Access to care following injury in Northern Malawi, a comparison of travel time estimates between Geographic Information System and community household reports

Mapping the processes and information flows of a prehospital emergency care system in Rwanda: a process mapping exercise

OBJECTIVE

A vital component of a prehospital emergency care system is getting an injured patient to the right hospital at the right time. Process and information flow mapping are recognised methods to show where efficiencies can be made. We aimed to understand the process and information flows used by the prehospital emergency service in transporting community emergencies in Rwanda in order to identify areas for improvement.

DESIGN

Two facilitated process/information mapping workshops were conducted. Process maps were produced in real time during discussions and shared with participants for their agreement. They were further validated by field observations.

SETTING

The study took place in two prehospital care settings serving predominantly rural and predominantly urban patients.

PARTICIPANTS

24 healthcare professionals from various cadres. Field observations were done on 49 emergencies across both sites.

RESULTS

Two maps were produced, and four main process stages were described: (1) call triage by the dispatch/call centre team, (2) scene triage by the ambulance team, (3) patient monitoring by the ambulance team on the way to the health facility and (4) handover process at the health facility. The first key finding was that the rural site had multiple points of entry into the system for emergency patients, whereas the urban system had one point of entry (the national emergency number); processes were otherwise similar between sites. The second was that although large amounts of information were collected to inform decision-making about which health facility to transfer patients to, participants found it challenging to articulate the intellectual process by which they used this to make decisions; guidelines were not used for decision-making.

DISCUSSION

We have identified several areas of the prehospital care processes where there can be efficiencies. To make efficiencies in the decision-making process and produce a standard approach for all patients will require protocolising care pathways.

Access to quality care after injury in Northern Malawi: results of a household survey

BACKGROUND

Most injury care research in low-income contexts such as Malawi is facility centric. Community-derived data is needed to better understand actual injury incidence, health system utilisation and barriers to seeking care following injury.

METHODS

We administered a household survey to 2200 households in Karonga, Malawi. The primary outcome was injury incidence, with non-fatal injuries classified as major or minor (> 30 or 1-29 disability days respectively). Those seeking medical treatment were asked about time delays to seeking, reaching and receiving care at a facility, where they sought care, and whether they attended a second facility. We performed analysis for associations between injury severity and whether the patient sought care, stayed overnight in a facility, attended a second facility, or received care within 1 or 2 h. The reason for those not seeking care was asked.

RESULTS

Most households (82.7%) completed the survey, with 29.2% reporting an injury. Overall, 611 non-fatal and four fatal injuries were reported from 531 households: an incidence of 6900 per 100,000. Major injuries accounted for 26.6%. Three quarters, 76.1% (465/611), sought medical attention. Almost all, 96.3% (448/465), seeking care attended a primary facility first. Only 29.7% (138/465), attended a second place of care. Only 32.0% (142/444), received care within one hour. A further 19.1% (85/444) received care within 2 h. Major injury was associated with being more likely to have; sought care (94.4% vs 69.8% p < 0.001), stayed overnight at a facility (22.9% vs 15.4% P = 0.047), attended a second place of care (50.3% vs 19.9%, P < 0.001). For those not seeking care the most important reason was the injury not being serious enough for 52.1% (74/142), followed by transport difficulties 13.4% (19/142) and financial costs 5.6% (8/142).

CONCLUSION

Injuries in Northern Malawi are substantial. Community-derived details are necessary to fully understand injury burden and barriers to seeking and reaching care.

Health system assessment for access to care after injury in low- or middle-income countries: A mixed methods study from Northern Malawi

BACKGROUND

Injuries represent a vast and relatively neglected burden of disease affecting low- and middle-income countries (LMICs). While many health systems underperform in treating injured patients, most assessments have not considered the whole system. We integrated findings from 9 methods using a 3 delays approach (delays in seeking, reaching, or receiving care) to prioritise important trauma care health system barriers in Karonga, Northern Malawi, and exemplify a holistic health system assessment approach applicable in comparable settings.

