Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34704961›Full record

ArticleJMIR mHealth and uHealth2021

Stakeholders' Perceptions of Benefits of and Barriers to Using Video-Observed Treatment for Monitoring Patients With Tuberculosis in Uganda: Exploratory Qualitative Study.

Juliet Nabbuye Sekandi, Vicent Kasiita, Nicole Amara Onuoha, Sarah Zalwango, Damalie Nakkonde, David Kaawa-Mafigiri, Julius Turinawe, Robert Kakaire, Paula Davis-Olwell, Lynn Atuyambe and 1 more

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in JMIR mHealth and uHealth, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 17 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
17citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
3.8field-weighted citation impact, top 7% 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

17 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 20 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Trial
  5. Trial
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Perceptions and experiences of directly observed treatment in tuberculosis: insights from a mixed-methods cross-sectional study.Jornal brasileiro de pneumologia : publicacao oficial da Sociedade Brasileira de Pneumologia e Tisilogia · 2025
    Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. 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

11 authors at 4 institutions in 2 countries.

Juliet Nabbuye SekandiDepartment of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, College of Public Health, University of Georgia, Athens, GA, United States.ORCID 0000-0003-2430-1396
Vicent KasiitaInfectious Disease Institute, Kampala, Uganda.ORCID 0000-0002-1616-6887
Nicole Amara OnuohaGlobal Health Institute, College of Public Health, University of Georgia, Athens, GA, United States.ORCID 0000-0003-1329-5461
Sarah ZalwangoSchool of Public Health, Makerere University, Kampala, Uganda.ORCID 0000-0002-9539-6110
Damalie NakkondeSchool of Public Health, Makerere University, Kampala, Uganda.ORCID 0000-0001-7270-6991
David Kaawa-MafigiriSchool of Social Sciences and Social Work, Makerere University, Kampala, Uganda.ORCID 0000-0002-2699-4248
Julius TurinaweSchool of Public Health, Makerere University, Kampala, Uganda.ORCID 0000-0001-6563-6841
Robert KakaireGlobal Health Institute, College of Public Health, University of Georgia, Athens, GA, United States.ORCID 0000-0003-1588-4075
Paula Davis-OlwellDepartment of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, College of Public Health, University of Georgia, Athens, GA, United States.ORCID 0000-0002-0876-8044
Lynn AtuyambeSchool of Public Health, Makerere University, Kampala, Uganda.ORCID 0000-0001-5886-5080
Esther BuregyeyaSchool of Public Health, Makerere University, Kampala, Uganda.ORCID 0000-0002-4410-8027
Makerere University · UGUniversity of Georgia · USInfectious Diseases Institute · UGKampala Capital City Authority · UG

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundNonadherence to treatment remains a barrier to tuberculosis (TB) control. Directly observed therapy (DOT) is the standard for monitoring adherence to TB treatment worldwide, but its implementation is challenging, especially in resource-limited settings. DOT is labor-intensive and inconvenient to both patients and health care workers. Video DOT (VDOT) is a novel patient-centered alternative that uses mobile technology to observe patients taking medication remotely. However, the perceptions and acceptability of potential end users have not been evaluated in Africa.

objectiveThis study explores stakeholders' acceptability of, as well as perceptions of potential benefits of and barriers to, using VDOT to inform a pilot study for monitoring patients with TB in urban Uganda.

methodsAn exploratory, qualitative, cross-sectional study with an exit survey was conducted in Kampala, Uganda, from April to May 2018. We conducted 5 focus group discussions, each comprising 6 participants. Groups included patients with TB (n=2 groups; male and female), health care providers (n=1), caregivers (n=1), and community DOT volunteer workers (n=1). The questions that captured perceived benefits and barriers were guided by domains adopted from the Technology Acceptance Model. These included perceived usefulness, ease of use, and intent to use technology. Eligible participants were aged ≥18 years and provided written informed consent. For patients with TB, we included only those who had completed at least 2 months of treatment to minimize the likelihood of infection. A purposive sample of patients, caregivers, health care providers, and community DOT workers was recruited at 4 TB clinics in Kampala. Trained interviewers conducted unstructured interviews that were audio-recorded, transcribed, and analyzed using inductive content analysis to generate emerging themes.

resultsThe average age of participants was 34.5 (SD 10.7) years. VDOT was acceptable to most participants on a scale of 1 to 10. Of the participants, 70% (21/30) perceived it as highly acceptable, with scores ≥8, whereas 30% (9/30) scored between 5 and 7. Emergent themes on perceived benefits of VDOT were facilitation of easy adherence monitoring, timely follow-up on missed doses, patient-provider communication, and saving time and money because of minimal travel to meet in person. Perceived barriers included limited technology usability skills, inadequate cellular connectivity, internet access, availability of electricity, cost of the smartphone, and use of the internet. Some female patients raised concerns about the disruption of their domestic work routines to record videos. The impact of VDOT on privacy and confidentiality emerged as both a perceived benefit and barrier.

conclusionsVDOT was acceptable and perceived as beneficial by most study participants, despite potential technical and cost barriers. Mixed perceptions emerged about the impact of VDOT on privacy and confidentiality. Future efforts should focus on training users, ensuring adequate technical infrastructure, assuring privacy, and performing comparative cost analyses in the local context.

Indexed as

Medication AdherenceTuberculosisAdolescentAdultCross-Sectional StudiesFemaleHumansMalePerceptionPilot ProjectsUgandaadherencemHealthmobile phonetuberculosisUgandavideo directly observed therapy

Identifiers

PMID34704961
PMCPMC8581755
OpenAlexW3196338004

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.