RESEARCH

 

Staff training and ambulatory tuberculosis treatment outcomes: a cluster randomized controlled trial in South Africa

 

Formation du personnel et résultats du traitement ambulatoire antituberculeux : essai contrôlé et randomisé par grappes en Afrique du Sud

 

Formación del personal y resultados del tratamiento ambulatorio de la tuberculosis: ensayo controlado aleatorizado por conglomerados en Sudáfrica

 

 

Simon LewinI,1; Judy DickII; Merrick ZwarensteinIII; Carl J. LombardIV

IDepartment of Public Health and Policy, London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, Keppel Street, London, WC1E 7HT, England; and Health Systems Research Unit, Medical Research Council of South Africa
IIHealth Systems Research Unit, Medical Research Council of South Africa, Tygerberg, South Africa
IIIKnowledge Translation Programme, Department of Health Policy, Management and Evaluation, Faculty of Medicine, University of Toronto, Toronto, Canada
IVBiostatistics Unit, Medical Research Council of South Africa, Tygerberg, South Africa

 

 

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE: To assess whether adding a training intervention for clinic staff to the usual DOTS strategy (the internationally recommended control strategy for tuberculosis (TB)) would affect the outcomes of TB treatment in primary care clinics with treatment success rates below 70%.
METHODS: A cluster randomized controlled trial was conducted from July 1996 to July 2000 in nurse-managed ambulatory primary care clinics in Cape Town, South Africa. Clinics with successful TB treatment completion rates of less than 70% and annual adult pulmonary TB loads of more than 40 patients per year were randomly assigned to either the intervention (n = 12) or control (n = 12) groups. All clinics completed follow-up. Treatment outcomes were measured in cohorts of adult, pulmonary TB patients before the intervention (n = 1200) and 9 months following the training (n = 1177). The intervention comprised an 18-hour experiential, participatory in-service training programme for clinic staff delivered by nurse facilitators and focusing on patient centredness, critical reflection on practice, and quality improvement. The main outcome measure was successful treatment, defined as patients who were cured and those who had completed tuberculosis treatment.
FINDINGS: The estimated effect of the intervention was an increase in successful treatment rates of 4.8% (95% confidence interval (CI): —5.5% to 15.2%) and in bacteriological cure rates of 10.4% (CI: —1.2% to 22%). A treatment effect of 10% was envisaged, based on the views of policy-makers on the minimum effect size for large-scale implementation.
CONCLUSION: This is the first evidence from a randomized controlled trial on the effects of experiential, participatory training on TB outcomes in primary care facilities in a developing country. Such training did not appear to improve TB outcomes. However, the results were inconclusive and further studies are required.

Keywords: Tuberculosis, Pulmonary/therapy; Health personnel/education; Directly observed therapy; Treatment outcome; Patient compliance; Inservice training; Patient-centered care; Ambulatory care; Randomized controlled trials; Cluster analysis; South Africa (source: MeSH, NLM).

RÉSUMÉ

OBJECTIF: Évaluer si l'introduction, dans la stratégie DOTS (stratégie de lutte antituberculeuse internationalement recommandée) habituelle, d'une intervention de formation destinée au personnel clinique influerait sur les résultats du traitement antituberculeux délivré dans les dispensaires de soins de santé primaire qui obtiennent un taux de succès du traitement inférieur à 70 %.
MÉTHODES: Un essai contrôlé et randomisé par grappes a été mené de juillet 1996 à juillet 2000 dans des dispensaires de soins de santé primaires ambulatoires, gérés par des infirmières, à Cape Town, Afrique du Sud. Les dispensaires présentant un taux d'achèvement avec succès du traitement antituberculeux de moins de 70 % et une charge annuelle de tuberculose pulmonaire de plus de 40 malades par an ont été répartis au hasard entre le groupe d'intervention (n = 12) et le groupe témoin (n = 12). Le suivi a été mené à terme dans tous les dispensaires. Les résultats du traitement ont été mesurés sur des cohortes de patients adultes atteints de tuberculose pulmonaire avant l'intervention (n = 1200) et 9 mois après (n = 1177). L'intervention consistait en un programme de 18 h de formation en service participative et empirique, délivré au personnel clinique par des moniteurs. Ce programme était axé sur la place centrale à donner au malade, sur la réflexion critique appliquée à la pratique et sur l'amélioration de la qualité. Le principal résultat mesuré était le succès du traitement, défini comme la guérison du malade et l'achèvement du traitement antituberculeux.
RÉSULTATS: On a estimé que l'intervention s'était traduite par une augmentation du taux de succès du traitement de 4,8 % (intervalle de confiance à 95 % : - 5,5 % à 15,2 %) et du taux de guérison bactériologique de 10,4 % (intervalle de confiance : -1,2 % à 22 %). On a envisagé un effet de 10 % sur le traitement d'après le point de vue des décideurs politiques sur l'ampleur minimale de l'effet dans le cas d'une mise en œuvre à grande échelle.
CONCLUSION: L'article présente les premières données d'un essai contrôlé et randomisé concernant les effets sur l'issue de la tuberculose d'une formation participative et empirique, délivrée dans les installations de soins de santé primaires d'un pays en développement. Cette formation n'a pas semblé améliorer l'issue de la tuberculose. Toutefois, les résultats n'étaient pas concluants et d'autres études sont nécessaires.

