Limitations of CBA study: Controlled before after study

Documenting the implementation processes and effects of the data use initiatives in primary health care settings in Tanzania: A before-after mixed methods study protocol

BACKGROUND

The use of data in decision making and planning in primary health care settings is critical for improving efficiency and health outcomes for patients and communities. Implementation research can be used to fully understand the effects, context, challenges, and facilitators of data use, as well as how to scale up data use interventions. However, in the context of low resource settings, little is known about how implementation research can be employed to assess the implementation and impact of data use interventions.

METHODS

We will conduct a hybrid type 2 effectiveness-implementation study employing a mixed method controlled before and after design to measure the effects of data use interventions while simultaneously understanding the implementation of those initiatives. The controlled before and after entails measurement of the effects of the interventions at baseline and end line in a matched intervention and control health facilities using structured questionnaire to health workers (n = 440) and existing patients (n = 422) while also extracting selected health outcome variable from routine data in all participating health facilities (n = 80). The mixed methods component entails measuring the implementation outcomes (adoption, acceptability, fidelity and maintenance) and their moderators entails the integration of both quantitative and qualitative data collection, analysis, and interpretation (i.e. mixed methods) approach by using a structured questionnaire to implementers (health workers and managers) (n = 400). Experiential dimensions of implementation processes and moderators will be explored using qualitative interviews. Guided by implementation research theories and frameworks, a theory of change (TOC) is developed first to guide the evaluation of implementation processes and effects of the interventions. Descriptive and inferential statistics will be employed to analyze quantitative data whereas thematic analysis approach will be employed for qualitative data.

DISCUSSION

This study is one of the first to test the simultaneous measurement of effects and implementation processes of data use interventions in the primary health care settings. Findings will support efforts to improve quality of services by optimizing scale up and sustainability of the data use initiatives in primary health care settings.

Impact of Rapid Molecular Diagnostic Testing of Respiratory Viruses on Outcomes of Adults Hospitalized with Respiratory Illness: a Multicenter Quasi-experimental Study

A standard multiplex PCR offers comprehensive testing for respiratory viruses. However, it has traditionally been performed in a referral laboratory with a lengthy turnaround time, which can reduce patient flow through the hospital. We aimed to determine whether the introduction of a rapid PCR, but with limited targets (Cepheid Xpert Flu/RSV XC), was associated with improved outcomes for adults hospitalized with respiratory illness. A controlled quasi-experimental study was conducted across three hospitals in New South Wales, Australia. Intervention groups received standard multiplex PCR during the preimplementation, July to December 2016 (n = 953), and rapid PCR during the postimplementation, July to December 2017 (n = 1,209). Control groups (preimplementation, n = 937, and postimplementation, n = 1,102) were randomly selected from adults hospitalized with respiratory illness during the same periods. The outcomes were hospital length of stay (LOS) and microbiology test utilization (blood culture, urine culture, sputum culture, and respiratory bacterial and virus serologies). The introduction of rapid PCR was associated with a nonsignificant 8.9-h reduction in median LOS (95% confidence interval [CI], -21.5 h to 3.7 h; P = 0.17) for all patients and a significant 21.5-h reduction in median LOS (95% CI, -36.8 h to -6.2 h; P < 0.01) among patients with positive test results in an adjusted difference-in-differences analysis. For patients receiving test results before disposition, rapid PCR use was associated with a significant reduction in LOS, irrespective of test results. Compared with standard PCR testing, rapid PCR use was significantly associated with fewer blood culture (adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 0.67; 95% CI, 0.5 to 0.82; P < 0.001), sputum culture (aOR, 0.56; 95% CI, 0.47 to 0.68, P < 0.001), bacterial serology (aOR, 0.44; 95% CI, 0.35 to 0.55, P < 0.001) and viral serology (aOR, 0.42; 95% CI, 0.33 to 0.53, P < 0.001) tests, but not with fewer urine culture tests (aOR, 0.94; 95% CI, 0.78 to 1.12, P = 0.48). Rapid PCR testing of adults hospitalized with respiratory illnesses can deliver benefits to patients and reduce resource utilization. Future research should consider a formal economic analysis and assess its potential impacts on clinical decision making.