Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29259824›Full record

ArticleBMJ global health2017

Health system effects of implementing integrated community case management (iCCM) intervention in private retail drug shops in South Western Uganda: a qualitative study.

Freddy Eric Kitutu, Chrispus Mayora, Emily White Johansson, Stefan Peterson, Henry Wamani, Maryam Bigdeli, Zubin Cyrus Shroff

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMJ global health, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 22 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
22citing papers in PubMed
4.5field-weighted citation impact, top 6% 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

22 citing papers in PubMed, 27 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Strengthening health systems: the role of drug shops.Journal of pharmaceutical policy and practice · 2021
    Article
  11. Drug shops for stronger health systems: learning from initiatives in six LMICs.Journal of pharmaceutical policy and practice · 2021
    Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Moving towards universal health coverage: engaging non-state providers.International journal for equity in health · 2018
    Article
  20. 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

7 authors at 5 institutions in 5 countries.

Freddy Eric KitutuDepartment of Pharmacy, Makerere University College of Health Sciences, Kampala, Uganda.ORCID 0000-0003-2277-9572
Chrispus MayoraSchool of Public Health, Makerere University College of Health Sciences, Kampala, Uganda.
Emily White JohanssonDepartment of Women's and Children's Health, International Maternal and Child Health Unit, Uppsala University, Uppsala, Sweden.
Stefan PetersonSchool of Public Health, Makerere University College of Health Sciences, Kampala, Uganda.
Henry WamaniSchool of Public Health, Makerere University College of Health Sciences, Kampala, Uganda.
Maryam BigdeliDepartment of Health System Governance and Financing, Health System Governance, Policy and Aid Effectiveness, WHO, Geneva, Switzerland.
Zubin Cyrus ShroffWHO Alliance for Health Policy and Systems Research, Geneva, Switzerland.
Alliance for Health Policy and Systems Research · CHUppsala University · SEMakerere University · UGUnited Nations Children's Fund · USUniversity of the Witwatersrand · ZA

Funding

World Health Organization 001
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundIntervening in private drug shops to improve quality of care and enhance regulatory oversight may have health system effects that need to be understood before scaling up any such interventions. We examine the processes through which a drug shop intervention culminated in positive unintended effects and other dynamic interactions within the underlying health system.

methodsA multifaceted intervention consisting of drug seller training, supply of diagnostics and subsidised medicines, use of treatment algorithms, monthly supervision and community sensitisation was implemented in drug shops in South Western Uganda, to improve paediatric fever management. Focus group discussions and in-depth interviews were conducted with stakeholders (drug sellers, government officials and community health workers) at baseline, midpoint and end-line between September 2013 and September 2015. Using a health market and systems lens, transcripts from the interviews were analysed to identify health system effects associated with the apparent success of the intervention.

findingsStakeholders initially expressed caution and fears about the intervention's implications for quality, equity and interface with the regulatory framework. Over time, these stakeholders embraced the intervention. Most respondents noted that the intervention had improved drug shop standards, enabled drug shops to embrace patient record keeping, parasite-based treatment of malaria and appropriate medicine use. There was also improved supportive supervision, and better compliance to licensing and other regulatory requirements. Drug seller legitimacy was enhanced from the community and client perspective, leading to improved trust in drug shops.

conclusionThe study showed how effectively using health technologies and the perceived efficacy of medicines contributed to improved legitimacy and trust in drug shops among stakeholders. The study also demonstrated that using a combination of appropriate incentives and consumer empowerment strategies can help harmonise common practices with medicine regulations and safeguard public health, especially in mixed health market contexts.

Indexed as

acute respiratory infectionchild healthhealth systemsmalariaqualitative study

Identifiers

PMID29259824
PMCPMC5717929
OpenAlexW2754368517

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.