care continuum; and demonstration of the validity, reliability, and feasibility provided by engaging local experts. Specific to Brazil, further added value comes in the potential use of the checklist for health unit accreditation as well as its applications to logistics and resource distribution. Future research priorities should apply this checklist to health units in the Amazon region of Brazil to determine which community health centers are or could be capable of receiving antivenom and translate this expert-driven checklist and approach to snakebite care in other settings or other diseases in low-resource settings.