Mots clés: Tuberculose pulmonaire/thérapeutique; Personnel sanitaire/enseignement; Thérapie sous observation directe; Evaluation résultats traitement; Observance prescription; Stage; Soins centrés patient; Soins ambulatoires; Essai clinique randomisé; Sondage en grappes; Afrique du Sud (source: MeSH, INSERM).

RESUMEN

OBJETIVO: Determinar si una intervención de formación dirigida al personal de los dispensarios como complemento de la estrategia DOTS habitual (estrategia de lucha contra la TB recomendada internacionalmente) mejoraría los resultados del tratamiento de la tuberculosis en los dispensarios de atención primaria donde la tasa de tratamiento satisfactorio es inferior al 70%.
MÉTODOS: Entre julio de 1996 y julio de 2000 se realizó un ensayo controlado aleatorizado en ambulatorios de atención primaria gestionados por enfermeras de Ciudad del Cabo (Sudáfrica). Aquellos cuya tasa de tratamiento satisfactorio era inferior al 70% y cuya carga anual de adultos con tuberculosis pulmonar superaba la cifra de 40 pacientes al año fueron asignados de forma aleatoria a un grupo de intervención (n = 12) o a un grupo testigo (n = 12). Todos los dispensarios finalizaron el seguimiento. Se valoraron los resultados del tratamiento entre los grupos de adultos con tuberculosis pulmonar antes de la intervención (n = 1200) y nueve meses después de la formación (n = 1177). La intervención consistió en un programa experiencial de formación en el servicio basado en la participación, de 18 horas de duración. Impartida por enfermeras, la formación giraba en torno a la atención centrada en el paciente, la reflexión crítica sobre la práctica y la mejora de la calidad. La variable de resultado principal fue el tratamiento satisfactorio, definido como la suma de los pacientes curados y los que habían terminado el tratamiento antituberculoso.
RESULTADOS: El efecto estimado de la intervención fue un aumento de un 4,8% de las tasas de tratamiento satisfactorio (intervalo de confianza del 95%: -5,5% a 15,2%) y de un 10,4% de las tasas de curación bacteriológica (intervalo de confianza: -1,2% a 22%). Considerando la opinión de las instancias normativas sobre el efecto mínimo para proceder a una implementación a gran escala, se perseguía un aumento de un 10%.
CONCLUSIÓN: Estos son los primeros datos obtenidos mediante un ensayo controlado aleatorizado sobre los efectos de una iniciativa de formación experiencial y participativa en los resultados del tratamiento de la tuberculosis en los establecimientos de atención primaria de un país en desarrollo. Aparentemente dicha formación no mejoró los resultados, pero los datos son inconcluyentes, por lo que es necesario realizar nuevos estudios.

Palabras clave: Tuberculosis pulmonar/terapia; Personal de salud/educación; Resultado del tratamiento; Terapia por observación directa; Cooperación del paciente; Capacitación en servicio; Atención dirigida al paciente; Cuidados ambulatorios; Ensayos controlados aleatorios; Análisis por conglomerados; Sudáfrica (fuente: DeCS, BIREME).

 

 

Introduction

Tuberculosis (TB) is a major contributor to the disease burden in developing countries (1—4), including South Africa (5), where it is exacerbated by the epidemic of human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) (6—8). The implementation of DOTS — the internationally recommended strategy for the control of TB (9, 10) — in South Africa since 1996 has improved drug availability, bacteriological diagnosis and programme monitoring. South Africa uses the 6-month (8 months for re-treatment patients) multi-drug regimen that includes rifampicin. Treatment is taken under the direct observation of another person such as a health-care provider or a lay volunteer (11). TB care in the public sector generally covers the poorest areas and is provided free of charge to patients (5). Nevertheless, cure rates in South Africa remain at 65% (5), and are therefore insufficient to control or reverse the epidemic.

