Trial reportGlobal health action2016
Learning from a cluster randomized controlled trial to improve healthcare workers' access to prevention and care for tuberculosis and HIV in Free State, South Africa: the pivotal role of information systems.
Trial report in Global health action, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
6 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 9 citations in OpenAlex.
- Effectiveness of control measures to prevent occupational tuberculosis infection in health care workers: a systematic review.BMC public health · 2018Pooled it
- Specification of implementation interventions to address the cascade of HIV care and treatment in resource-limited settings: a systematic review.Implementation science : IS · 2017Pooled it
- Article
- Towards TB elimination: how are macro-level factors perceived and addressed in policy initiatives in a high burden country?Globalization and health · 2021Article
- Use of Digital Technology to Enhance Tuberculosis Control: Scoping Review.Journal of medical Internet research · 2020Article
- Agents of change: The role of healthcare workers in the prevention of nosocomial and occupational tuberculosis.Presse medicale (Paris, France : 1983) · 2017Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundOccupational tuberculosis (TB) continues to plague the healthcare workforce in South Africa. A 2-year cluster randomized controlled trial was therefore launched in 27 public hospitals in Free State province, to better understand how a combined workforce and workplace program can improve health of the healthcare workforce.
objectiveThis mid-term evaluation aimed to analyze how well the intervention was being implemented, seek evidence of impact or harm, and draw lessons.
methodsBoth intervention and comparison sites had been instructed to conduct bi-annual and issue-based infection control assessments (when healthcare workers [HCW] are diagnosed with TB) and offer HCWs confidential TB and HIV counseling and testing, TB treatment and prophylaxis for HIV-positive HCWs. Intervention sites were additionally instructed to conduct quarterly workplace assessments, and also offer HCWs HIV treatment at their occupational health units (OHUs). Trends in HCW mortality, sick-time, and turnover rates (2005-2014) were analyzed from the personnel salary database ('PERSAL'). Data submitted by the OHUs were also analyzed. Open-ended questionnaires were then distributed to OHU HCWs and in-depth interviews conducted at 17 of the sites to investigate challenges encountered.
resultsOHUs reported identifying and treating 23 new HCW cases of TB amongst the 1,372 workers who used the OHU for HIV and/or TB services; 39 new cases of HIV were also identified and 108 known-HIV-positive HCWs serviced. Although intervention-site workforces used these services significantly more than comparison-site healthcare staff (p<0.001), the data recorded were incomplete for both the intervention and comparison OHUs. An overall significant decline in mortality and turnover rates was documented over this period, but no significant differences between intervention and comparison sites; sick-time data proved unreliable. Severe OHU workload as well as residual confidentiality concerns prevented the proper implementation of protocols, especially workplace assessments and data recording. Particularly, the failure to implement computerized data collection required OHU staff to duplicate their operational data collection duties by also entering research paper forms. The study was therefore halted pending the implementation of a computerized system.
conclusionsThe significant differences in OHU use documented cannot be attributable to the intervention due to incomplete data reporting; unreliable sick-time data further precluded ascertaining the benefit potentially attributable to the intervention. Computerized data collection is essential to facilitate operational monitoring while conducting real-world intervention research. The digital divide still requires the attention of researchers along with overall infrastructural constraints.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.