CHW ISSUE RESEARCH-ROUND UP, ISSUE 001
Oct 15-Oct 29, 2018
Comments: By our own team Muso + Medic! Way to go!
Methods: RCT; N=148 CHW; follow-up=6 months
Takeaway: Use of a personalised performance dashboard (metrics: quantity, speed, and quality of CHW care) during monthly supervision upped quantity of care without compromising speed or quality. (mean number of home visits increased significantly while effects on secondary outcomes of timeliness and quality were positive but not statistically significant)
Methods: non-randomised trial; 2 int districts (289 CHW), 2 control districts; follow-up=12 months
Takeaway: CHW home visiting during the antenatal and postnatal periods can improve health service use (Facility delivery, Attendance for at least one antenatal care +postnatal care visit) in fragile- and conflict-affected countries
Comments: From our friends at Oxford, James! Interesting re: role of human-centred design in CHW program design/implementation
Methods: Systematic scoping review
Takeaway: Participatory visual methodologies (e.g. participatory photography, film, digital storytelling, mapping, and drawing - PVMs) can help assist CHWs' reflective practice, understanding of complex health issues, identifying key issues in the community to potentially leverage social action.
Comment: Interesting re: role of CHWs for NCDs
Methods: quasi-experimental study; health care provider advice and assistance (Arm 1) vs. Arm 1 plus CHW counseling; N=1,318 tobacco users; 6 month follow-up
Takeaway: Evidence for a team approach to tobacco dependence treatment: smokers in Arm 2 were almost three times more likely to quit compared with those in Arm 1.
Comment: From our friends at the REACH-OUT Consortium
Methods: development + validation of a simple tool to measure perceived supervision across seven LMICs
Takeaway: The 6-item measure of perceived supervision (capturing regular contact, two-way communication, and joint problem-solving elements - PSS) is the first validated tool that measures supervisory experience from the perspective of CHWs; available in 11 languages
Comment: From our own Celia Taylor + the Living Goods team!
Methods: cohort study of CHWs working for LG in 8 districts (N=547); Kendall's tau-b correlations between each selection score and performance outcome were calculated
Takeaway: None of the correlations between selection scores and outcomes (e.g. number of household and pregnancy registrations, number of child assessments, proportion of on-time follow-ups and value of goods sold) reached the 0.3 threshold of an "adequate" predictor of performance. N.B. important outcomes, retention in post and quality of care were not included in study.
Comment: From our friends at the Penn Center, Shreya et. al!
Methods: RCT; N=592 patients; follow-up: 6, 9 months
Takeaway: CHW intervention reduced total hospital days by 65% while doubling quality!
Interesting trial registrations:
Implementing community health worker-patient pairings at the time of hospital discharge: A randomized control trial (Clinical Trials.gov ID# NCT03085264)
Methods: RCT designed to determine if linking hospitalized patients with chronic disease to CHWs can decrease 30-day readmissions (USA)