Previous studies have suggested that the failure of the TB control programme in South Africa to achieve its treatment outcome targets is multifaceted (12—14) (Fig. 1). Poor quality of care, resulting from rigid clinic routines; poorly motivated staff; and inadequate provider—patient relations, all contribute to poor adherence to treatment (12, 15). Similar problems have been reported elsewhere (16—20). However, there is little rigorous evidence of the effects of interventions that aim to improve the way in which health workers care for TB patients (21, 22).

To address these problems, a short in-service training programme for primary care clinic staff caring for TB patients was developed. We report here the findings of a cluster randomized controlled trial conducted to evaluate the impact of the programme on the outcomes of TB treatment (23).

The objective of the present study was to assess whether the addition to the DOTS strategy of an experiential, participatory training intervention for clinic staff would improve treatment outcomes, when compared to those achieved with DOTS alone, in TB patients attending clinics with low rates for the successful treatment of TB (< 70%) in South Africa.

Our study hypothesis was that training would have a positive impact on patient adherence and treatment outcomes through better provider—client relations and improvements in the organization of TB care. The approach was pragmatic: we tested an intervention that could be realistically implemented in public sector facilities in South Africa and in countries with similar health-care delivery systems, and that examined key outcomes of TB control programmes (24—26).

 

Methods

Setting

The study was undertaken in nurse-managed municipal primary health clinics that provided care to TB patients in Cape Town, South Africa. These clinics manage more than 90% of ambulatory TB treatment in the city. Many of the clinics are based in low-income, periurban townships. All had good access to diagnostic and referral facilities and drug supplies.

Ethics and consent

Study approval was granted by the Medical Research Council of South Africa and health department managers in Cape Town. The facilitators met the staff of each clinic allocated to the intervention group to discuss the programme and to seek their consent for participation. One clinic allocated to the intervention group refused the intervention, but was analysed on an intention-to-treat basis.

Clinic recruitment

Primary care clinics had to meet the following entry criteria for participation in the trial.

  • The overall successful treatment completion rate for all adult patients with smear-positive pulmonary TB was less than 70% in the year preceding the trial (1997). This ensured that only clinics with poor treatment outcomes were entered into the trial. Fifty-nine of the 90 municipal clinics were eligible under this criterion, accounting for 82% of the annual total load of adult, smear-positive pulmonary TB patients in Cape Town.
  • The adult smear-positive pulmonary TB load was more than 40 patients per year, so as to ensure that the sample size of 50 patients per clinic could be achieved.
  • The clinic had not acted as a pilot site for this or for other similar interventions in the 3 years preceding the study.
  • The clinic offered the standard package of ambulatory TB care. This excluded services offered in prisons, inpatient facilities and mobile clinics.

Thirty-nine of the 90 primary care clinics in Cape Town were eligible for entry into the trial (Fig. 2).

 

 

Patient recruitment

Eligible TB patients were adults (over 14 years), with Ziehl—Nielson sputum-smear-positive pulmonary TB, who started a new course of TB treatment during the course of the study. The trial focused on patients with smear-positive pulmonary TB as this is the key target group for the DOTS strategy (11). The following patients were excluded:

  • those who had transferred in from another health facility after the first 2 weeks of treatment;
  • patients with recurrent TB who had already been in the trial; and
  • patients in whom there was evidence of multidrug-resistant TB.

The pre-intervention treatment rates for each clinic were established using a cohort of the 50 most recent consecutive eligible patients attending that clinic for treatment initiation, whose treatment was completed before December 1998. The outcome of training was assessed, starting 2 weeks after each clinic had completed the training intervention, using a similar cohort of 50 sequential patients from each clinic.

Sample size

The sample size of 24 clinics and 50 patients per clinic pre- and post-intervention was chosen to enable the detection of a 10% difference in successful treatment rate between the intervention and control groups, with power of 80% at a significance level of 5%, assuming an intra-cluster correlation coefficient of 0.05. The intra-cluster correlation coefficient was calculated using specially collected data on TB treatment outcomes from potential study sites. The selection of a 10% difference as the envisaged treatment effect was based on discussions with policy-makers regarding the minimum effect size required for large-scale implementation of the intervention.

Stratification and randomization

Clinics were the unit of randomization and analysis because the intervention was directed towards clinic teams rather than individual staff. Eligible clinics were stratified according to the number of TB patients treated in the previous year as there was some evidence that clinic size was inversely related to treatment outcomes (27). This approach ensured a balance in the size of the clinics randomly allocated to each group (28) and the generalizability of the findings across clinics in Cape Town.

