Department of Global Health and Population, Harvard T H Chan School of Public Health, Boston, Massachusetts, USA
CDC Foundation, Atlanta, Georgia, USA.
BMJ Qual Saf. 2022 Feb;31(2):123-133. doi: 10.1136/bmjqs-2020-011717. Epub 2021 May 18.
A recent systematic review evaluated the effectiveness of strategies to improve healthcare provider (HCP) performance in low-income and middle-income countries. The review identified strategies with varying effects, including in-service training, supervision and group problem-solving. However, whether their effectiveness changed over time remained unclear. In particular, understanding whether effects decay over time is crucial to improve sustainability.
We conducted a secondary analysis of data from the aforementioned review to explore associations between time and effectiveness. We calculated effect sizes (defined as percentage-point (%-point) changes) for HCP practice outcomes (eg, percentage of patients correctly treated) at each follow-up time point after the strategy was implemented. We estimated the association between time and effectiveness using random-intercept linear regression models with time-specific effect sizes clustered within studies and adjusted for baseline performance.
The primary analysis included 37 studies, and a sensitivity analysis included 77 additional studies. For training, every additional month of follow-up was associated with a 0.19 %-point decrease in effectiveness (95% CI: -0.36 to -0.03). For training combined with supervision, every additional month was associated with a 0.40 %-point decrease in effectiveness (95% CI: -0.68 to -0.12). Time trend results for supervision were inconclusive. For group problem-solving alone, time was positively associated with effectiveness, with a 0.50 %-point increase in effect per month (95% CI: 0.37 to 0.64). Group problem-solving combined with training was associated with large improvements, and its effect was not associated with time.
Time trends in the effectiveness of different strategies to improve HCP practices vary among strategies. Programmes relying solely on in-service training might need periodical refresher training or, better still, consider combining training with group problem-solving. Although more high-quality research is needed, these results, which are important for decision-makers as they choose which strategies to use, underscore the utility of studies with multiple post-implementation measurements so sustainability of the impact on HCP practices can be assessed.
最近的一项系统评价评估了改善中低收入国家医疗保健提供者(HCP)绩效的策略的有效性。该综述确定了具有不同效果的策略,包括在职培训、监督和小组解决问题。然而,其有效性是否随时间而变化尚不清楚。特别是,了解效果是否随时间衰减对于提高可持续性至关重要。
我们对上述综述的数据进行了二次分析,以探讨时间与效果之间的关系。我们计算了策略实施后每个随访时间点的 HCP 实践结果(例如,正确治疗的患者比例)的效果大小(定义为百分点变化)。我们使用具有研究内时间特异性效果大小聚类的随机截距线性回归模型来估计时间与效果之间的关联,并根据基线表现进行了调整。
主要分析包括 37 项研究,敏感性分析包括另外 77 项研究。对于培训,每增加一个月的随访,效果降低 0.19 个百分点(95%CI:-0.36 至 -0.03)。对于培训与监督相结合,每增加一个月,效果降低 0.40 个百分点(95%CI:-0.68 至 -0.12)。监督的时间趋势结果不确定。对于单独的小组解决问题,时间与效果呈正相关,每月增加 0.50 个百分点(95%CI:0.37 至 0.64)。小组解决问题与培训相结合与较大的改进相关,其效果与时间无关。
不同提高 HCP 实践策略的有效性的时间趋势因策略而异。仅依赖在职培训的计划可能需要定期更新培训,或者更好的是,考虑将培训与小组解决问题相结合。尽管需要更多高质量的研究,但这些结果对于决策者选择使用哪种策略非常重要,它们强调了具有多次实施后测量的研究的效用,以便可以评估对 HCP 实践的影响的可持续性。