Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29025832›Full record

Trial reportBMJ open2017

Feasibility and acceptability of training community health workers in ear and hearing care in Malawi: a cluster randomised controlled trial.

Wakisa Mulwafu, Hannah Kuper, Asgaut Viste, Frederik K Goplen

Open access · goldAbstract readMulticenter StudyRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in BMJ open, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
16citing papers in PubMed
4.7field-weighted citation impact, top 5% of its field
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

16 citing papers in PubMed, 34 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Outcomes of Training Nurses Engaged in a Public Sector Newborn Hearing Screening Program in South India.Indian journal of otolaryngology and head and neck surgery : official publication of the Association of Otolaryngologists of India · 2022
    Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Training for hearing care providers.Bulletin of the World Health Organization · 2019
    Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors at 3 institutions in 3 countries.

Wakisa MulwafuDepartment of Surgery, College of Medicine Blantyre Malawi, Blantyre, Malawi.
Hannah KuperDepartment of Clinical Research, The London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine, London, UK.
Asgaut VisteHaukeland Universitetssjukehus, Bergen, Norway.
Frederik K GoplenHaukeland Universitetssjukehus, Bergen, Norway.
Haukeland University Hospital · NOBlantyre Institute for Community Ophthalmology · MWLondon School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveTo assess the feasibility and acceptability of training community health workers (CHWs) in ear and hearing care, and their ability to identify patients with ear and hearing disorders.

designCluster randomised controlled trial (RCT).

settingHealth centres in Thyolo district, Malawi.

participantsTen health centres participated, 5 intervention (29 CHWs) and 5 control (28 CHWs).

interventionIntervention CHWs received 3 days of training in primary ear and hearing care, while among control CHWs, training was delayed for 6 months. Both groups were given a pretest that assessed knowledge about ear and hearing care, only the intervention group was given the posttest on the third day of training. The intervention group was given 1 month to identify patients with ear and hearing disorders in their communities, and these people were screened for hearing disorders by ear, nose and throat clinical specialists. OUTCOME MEASURES: Primary outcome measure was improvement in knowledge of ear and hearing care among CHWs after the training. Secondary outcome measures were number of patients with ear or hearing disorders identified by CHWs and number recorded at health centres during routine activities, and the perceived feasibility and acceptability of the intervention.

resultsThe average overall correct answers increased from 55% to 68% (95% CI 65 to 71) in the intervention group (p<0.001). A total of 1739 patients with potential ear and hearing disorders were identified by CHWs and 860 patients attended the screening camps, of whom 400 had hearing loss (73 patients determined through bilateral fail on otoacoustic emissions, 327 patients through audiometry). Where cause could be determined, the most common cause of ear and hearing disorders was chronic suppurative otitis media followed by impacted wax. The intervention was perceived as feasible and acceptable to implement.

conclusionsTraining was effective in improving the knowledge of CHW in ear and hearing care in Malawi and allowing them to identify patients with ear and hearing disorders. This intervention could be scaled up to other CHWs in low-income and middle-income countries. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: Pan African Clinical Trial Registry (201705002285194); Results.

Indexed as

Health Knowledge, Attitudes, PracticeAdolescentAdultAgedAged, 80 and overChildChild, PreschoolCommunity Health WorkersDelivery of Health CareDeveloping CountriesEar DiseasesFeasibility StudiesFemaleHearing DisordersHumansInfantcommunity health workersear and hearing disorderstraining

Identifiers

PMID29025832
PMCPMC5652500
OpenAlexW2763547391

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.