Search results for: structured%20packed%20column

Authors: Veenapani Rajeev Verma

Abstract:

Context: Assessing facility readiness is paramount as it can indicate capacity of facilities to provide essential care for resilience to health challenges. In the context of decentralization, estimation of supply side readiness indices at sub national level is imperative for effective evidence based policy but remains a colossal challenge due to lack of dependable and representative data sources. Setting: District Poonch of Jammu and Kashmir was selected for this study. It is remote, rural district with unprecedented topographical barriers and is identified as high priority by government. It is also a fragile area as is bounded by Line of Control with Pakistan bearing the brunt of cease fire violations, military skirmishes and sporadic militant attacks. Hilly geographical terrain, rudimentary/absence of road network and impoverishment are quintessential to this area. Objectives: Objective of the study is to a) Evaluate the service readiness of health facilities and create a concise index subsuming plethora of discrete indicators and b) Ascertain supply side barriers in service provisioning via stakeholder’s analysis. Study also strives to expand analytical domain unravelling context and area specific intricacies associated with service delivery. Methodology: Mixed method approach was employed to triangulate quantitative analysis with qualitative nuances. Facility survey encompassing 90 Subcentres, 44 Primary health centres, 3 Community health centres and 1 District hospital was conducted to gauge general service availability and service specific availability (depth of coverage). Compendium of checklist was designed using Indian Public Health Standards (IPHS) in form of standard core questionnaire and scorecard generated for each facility. Information was collected across dimensions of amenities, equipment, medicines, laboratory and infection control protocols as proposed in WHO’s Service Availability and Readiness Assesment (SARA). Two stage polychoric principal component analysis employed to generate a parsimonious index by coalescing an array of tracer indicators. OLS regression method used to determine factors explaining composite index generated from PCA. Stakeholder analysis was conducted to discern qualitative information. Myriad of techniques like observations, key informant interviews and focus group discussions using semi structured questionnaires on both leaders and laggards were administered for critical stakeholder’s analysis. Results: General readiness score of health facilities was found to be 0.48. Results indicated poorest readiness for subcentres and PHC’s (first point of contact) with composite score of 0.47 and 0.41 respectively. For primary care facilities; principal component was characterized by basic newborn care as well as preparedness for delivery. Results revealed availability of equipment and surgical preparedness having lowest score (0.46 and 0.47) for facilities providing secondary care. Presence of contractual staff, more than 1 hr walk to facility, facilities in zone A (most vulnerable) to cross border shelling and facilities inaccessible due to snowfall and thick jungles was negatively associated with readiness index. Nonchalant staff attitude, unavailability of staff quarters, leakages and constraint in supply chain of drugs and consumables were other impediments identified. Conclusions/Policy Implications: It is pertinent to first strengthen primary care facilities in this setting. Complex dimensions such as geographic barriers, user and provider behavior is not under precinct of this methodology.

Keywords: effective coverage, principal component analysis, readiness index, universal health coverage

Procedia PDF Downloads 120

Authors: Rebeca V. Tholen, Elaine Bundy

Abstract:

Background: Liver transplantation (LT) is considered the only curative treatment for end-stage liver disease Background: Liver transplantation (LT) is considered the only curative treatment for end-stage liver disease (ESLD). The effects of alcoholism can cause irreversible liver damage, cirrhosis and subsequent liver failure. Alcohol relapse after transplant occurs in 20-50% of patients and increases the risk for recurrent cirrhosis, organ rejection, and graft failure. Alcohol relapse after transplant has been identified as a problem among liver transplant recipients at a large urban academic transplant center in the United States. Transplantation will reverse the complications of ESLD, but it does not treat underlying alcoholism or reduce the risk of relapse after transplant. The purpose of this quality improvement project is to implement and evaluate the effectiveness of a High-Risk Alcoholism Relapse (HRAR) Scale to screen and identify patients at high-risk for alcohol relapse after receiving an LT. Methods: The HRAR Scale is a predictive tool designed to determine the severity of alcoholism and risk of relapse after transplant. The scale consists of three variables identified as having the highest predictive power for early relapse including, daily number of drinks, history of previous inpatient treatment for alcoholism, and the number of years of heavy drinking. All adult liver transplant recipients at a large urban transplant center were screened with the HRAR Scale prior to hospital discharge. A zero to two ordinal score is ranked for each variable, and the total score ranges from zero to six. High-risk scores are between three to six. Results: Descriptive statistics revealed 25 patients were newly transplanted and discharged from the hospital during an 8-week period. 40% of patients (n=10) were identified as being high-risk for relapse and 60% low-risk (n=15). The daily number of drinks were determined by alcohol content (1 drink = 15g of ethanol) and number of drinks per day. 60% of patients reported drinking 9-17 drinks per day, and 40% reported ≤ 9 drinks. 50% of high-risk patients reported drinking ≥ 25 years, 40% for 11-25 years, and 10% ≤ 11 years. For number of inpatient treatments for alcoholism, 50% received inpatient treatment one time, 20% ≥ 1, and 30% reported never receiving inpatient treatment. Findings reveal the importance and value of a validated screening tool as a more efficient method than other screening methods alone. Integration of a structured clinical tool will help guide the drinking history portion of the psychosocial assessment. Targeted interventions can be implemented for all high-risk patients. Conclusions: Our findings validate the effectiveness of utilizing the HRAR scale to screen and identify patients who are a high-risk for alcohol relapse post-LT. Recommendations to help maintain post-transplant sobriety include starting a transplant support group within the organization for all high-risk patients. (ESLD). The effects of alcoholism can cause irreversible liver damage, cirrhosis and subsequent liver failure. Alcohol relapse after transplant occurs in 20-50% of patients, and increases the risk for recurrent cirrhosis, organ rejection, and graft failure. Alcohol relapse after transplant has been identified as a problem among liver transplant recipients at a large urban academic transplant center in the United States. Transplantation will reverse the complications of ESLD, but it does not treat underlying alcoholism or reduce the risk of relapse after transplant. The purpose of this quality improvement project is to implement and evaluate the effectiveness of a High-Risk Alcoholism Relapse (HRAR) Scale to screen and identify patients at high-risk for alcohol relapse after receiving a LT. Methods: The HRAR Scale is a predictive tool designed to determine severity of alcoholism and risk of relapse after transplant. The scale consists of three variables identified as having the highest predictive power for early relapse including, daily number of drinks, history of previous inpatient treatment for alcoholism, and the number of years of heavy drinking. All adult liver transplant recipients at a large urban transplant center were screened with the HRAR Scale prior to hospital discharge. A zero to two ordinal score is ranked for each variable, and the total score ranges from zero to six. High-risk scores are between three to six. Results: Descriptive statistics revealed 25 patients were newly transplanted and discharged from the hospital during an 8-week period. 40% of patients (n=10) were identified as being high-risk for relapse and 60% low-risk (n=15). The daily number of drinks were determined by alcohol content (1 drink = 15g of ethanol) and number of drinks per day. 60% of patients reported drinking 9-17 drinks per day, and 40% reported ≤ 9 drinks. 50% of high-risk patients reported drinking ≥ 25 years, 40% for 11-25 years, and 10% ≤ 11 years. For number of inpatient treatments for alcoholism, 50% received inpatient treatment one time, 20% ≥ 1, and 30% reported never receiving inpatient treatment. Findings reveal the importance and value of a validated screening tool as a more efficient method than other screening methods alone. Integration of a structured clinical tool will help guide the drinking history portion of the psychosocial assessment. Targeted interventions can be implemented for all high-risk patients. Conclusions: Our findings validate the effectiveness of utilizing the HRAR scale to screen and identify patients who are a high-risk for alcohol relapse post-LT. Recommendations to help maintain post-transplant sobriety include starting a transplant support group within the organization for all high-risk patients.

Keywords: alcoholism, liver transplant, quality improvement, substance abuse

Procedia PDF Downloads 115