All of four eligible large clinics (> 200 smear-positive cases per year) were included in the study. Random samples of 10 of 16 medium-sized clinics (> 111 and < 200 smear-positive cases per year) and 10 of 19 small clinics (> 40 and < 110 smear-positive cases per year) were drawn from separate opaque containers by an individual unconnected with the study or the health services, under the direct observation of the statistician. This ensured a self-weighted sample of these two groups of clinics in the trial. The 24 clinics included in the trial were then randomized within each stratum to either the intervention or control group. Restrictions were applied to ensure that all municipalities were represented so as to maximize generalizability of the findings across the metropolitan area and to improve the likelihood of participation by municipal health departments. The clinics were also allocated in such a way that no health service area manager was responsible for clinics in both arms of the trial, in order to reduce the potential for contamination between the intervention and control clinics. The 24 clinics accounted for 45% of the annual TB patient load in Cape Town (27).

Definition of outcome measures

The principal study outcome, "successful treatment", was defined according to International Union Against Tuberculosis and Lung Disease/WHO criteria as patients who were cured and those who had completed treatment (23). "Cure" applied to patients who had had a pre-treatment sputum smear that was positive, who had received 6 months of treatment (8 months for re-treatment patients), and who had a negative second smear after 2—3 months of treatment and a negative smear result at the end of treatment.

"Treatment completed" applied to patients who had a positive pre-treatment smear and had completed the full course of treatment, but had either no smear result at the end of 2 months and a negative end-of-treatment result; or had negative results at the end of 2 months and no end-of-treatment result. Patients with a positive smear or culture result at the end of treatment were considered to be "treatment failures", whereas "treatment interrupters" were patients who had stopped taking their treatment for 8 or more weeks in the course of the treatment period. Other outcomes were: transfer to another health facility, or death, due to TB or other causes, while receiving treatment. The laboratory staff who undertook the smear microscopy were unaware of the group to which the clinics had been allocated.

Treatment regimens

All patients received their medication under the DOTS strategy, in which a second person, usually a nurse, was assigned to observe that each treatment dose was taken by the patient (11). New patients (i.e. those who had never before had any TB treatment) received weight-adjusted Rifater® (rifampicin, isoniazid, pyrazinamide) and ethambutol, five times per week during the intensive phase of 8—12 weeks. If they had a negative smear result after 8 weeks, they received Rifinah® (rifampicin and isoniazid) for the following 16 weeks. If their smear result was positive at 8 weeks, the intensive phase was continued to 12 weeks, after which they received Rifinah for 12 weeks. Smear-positive re-treatment patients received the same regimen as new smear-positive patients, with the addition of weight-adjusted streptomycin for the first 8 weeks. At the end of the third month, the pyrazinamide was discontinued.

The intervention

The "clinic level" barriers to improving adherence to TB treatment included poor provider—patient relations; inadequate teamwork among providers; lack of audit; and little motivation to implement changes in practice (12, 29). The training intervention therefore focused on concentrating the attention of all primary care clinic staff on the central task of maintaining patients' participation in the TB treatment process, so as to improve treatment adherence and outcomes. The design of the intervention drew on a number of theoretical models: the theory of reasoned action (30), social learning theory (31) and the theory of self-efficacy (32). It also utilized concepts and materials developed by the Health Workers for Change Project (33, 34). Further information on the intervention has been published elsewhere (35, 36). The intervention had the following aims:

  • equipping clinic staff to understand the barriers to improving client relations (37);
  • encouraging patient-centredness, including the provision of support to patients and sharing control of the consultation with them (38);
  • empowering clinic staff to implement changes at their clinic; and
  • continuous quality improvement, self-evaluation and critical reflection on practice.

The package was pilot-tested in two clinics where encouraging results were obtained in improving quality of care and adherence to TB treatment (35). Seven training modules were developed (Box 1), each constituting one training session. Primary care clinic staff met with the learning facilitators for one 3-hour session per week for 6 weeks. Each session was linked to the next, and the learning points reinforced, by requesting participants to complete some "homework" and reviewing this at the next session. The training used an experiential learning approach which encouraged participants to reflect on their experiences of caring for TB patients; explore problems in delivery of care; and develop an action plan for practice change (33, 39, 40). The training allowed some flexibility for responding to the specific needs of each clinic and therefore differed slightly between the clinics. TB patients were not directly involved in developing or delivering the intervention. However, research on consumer experiences of illness informed the design of the intervention (41).

Some follow-up inputs were provided in the 6 weeks following the final training session. These included meetings and telephone discussions between the facilitators and clinic staff. Further supervision was the responsibility of health service managers. Training began in February 1999 and was completed in October 1999.

The training was undertaken by two clinical nurse practitioners, both of whom had extensive experience of working with TB patients in primary care facilities. Between them, the facilitators were fluent in the three commonly spoken local languages. They were therefore able to conduct training in the preferred language of the clinic staff. The successful implementation of the training was verified, firstly, through training debriefing meetings that discussed progress in each clinic and reviewed the programme for forthcoming sessions and, secondly, through observation of training sessions in half of the intervention clinics by a researcher.

