Implementation status of household contact tuberculosis screening by health extension workers: assessment findings from programme implementation in Tigray region, northern Ethiopia.
Ethiopia
Health extension worker
Tigray
Tuberculosis
Tuberculosis screening
Journal
BMC health services research
ISSN: 1472-6963
Titre abrégé: BMC Health Serv Res
Pays: England
ID NLM: 101088677
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
31 Jan 2020
31 Jan 2020
Historique:
received:
16
04
2019
accepted:
23
01
2020
entrez:
2
2
2020
pubmed:
2
2
2020
medline:
8
5
2020
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
In the Tigray region of Ethiopia, Health Extension Workers (HEWs) conduct Tuberculosis (TB) screening for all household (HH) contacts. However, there is limited evidence on implementation status of HH contact TB screening by HEWs. The aim of this program assessment was to describe the implementation status and associated factors of HH contact TB screening by HEWs. This programme assessment was conducted in three randomly selected districts from March to April 2018. Data was collected by using pre-tested structured questionnaire. Descriptive statistics was carried out using frequency tables. Logistic regression analysis was done to identify factors associated with HH contacts screening by HEWs. In this programme assessment a total of HHs of 411 index TB cases were included. One-fifth (21.7%) of index TB cases had at least one HH contact screened for TB by HEWs. Having TB treatment supporter (TTS) during intensive phase of index TB case (AOR = 2.55, 95% CI: 1.06-6.01), health education on TB to HH contacts by HEWs (AOR = 4.28, 95% CI: 2.04-9.00), HH visit by HEWs within 6 months prior to the programme assessment (AOR = 5.84, 95% CI: 2.81-12.17) and discussions about TB activities by HEWs with Women Development Army (WDA) leaders (AOR = 9.51, 95% CI: 1.49-60.75) were significantly associated with household contact TB screening by HEWs. Our finding revealed that the proportion of HH contact TB screened by HEWs was low. Therefore, HEWs should routinely visit HHs of index TB cases and provide regular health education to improve contact screening practice. In addition, it is highly recommended to strengthen HEWs regular discussion about TB activities with WDA leaders and TB TTS.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
BACKGROUND
In the Tigray region of Ethiopia, Health Extension Workers (HEWs) conduct Tuberculosis (TB) screening for all household (HH) contacts. However, there is limited evidence on implementation status of HH contact TB screening by HEWs. The aim of this program assessment was to describe the implementation status and associated factors of HH contact TB screening by HEWs.
METHODS
METHODS
This programme assessment was conducted in three randomly selected districts from March to April 2018. Data was collected by using pre-tested structured questionnaire. Descriptive statistics was carried out using frequency tables. Logistic regression analysis was done to identify factors associated with HH contacts screening by HEWs.
RESULTS
RESULTS
In this programme assessment a total of HHs of 411 index TB cases were included. One-fifth (21.7%) of index TB cases had at least one HH contact screened for TB by HEWs. Having TB treatment supporter (TTS) during intensive phase of index TB case (AOR = 2.55, 95% CI: 1.06-6.01), health education on TB to HH contacts by HEWs (AOR = 4.28, 95% CI: 2.04-9.00), HH visit by HEWs within 6 months prior to the programme assessment (AOR = 5.84, 95% CI: 2.81-12.17) and discussions about TB activities by HEWs with Women Development Army (WDA) leaders (AOR = 9.51, 95% CI: 1.49-60.75) were significantly associated with household contact TB screening by HEWs.
CONCLUSIONS
CONCLUSIONS
Our finding revealed that the proportion of HH contact TB screened by HEWs was low. Therefore, HEWs should routinely visit HHs of index TB cases and provide regular health education to improve contact screening practice. In addition, it is highly recommended to strengthen HEWs regular discussion about TB activities with WDA leaders and TB TTS.
Identifiants
pubmed: 32005226
doi: 10.1186/s12913-020-4928-x
pii: 10.1186/s12913-020-4928-x
pmc: PMC6995142
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
72Références
PLoS One. 2011;6(7):e22500
pubmed: 21799875
Int J Tuberc Lung Dis. 2013 Oct;17(10 Suppl 1):48-55
pubmed: 24020602
BMC Health Serv Res. 2017 Mar 11;17(1):193
pubmed: 28284193
Int J Mycobacteriol. 2017 Jul-Sep;6(3):246-252
pubmed: 28776522
Int J Tuberc Lung Dis. 2017 Sep 1;21(9):1002-1007
pubmed: 28826449
Int J Mycobacteriol. 2013 Dec;2(4):240-3
pubmed: 26786130
PLoS One. 2016 Feb 05;11(2):e0147744
pubmed: 26849656
BMC Public Health. 2016 Feb 23;16:177
pubmed: 26905034
PLoS One. 2009;4(5):e5443
pubmed: 19424460
BMC Public Health. 2015 Feb 25;15:187
pubmed: 25885789
BMJ Glob Health. 2017 Nov 2;2(4):e000390
pubmed: 29209537
S Afr Fam Pract (2004). 2015 Mar 1;57(2):116-120
pubmed: 26279948
Tanaffos. 2012;11(3):15-22
pubmed: 25191423
Public Health Action. 2017 Sep 21;7(3):206-211
pubmed: 29226096
Lancet Infect Dis. 2018 Jul;18(7):711-712
pubmed: 29153268
PLoS One. 2015 Mar 26;10(3):e0119822
pubmed: 25812013
PLoS One. 2015 May 08;10(5):e0125767
pubmed: 25955517
Int J Tuberc Lung Dis. 2009 Dec;13(12):1507-12
pubmed: 19919768
BMC Health Serv Res. 2014 Apr 05;14:156
pubmed: 24708661
PLoS One. 2016 Aug 02;11(8):e0160514
pubmed: 27483160
PLoS One. 2013 May 27;8(5):e63174
pubmed: 23723975
BMC Public Health. 2014 Nov 18;14:1175
pubmed: 25407379
F1000Res. 2018 Jul 5;7:null
pubmed: 30026917
PLoS One. 2014 Feb 18;9(2):e88937
pubmed: 24558452
PLoS One. 2016 Feb 22;11(2):e0149412
pubmed: 26901854
BMC Public Health. 2014 Jul 11;14:713
pubmed: 25015682
Eur Respir J. 2013 Jan;41(1):140-56
pubmed: 22936710