Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36469527›Full record

ArticlePLoS medicine2022

Care cascades for hypertension and diabetes: Cross-sectional evaluation of rural districts in Tanzania.

Brianna Osetinsky, Grace Mhalu, Sally Mtenga, Fabrizio Tediosi

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PLoS medicine, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 24 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
24citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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

24 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Observational
  4. Article
  5. Observational
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. 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

4 authors.

Brianna OsetinskySwiss Tropical and Public Health Institute, Allschwill, Switzerland.ORCID 0000-0002-9871-3062
Grace MhaluIfakara Health Institute, Dar es Salaam, Tanzania.
Sally MtengaIfakara Health Institute, Dar es Salaam, Tanzania.
Fabrizio TediosiSwiss Tropical and Public Health Institute, Allschwill, Switzerland.ORCID 0000-0001-8671-9400

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundNoncommunicable diseases (NCDs), especially hypertension and diabetes, are rapidly rising in sub-Saharan Africa, necessitating health systems transformations. In Tanzania, current policies aim to improve control of hypertension and diabetes, but information is still needed to assess the gaps in treatment. METHODS AND

findingsWe conducted a cross-sectional household survey of 784 adults in two districts in Tanzania from December 2020 to January 2021, capturing the cascade-of-care for hypertension and diabetes. The ages of the respondents ranged from 18 to 89 years. Of those screened positive for these conditions, we measured the proportion in each step of the cascades: awareness, care engagement, treatment, and control. We conducted multivariable logistic regression analyses for all four steps along the hypertension care cascade with the independent variables of social health protection schemes, and prior diagnosis of comorbid diabetes, and demographic information. In our sample, of the 771 who had their blood pressure measured, 41% (95% confidence interval (CI): 38% to 44%) were screened positive for hypertension, and of the 707 who had their blood sugar measured, 6% (95% CI: 4% to 8%) were screened positive for diabetes. Of those with hypertension, 43% (95% CI: 38% to 49%) had a prior diagnosis, 25% (95% CI: 21% to 31%) were engaged in care, 21% (95% CI: 3% to 25%) were on treatment, and 11% (95% CI: 8% to 15%) were controlled. Of the 42 respondents with diabetes, 80% (95% CI: 69% to 93%) had a prior diagnosis. The diabetes care cascade had much less drop-off, so 66% of those with diabetes (95% CI: 52% to 82%) were engaged in care and on treatment, and 48% (95% CI: 32% to 63%) had their diabetes controlled at the point of testing. Healthcare fee exemptions were independently associated with higher odds of being previously diagnosed (OR 5.81; 95% CI [1.98 to 17.10] p < 0.005), engaged in care (OR 4.71; 95% CI [1.59 to 13.90] p 0.005), and retained in treatment (OR 2.93; 95% CI [1.03 to 8.35] p < 0.05). Prior diagnosis of comorbid diabetes was highly associated with higher odds of being engaged in care for hypertension (OR 3.26; 95% CI [1.39 to 7.63] p < 0.005). The two primary limitations of this study were reliance on screening at a single time point only of people available at the village at the time of the sample and dependence on self-report for to inform the three cascade steps of prior diagnosis, healthcare visits for engagement in care, and treatment use.

conclusionsThe high burden of hypertension and low levels of control in our study underscores the importance of improving the awareness and treatment of hypertension. The differences in the care cascades for hypertension and diabetes demonstrates that chronic NCD treatment is possible in this setting, but efforts will be needed across the entire care cascade to improve hypertension control.

Indexed as

Diabetes MellitusHypertensionAdolescentAdultAgedAged, 80 and overComorbidityCross-Sectional StudiesHumansMiddle AgedPrevalenceTanzaniaYoung Adult

Identifiers

PMID36469527
PMCPMC9762578

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.