The staff who attended the training sessions included professional and assistant nurses, doctors, health educators, clerical staff and community-based lay health workers associated with the clinic. The size of the group ranged from 4 to 20 participants. Training was successfully conducted in all but one clinic, which refused the intervention. In some clinics all staff attended whereas in others only staff who worked with TB patients volunteered to attend.

Data collection

Cases were identified manually from non-computerized TB registers at 20 of the 24 participating clinics. These registers were completed routinely by the clinic staff and included the following data: patient name and clinic number; date of notification; patient origin (where referred from); gender; age; type of TB (e.g. pulmonary or extrapulmonary); sputum smear results at diagnosis and at 2 and 5 months after treatment initiation; and whether the patient was a new or a re-treatment case. A planned secondary measure of adherence to treatment (doses taken as a proportion of doses prescribed) could not be obtained as this information ceased to be collected routinely during the study. There were no other changes to the TB register during the study period.

For the four remaining clinics, TB data were sent directly to the municipal health department where they were entered into a central register. Data for these clinics were extracted at that level. The two field workers who extracted data from the TB registers were not blinded as to the clinic allocation, but were not involved in the design or implementation of the intervention or in the final analysis. Clinic staff were blinded as to which patients would be included in the cohorts whose outcomes would be assessed.

Missing information was sought in the first instance from the patient's clinic folder. Where clinic or municipal records were incomplete, the records of the central laboratory service were searched for the results of sputum smears. This central laboratory conducts sputum smears for all TB patients treated in primary care clinics in the Cape Town metropolitan area and has rigorous quality controls. For quality assurance, a random sample of 10% of the sputum smear results held at clinics were verified against the laboratory database to confirm treatment outcomes. For the collection of data before the intervention, the first patient to enter the trial started treatment on 2 July 1996 and the last on 15 December 1998. For the collection of post-intervention data, the first patient started treatment on 6 April 1999 and the last patient on 6 July 2000. Post-intervention data collection was therefore initiated in some clinics while training was still taking place in others.

A parallel qualitative evaluation assessed the extent to which clinic staff carried out the activities advocated in the intervention.

Statistical analysis

Analysis was by intention to treat and took into account the effects of clustering (42). The main analysis compared the outcomes of TB treatment of the 12 intervention and 12 control clinics before the intervention with those 9 months later (post-intervention). Data on individual patients were combined for each intervention and control clinic and the rates of successful treatment calculated for each clinic, and for previously planned subgroups (clinic stratum, gender, and whether the patient was new or attending for re-treatment). A two-way analysis of variance was used for the analysis of the differences between the pre- and post-intervention outcomes, with stratification and intervention as the two main effects. All analyses were planned a priori. All statistical tests were two sided and 95% confidence intervals (CI) were calculated for the effects of the intervention on various outcomes (28).

 

Findings

Data validity and collection

The clinic-based records were found to match the central laboratory-based records for 100% of the sampled records. Complete pre-intervention data on 50 sequential patients for each of the 24 clinics were successfully obtained. Post-intervention data for 50 patients were obtained for all but one clinic (Fig. 2). This clinic had enrolled only 27 eligible patients, possibly due to changes in the catchment area. One clinic allocated to the intervention group refused training, but data were collected on 50 pre-intervention and 50 post-intervention patients and analysed in the allocated group. The intra-cluster correlation coefficient for the main outcome (successful treatment completion) at the post-intervention time point was 0.034. This closely approximated to the coefficient of 0.05 used to plan the study.

Comparability

Prior to the intervention, the clinics in the intervention and control groups were comparable with respect to patient category (new or re-treatment); treatment outcomes; age; and gender distribution (Table 1 and Table 2). The two groups were also comparable with respect to the type of supervision received by patients. 89.1% of patients in the clinics that received the intervention and 79.8% of those in the control group of clinics received clinic-supervised treatment.

Outcomes

Over the study period the principal outcome measure — rates for successful completion of treatment — improved more in the clinics that received the intervention than in the control clinics (4.8%, 95% CI: —5.5% to 15.2%) (Table 3). The bacteriological cure rate improved by 2.5% in the intervention clinics following the intervention, while it decreased by 7.9% in the control clinics (difference = 10.4%, 95% CI: —1.2% to 22%). These differences were not statistically significant.

The estimated effect of the intervention on successful completion of treatment for new patients only was 6.9% (95% CI: —6% to 20%) and for re-treatment patients only was 4.1% (95% CI: —13.5% to 21.7%). No difference in the effect of the intervention in relation to clinic size was detected.

