25
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      An assessment of community health workers’ ability to screen for cardiovascular disease risk with a simple, non-invasive risk assessment instrument in Bangladesh, Guatemala, Mexico, and South Africa: an observational study

      research-article

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Summary

          Background

          Cardiovascular disease contributes substantially to the non-communicable disease (NCD) burden in low-income and middle-income countries, which also often have substantial health personnel shortages. In this observational study we investigated whether community health workers could do community-based screenings to predict cardiovascular disease risk as effectively as could physicians or nurses, with a simple, non-invasive risk prediction indicator in low-income and middle-income countries.

          Methods

          This observation study was done in Bangladesh, Guatemala, Mexico, and South Africa. Each site recruited at least ten to 15 community health workers based on usual site-specific norms for required levels of education and language competency. Community health workers had to reside in the community where the screenings were done and had to be fluent in that community’s predominant language. These workers were trained to calculate an absolute cardiovascular disease risk score with a previously validated simple, non-invasive screening indicator. Community health workers who successfully finished the training screened community residents aged 35–74 years without a previous diagnosis of hypertension, diabetes, or heart disease. Health professionals independently generated a second risk score with the same instrument and the two sets of scores were compared for agreement. The primary endpoint of this study was the level of direct agreement between risk scores assigned by the community health workers and the health professionals.

          Findings

          Of 68 community health worker trainees recruited between June 4, 2012, and Feb 8, 2013, 42 were deemed qualified to do fieldwork (15 in Bangladesh, eight in Guatemala, nine in Mexico, and ten in South Africa). Across all sites, 4383 community members were approached for participation and 4049 completed screening. The mean level of agreement between the two sets of risk scores was 96 8% (weighted κ =0 948, 95% CI 0 936–0 961) and community health workers showed that 263 (6%) of 4049 people had a 5-year cardiovascular disease risk of greater than 20%.

          Interpretation

          Health workers without formal professional training can be adequately trained to effectively screen for, and identify, people at high risk of cardiovascular disease. Using community health workers for this screening would free up trained health professionals in low-resource settings to do tasks that need high levels of formal, professional training.

          Funding

          US National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute and National Institutes of Health, UnitedHealth Chronic Disease Initiative.

          Related collections

          Most cited references24

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: found
          Is Open Access

          Inequities in the Global Health Workforce: The Greatest Impediment to Health in Sub-Saharan Africa

          Health systems played a key role in the dramatic rise in global life expectancy that occurred during the 20th century, and have continued to contribute enormously to the improvement of the health of most of the world’s population. The health workforce is the backbone of each health system, the lubricant that facilitates the smooth implementation of health action for sustainable socio-economic development. It has been proved beyond reasonable doubt that the density of the health workforce is directly correlated with positive health outcomes. In other words, health workers save lives and improve health. About 59 million people make up the health workforce of paid full-time health workers world-wide. However, enormous gaps remain between the potential of health systems and their actual performance, and there are far too many inequities in the distribution of health workers between countries and within countries. The Americas (mainly USA and Canada) are home to 14% of the world’s population, bear only 10% of the world’s disease burden, have 37% of the global health workforce and spend about 50% of the world’s financial resources for health. Conversely, sub-Saharan Africa, with about 11% of the world’s population bears over 24% of the global disease burden, is home to only 3% of the global health workforce, and spends less than 1% of the world’s financial resources on health. In most developing countries, the health workforce is concentrated in the major towns and cities, while rural areas can only boast of about 23% and 38% of the country’s doctors and nurses respectively. The imbalances exist not only in the total numbers and geographical distribution of health workers, but also in the skills mix of available health workers. WHO estimates that 57 countries world wide have a critical shortage of health workers, equivalent to a global deficit of about 2.4 million doctors, nurses and midwives. Thirty six of these countries are in sub-Saharan Africa. They would need to increase their health workforce by about 140% to achieve enough coverage for essential health interventions to make a positive difference in the health and life expectancy of their populations. The extent causes and consequences of the health workforce crisis in Sub-Saharan Africa, and the various factors that influence and are related to it are well known and described. Although there is no “magic bullet” solution to the problem, there are several documented, tested and tried best practices from various countries. The global health workforce crisis can be tackled if there is global responsibility, political will, financial commitment and public-private partnership for country-led and country-specific interventions that seek solutions beyond the health sector. Only when enough health workers can be trained, sustained and retained in sub-Saharan African countries will there be meaningful socio-economic development and the faintest hope of attaining the Millennium Development Goals in the sub-continent.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Laboratory-based versus non-laboratory-based method for assessment of cardiovascular disease risk: the NHANES I Follow-up Study cohort.