METHODS AND FINDINGS

To provide multiple perspectives on each conceptual delay and include data from community-based and facility-based sources, we used 9 methods to examine the injury care health system. The methods were (1) household survey; (2) verbal autopsy analysis; (3) community focus group discussions (FGDs); (4) community photovoice; (5) facility care-pathway process mapping and elucidation of barriers following injury; (6) facility healthcare worker survey; (7) facility assessment survey; (8) clinical vignettes for care process quality assessment of facility-based healthcare workers; and (9) geographic information system (GIS) analysis. Empirical data collection took place in Karonga, Northern Malawi, between July 2019 and February 2020. We used a convergent parallel study design concurrently conducting all data collection before subsequently integrating results for interpretation. For each delay, a matrix was created to juxtapose method-specific data relevant to each barrier identified as driving delays to injury care. Using a consensus approach, we graded the evidence from each method as to whether an identified barrier was important within the health system. We identified 26 barriers to access timely quality injury care evidenced by at least 3 of the 9 study methods. There were 10 barriers at delay 1, 6 at delay 2, and 10 at delay 3. We found that the barriers "cost," "transport," and "physical resources" had the most methods providing strong evidence they were important health system barriers within delays 1 (seeking care), 2 (reaching care), and 3 (receiving care), respectively. Facility process mapping provided evidence for the greatest number of barriers-25 of 26 within the integrated analysis. There were some barriers with notable divergent findings between the community- and facility-based methods, as well as among different community- and facility-based methods, which are discussed. The main limitation of our study is that the framework for grading evidence strength for important health system barriers across the 9 studies was done by author-derived consensus; other researchers might have created a different framework.

CONCLUSIONS

By integrating 9 different methods, including qualitative, quantitative, community-, patient-, and healthcare worker-derived data sources, we gained a rich insight into the functioning of this health system's ability to provide injury care. This approach allowed more holistic appraisal of this health system's issues by establishing convergence of evidence across the diverse methods used that the barriers of cost, transport, and physical resources were the most important health system barriers driving delays to seeking, reaching, and receiving injury care, respectively. This offers direction and confidence, over and above that derived from single methodology studies, for prioritising barriers to address through health service development and policy.

Distance is “a big problem”: a geographic analysis of reported and modelled proximity to maternal health services in Ghana

Background

Geographic barriers to healthcare are associated with adverse maternal health outcomes. Modelling travel times using georeferenced data is becoming common in quantifying physical access. Multiple Demographic and Health Surveys ask women about distance-related problems accessing healthcare, but responses have not been evaluated against modelled travel times. This cross-sectional study aims to compare reported and modelled distance by socio-demographic characteristics and evaluate their relationship with skilled birth attendance. Also, we assess the socio-demographic factors associated with self-reported distance problems in accessing healthcare.

Methods

Distance problems and socio-demographic characteristics reported by 2210 women via the 2017 Ghana Maternal Health Survey were included in analysis. Geospatial methods were used to model travel time to the nearest health facility using roads, rivers, land cover, travel speeds, cluster locations and health facility locations. Logistic regressions were used to predict skilled birth attendance and self-reported distance problems.

Results

Women reporting distance challenges accessing healthcare had significantly longer travel times to the nearest health facility. Poverty significantly increased the odds of reporting challenges with distance. In contrast, living in urban areas and being registered with health insurance reduced the odds of reporting distance challenges. Women with a skilled attendant at birth, four or more skilled antenatal appointments and timely skilled postnatal care had shorter travel times to the nearest health facility. Generally, less educated, poor, rural women registered with health insurance had longer travel times to their nearest health facility. After adjusting for socio-demographic characteristics, the following factors increased the odds of skilled birth attendance: wealth, health insurance, higher education, living in urban areas, and completing four or more antenatal care appointments.

Conclusion

Studies relying on modelled travel times to nearest facility should recognise the differential impact of geographic access to healthcare on poor rural women. Physical access to maternal health care should be scaled up in rural areas and utilisation increased by improving livelihoods.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12884-022-04998-0.

Comparing modelled with self-reported travel time and the used versus the nearest facility: modelling geographic accessibility to family planning outlets in Kenya

INTRODUCTION

Geographic access to family planning (FP) services has been characterised through a variety of proximity metrics. However, there is little evidence on the validity of women's self-reported compared with modelled travel time to an FP outlet, or between different distance measures.

METHODS

We used data from four urban sites in Kenya. A longitudinal FP outlet census was directly linked with data from cross-sectional FP user surveys. We combined characteristics of outlet visited to obtain FP, transport mode, self-reported travel time and location of households and outlets with data on road networks, elevation, land use and travel barriers within a cost-distance algorithm to compute modelled travel time, route and Euclidean distance between households and outlets. We compared modelled and self-reported travel times, Euclidean and route distances and the use of visited versus nearest facility.

RESULTS

931 contraceptive users were directly linked to their FP source. Self-reported travel times were consistently and significantly higher than modelled times, with greater differences for those using vehicles rather than walking. Modelled and Euclidean distances were similar in the four geographies. 20% of women used their nearest FP outlet while 52% went to their nearest outlet when conditional on it offering their most recently used FP method.

CONCLUSION

In urban areas with high facility density and good road connectivity, over half of FP users visited their nearest outlet with their chosen method available. In these settings, Euclidean distances were sufficient to characterise geographic proximity; however, reported and modelled travel times differed across all sites.