 

Discussion

This study examined the effects on TB treatment outcomes of an experiential, participatory training programme for primary health clinic staff. Successful treatment rates and bacteriological cure rates improved marginally in the clinics that received the intervention when compared to the control clinics. However, these differences were not statistically significant and the findings of the trial are therefore inconclusive. Bias is unlikely to explain these results. The training programme was successfully implemented in 11 of the 12 intervention clinics. The intervention and control groups were similar before the intervention; the outcome measures were objective; the quality of the data was high; and follow-up was complete for all clinics and for 98% of individual patients. The data extractors were not involved in the design or implementation of the trial or in the data analysis and the laboratory staff were blinded to clinic allocation.

Contamination is unlikely because the clinics that received the intervention were not aware of the identity of the control clinics and there was little communication between management or staff, and even less staff movement, between clinics. Finally, the complexity of the intervention would make informal replication in another clinic very difficult.

This evaluation was planned as a pragmatic effectiveness trial and the intervention was therefore designed to be realistic for system-wide implementation (24). A more intensive intervention, or more extensive tailoring of the intervention to the needs of specific clinics, might have produced larger improvements. However, we would argue that this would not be realistic for system-wide implementation in "real world" health-care settings. The decision not to recruit volunteer or highly-motivated clinics was appropriate to an "effectiveness" trial (43) as it allowed the evaluation of the intervention in a range of randomly selected clinics which more closely represented the real health system.

Our study hypothesis was that the training would have an impact on treatment adherence and treatment outcomes through better provider—client relations and improvements in the organization of TB care. We anticipated a virtuous spiral of reflection on practice; changes in work organization and practice; improved provider—patient relations; greater work satisfaction for providers of care; and increased self-generated motivation to improve practice. However, this spiral was not initiated in many of the participating clinics. A parallel qualitative evaluation (44) suggested that the intervention was well accepted by its recipients, who became more aware of the need to improve provider—patient relations and also made some changes in the organization of care. However, when compared with the findings of the pilot study, the changes in staff attitudes and practices following the training were less marked and often did not translate into improved provider—patient relations. There are a number of reasons for these differences between the findings of the pilot study and the full-scale trial. Firstly, a highly motivated clinic manager was present at one of the pilot sites. This contrasted with the generally weak clinic and middle management in the trial intervention clinics. Secondly, the pilot sites happened to have fewer organizational problems than the clinics in the trial where poor team working and staff conflicts were common; task-oriented care was entrenched; and staff did not see themselves as having the agency to initiate workplace change.

Health service policy-makers and managers often assume that professional practice can be changed by training. However, few training programmes for providers in developing countries have been rigorously evaluated. The findings of this trial are inconclusive, but suggest that such training may not improve the outcomes of TB treatment. Systematic reviews of interventions to change professional practice indicate that most have modest effects, congruent with those found in this trial (45). We therefore recommend that researchers in other settings attempt to replicate this work, but with less ambitious goals in mind. Further research is also needed on the conditions under which training programmes might best change professional practice and the organization of care in these settings.

The alternative is to consider whether intensifying the intervention is a realistic goal in real-world settings. This would entail combining our training programme with interventions to address other barriers to clinic and organizational change. These include the shortage of experienced clinic and mid-level managers, and health system reform and restructuring, which have increased turnover of experienced staff and exacerbated uncertainty among those who remain (46).

 

Conclusions

To our knowledge, this is the first randomized controlled trial to have evaluated staff training to improve primary-level TB care in a developing country. The intervention appears not to improve TB outcomes, possibly due to a range of health systems barriers that were not addressed by the training programme or due to other unknown or unmeasurable factors. The results therefore suggest that that such training may not be an effective use of public resources. However, given the many problems and the paucity of interventions to improve TB care in poor urban settlements, the possibility of an improvement of even 5% in treatment outcomes needs to be pursued. Larger studies are therefore required to examine this effect and to help ensure that scarce resources available for health care training are well spent (47).

 

Acknowledgements

We would like to thank the following: the patients who participated in the study; the staff of the 24 study clinics; and the many health service managers in Cape Town who provided support and encouragement for this work. Our thanks are also due to Hester van der Walt and Ineke Buskens (support for training programme development and implementation); Liz Rose and Nomsa Yekiso (training delivery); Judy Austin and Hennie Schoeman (data collection); Sylvia Louw (administrative support); John Walley (advice on study design and implementation and assistance in obtaining funding); Peter Barron, Vinod Diwan, Martin Eccles, Jeremy Grimshaw, Andrew Hutchings, Andy Oxman and Dave Sackett (advice on study design and comments on draft papers); and several anonymous referees.