            Around 80% of all cardiovascular deaths occur in developing countries. Assessment of those patients at high risk is an important strategy for prevention. Since developing countries have limited resources for prevention strategies that require laboratory testing, we assessed if a risk prediction method that did not require any laboratory tests could be as accurate as one requiring laboratory information. The National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES) was a prospective cohort study of 14 407 US participants aged between 25-74 years at the time they were first examined (between 1971 and 1975). Our follow-up study population included participants with complete information on these surveys who did not report a history of cardiovascular disease (myocardial infarction, heart failure, stroke, angina) or cancer, yielding an analysis dataset N=6186. We compared how well either method could predict first-time fatal and non-fatal cardiovascular disease events in this cohort. For the laboratory-based model, which required blood testing, we used standard risk factors to assess risk of cardiovascular disease: age, systolic blood pressure, smoking status, total cholesterol, reported diabetes status, and current treatment for hypertension. For the non-laboratory-based model, we substituted body-mass index for cholesterol. In the cohort of 6186, there were 1529 first-time cardiovascular events and 578 (38%) deaths due to cardiovascular disease over 21 years. In women, the laboratory-based model was useful for predicting events, with a c statistic of 0.829. The c statistic of the non-laboratory-based model was 0.831. In men, the results were similar (0.784 for the laboratory-based model and 0.783 for the non-laboratory-based model). Results were similar between the laboratory-based and non-laboratory-based models in both men and women when restricted to fatal events only. A method that uses non-laboratory-based risk factors predicted cardiovascular events as accurately as one that relied on laboratory-based values. This approach could simplify risk assessment in situations where laboratory testing is inconvenient or unavailable.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Lay health workers in primary and community health care.

              Lay health workers (LHWs) are widely used to provide care for a broad range of health issues. However, little is known about the effectiveness of LHW interventions. To assess the effects of LHW interventions in primary and community health care on health care behaviours, patients' health and wellbeing, and patients' satisfaction with care. We searched the Cochrane Effective Practice and Organisation of Care and Consumers and Communication specialised registers (to August 2001); the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (to August 2001); MEDLINE (1966- August 2001); EMBASE (1966-August 2001); Science Citations (to August 2001); CINAHL (1966-June 2001); Healthstar (1975-2000); AMED (1966-August 2001); the Leeds Health Education Effectiveness Database and the reference lists of articles. Randomised controlled trials of any intervention delivered by LHWs (paid or voluntary) in primary or community health care and intended to promote health, manage illness or provide support to patients. A 'lay health worker' was defined as any health worker carrying out functions related to health care delivery; trained in some way in the context of the intervention; and having no formal professional or paraprofessional certificated or degreed tertiary education. There were no restrictions on the types of consumers. Two reviewers independently extracted data onto a standard form and assessed study quality. Studies that compared broadly similar types of interventions were grouped together. Where feasible, the results of included studies were combined and an estimate of effect obtained. Forty three studies met the inclusion criteria, involving more than 210,110 consumers. These showed considerable diversity in the targeted health issue and the aims, content and outcomes of interventions. Most were conducted in high income countries (n=35), but nearly half of these focused on low income and minority populations (n=15). Study diversity limited meta-analysis to outcomes for five subgroups (n=15 studies) (LHW interventions to promote the uptake of breast cancer screening, immunisation and breastfeeding promotion [before two weeks and between two weeks and six months post partum] and to improve diagnosis and treatment for selected infectious diseases). Promising benefits in comparison with usual care were shown for LHW interventions to promote immunisation uptake in children and adults (RR=1.30 [95% CI 1.14, 1.48] p=0.0001) and LHW interventions to improve outcomes for selected infectious diseases (RR=0.74 [95% CI 0.58, 0.93) p=0.01). LHWs also appear promising for breastfeeding promotion. They appear to have a small effect in promoting breast cancer screening uptake when compared with usual care. For the remaining subgroups (n=29 studies), the outcomes were too diverse to allow statistical pooling. We can therefore draw no general conclusions on the effectiveness of these subgroups of interventions. LHWs show promising benefits in promoting immunisation uptake and improving outcomes for acute respiratory infections and malaria, when compared to usual care. For other health issues, evidence is insufficient to justify recommendations for policy and practice. There is also insufficient evidence to assess which LHW training or intervention strategies are likely to be most effective. Further research is needed in these areas.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                101613665
                42402
                Lancet Glob Health
                Lancet Glob Health
                The Lancet. Global health
                2214-109X
                9 March 2016
                14 July 2015
                September 2015
                17 March 2016
                : 3
                : 9
                : e556-e563
                Affiliations
                Division of Cardiovascular Medicine, Brigham and Women’s Hospital, Boston, MA, USA (T A Gaziano MD); Center for Health Decision Science, Harvard School of Public Health, Boston, MA, USA (S Abrahams-Gessel SM); Centro de Estudios en Salud y Sociedad, El Colegio de Sonora, Sonora, Mexico (C A Denman PhD); Institute of Nutrition of Central America and Panama, Guatemala City, Guatemala (C Mendoza Montano PhD); International Center for Diarrhoeal Disease Research, Dhaka, Bangladesh (M Khanam MD); School of Public Health, University of the Western Cape, Cape Town, South Africa (T Puoane DrPH); and Department of Medicine, University of Cape Town, Cape Town, South Africa (N S Levitt MD)
                Author notes
                Correspondence to: Assistant Professor, Thomas A Gaziano, Division of Cardiovascular Medicine, Brigham and Women’s Hospital, Boston, MA 02115, USA, tgaziano@ 123456partners.org
                Article
                NIHMS765837
                10.1016/S2214-109X(15)00143-6
                4795807
                26187361
                369416f9-fc39-48f6-81fd-df19f7953dc1

                Open Access article published under the terms of CC BY-NC-ND 4.0.

                History
                Categories
                Article

                Comments

                Comment on this article