Funding: Funding for this study was provided by the Commonwealth Programme of the Nuffield Foundation (Project CW28); the UK Department for International Development (Project R561); the Health Systems Trust (Project 226/98); and the Medical Research Council of South Africa. The protocol was developed as part of the European Union funded International Co-operation (INCO), 4th and 5th framework concerted action project entitled "Afro-implement" (Project ERB3514PL972571). The study design was approved by the sponsors. None of the sponsors were involved in implementation, data collection, analyses or authorization of publication.

Competing interests: none declared.

 

References

1. Murray CJL, Lopez AD. The global burden of disease: a comprehensive assessment of mortality and disability from diseases, injuries, and risk factors in 1990 and projected to 2020. Cambridge (MA): Harvard School of Public Health on behalf of the World Health Organization and the World Bank; 1996.        

2. Raviglione M, Snider D, Kochi A. Global epidemiology of tuberculosis: morbidity and mortality of a worldwide epidemic. Journal of the American Medical Association 1995;273:220-6.        

3. World Health Organization. Commission on macroeconomics and health. Macroeconomics and health: investing in health for economic development. Geneva; WHO; 2001.        

4. World Health Organization. Global tuberculosis control: surveillance, planning, financing. Geneva: WHO; 2003. WHO document WHO/CDS/TB/2003.316.        

5. Bamford L, Loveday M, Verkuijl S. Tuberculosis. In: Ijumba P, Day C, editors. South African health review 2004. Durban, South Africa: Health Systems Trust; 2004. p. 213-28.        

6. Kleinschmidt I. South African tuberculosis mortality data — showing the first sign of the AIDS epidemic? South African Medical Journal 1999;89:269-73.        

7. Mallory KF, Churchyard GJ, Kleinschmidt I, De Cock KM, Corbett EL. The impact of HIV infection on recurrence of tuberculosis in South African gold miners. The International Journal of Tuberculosis and Lung Disease 2000;4:455-62.        

8. Corbett EL, Watt CJ, Walker N, Maher D, Williams BG, Raviglione MC, et al. The growing burden of tuberculosis: global trends and interactions with the HIV epidemic. Archives of Internal Medicine 2003;12;163:1009-21.        

9. Kochi A. The global tuberculosis situation and new control strategy of the World Health Organization. Tubercle 1991;72:1-6.        

10. World Health Organization. Framework for effective tuberculosis control. Geneva: WHO; 1994. WHO document WHO/TB/94.179.        

11. World Health Organization. An expanded DOTS framework for effective tuberculosis control. Geneva: WHO; 2002. WHO document WHO/CDS/TB/2002.297.        

12. Dick J. Adherence to anti-tuberculosis treatment in Cape Town [dissertation]. Cape Town, South Africa: University of Cape Town; 1995.        

13. Van der Walt H, Swartz L. Task oriented nursing in a tuberculosis control programme in South Africa: where does it come from and what keeps it going? Social Science and Medicine 2001;54:1001-9.        

14. Steyn MA, Borcherds BA, van der Merwe BA. The use of a rating instrument to teach and access communication skills of health-care workers in a clinic in the Western Cape. Curationis 1999;22:32-40.        

15. Zwarenstein M, Schoeman JH, Vundule C, Lombard CJ, Tatley M. Randomised controlled trial of self-supervised and directly observed treatment of tuberculosis. Lancet 1998;352:1340-3.        

16. Comolet TM, Rakotomalala R, Rajaonarioa H. Factors determining compliance with tuberculosis treatment in an urban environment, Tamatave, Madagascar. International Journal of Tuberculosis and Lung Disease 1998;2:891-7.        

17. Johansson E, Winkvist A. Trust and transparency in human encounters in tuberculosis control: lessons learned from Vietnam. Qualitative Health Research 2002;12:473-91.        

18. Wares DF, Singh S, Acharya AK, Dangi R. Non-adherence to tuberculosis treatment in the eastern Tarai of Nepal. International Journal of Tuberculosis and Lung Disease 2003;7:327-35.        

19. Jaiswal A, Singh V, Ogden JA, Porter JD, Sharma PP, Sarin R, et al. Adherence to tuberculosis treatment: lessons from the urban setting of Delhi, India. Tropical Medicine and International Health 2003;8:625-33.        

20. Maher D, Uplekar M, Blanc L, Raviglione M. Treatment of tuberculosis. BMJ 2003;327:822-3.        

21. Jin BW, Kim SC, Shimao T. The impact of intensified supervisory activities on tuberculosis treatment. Tubercle and Lung Disease 1993;74:267-72.        

22. Volmink J, Garner P. Systematic review of randomised controlled trials of strategies to promote adherence to tuberculosis treatment. BMJ 1997;315:1403-6.        

23. Department of Health (South Africa). The South African Tuberculosis Control Programme. Practical guidelines. Pretoria, South Africa: Department of Health; 1996.        

24. Schwartz D, Lelouch J. Explanatory and pragmatic attitudes in therapeutic trials. Journal of Chronic Disease 1967;20:637-48.        

25. Kirkwood BR, Cousens SN, Victora CG, de Zoysa I. Issues in the design and interpretation of studies to evaluate the impact of community-based interventions. Tropical Medicine and International Health 1997;2:1022-9.        

26. Roland M, Torgersen TJ. What are pragmatic trials? BMJ 1998;316:285.        

27. Schoeman JH. Sampling report for the proposed study "A randomised controlled trial to evaluate the impact of a training intervention for health care workers on the adherence patterns and cure rates of pulmonary TB patients attending primary health care clinics in Cape Town". Cape Town, South Africa: Medical Research Council of South Africa; 1998.        

28. Donner A, Klar N. Design and analysis of cluster randomization trials in health research. London: Arnold; 2000.        

29. Dick J, Lombard C. Shared vision — a health education project designed to enhance adherence to anti-tuberculosis treatment. International Journal of Tuberculosis and Lung Disease 1997;1:181-6.        

30. Ajzen I, Fishbein M. Understanding attitudes and predicting social behaviour. Englewood Cliffs, (NJ): Prentice Hall; 1980.        

31. Bandura A. Social foundations of thought and action. Englewood Cliffs (NJ): Prentice Hall; 1986.        

32. Bandura A. Self-efficacy: toward a unifying theory of behavioral change. Psychological Review 1977;84:191-215.        

33. Fonn S, Xaba M. Health Workers for Change: developing the initiative. Health Policy and Planning 2001;16 Suppl 1:13-18.        

34. Vlassoff C, Fonn S. Health Workers for Change as a health systems management and development tool. Health Policy and Planning 2001;16 Suppl 1:47-52.        

35. Dick J, Groenewald P, van der Walt H, Rose E. Training for transformation: a pilot project. Cape Town, South Africa: Medical Research Council of South Africa; 1996.        

36. Dick J, Lewin S, Rose E, Zwarenstein M, van der Walt H. Changing professional practice in tuberculosis care: an educational intervention. Journal of Advanced Nursing 2004;48:434-42.        

37. Steyn M, van der Merwe N, Dick J, Borcherds N, Wilding R. Communication with TB patients; a neglected dimension of effective treatment? Curationis 1997;20:53-6.        

38. Lewin SA, Skea ZC, Entwistle V, Zwarenstein M, Dick J. Interventions for providers to promote a patient-centred approach in clinical consultations (Cochrane Review). In: The Cochrane Library, Issue 3. Chichester, UK: John Wiley & Sons; 2004.        

39. Johnston MP, Rifkin SB, editors. Health care together: training exercises for health workers in community based programmes. London: MacMillan; 1987.        

40. Kolb DA. The process of experiential learning. In: Thorpe M, Edwards R, Hanson A, editors. Culture and processes of adult learning: a reader. London: Routledge; 1993:138-56.        

41. Van der Walt H, Schoeman JH, Hoogendoorn E, Dick J, Swartz L, Dikweni L, et al. Being a TB patient: Stories from across the divide. 30th International Union Against Tuberculosis and Lung Disease (IUATLD) World Conference on Lung Health; 1999 September 15—18; Madrid, Spain.        

42. Newell DJ. Intention-to-treat analysis: implications for quantitative and qualitative research. International Journal of Epidemiology 1992;21:837-41.        

43. Haynes B. Can it work? Does it work? Is it worth it? The testing of health care interventions is evolving. BMJ 1999;319:652-3.        

44. Lewin S. The organization of TB nursing work in primary health clinics in Cape Town, South Africa [dissertation]. London: London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine; 2004.        

45. NHS Centre for Reviews and Dissemination, University of York, UK. Getting evidence into practice. Effective Health Care Bulletin 1999;5:1-16.        

46. Lewin S, Urquhart P, Strauss N, Kilian D, Hunt C. Linking health and environment in Cape Town, South Africa: the view from local government. Cape Town, South Africa: Medical Research Council of South Africa; 1998.        

47. Hutchinson L. Evaluating and researching the effectiveness of educational interventions. BMJ 1999:318:1267-9.        

 

 

(Submitted: 17 September 2004 — Final revised version received: 24 January 2005 — Accepted: 24 January 2005)

 

 

1 Correspondence should be sent to this author at the first address (email: simon.lewin@lshtm.ac.uk).

World Health Organization Genebra - Genebra - Switzerland
E-mail: bulletin@who.int
Acompanhe os números deste periódico no seu leitor de RSS