The effect of community health worker-led education on women's health and treatment-seeking: A cluster randomised trial and nested process evaluation in Gujarat, India

Effects of occupational health promotion interventions on health-related outcomes among employees of small businesses and self-employed individuals: A systematic review

BACKGROUND

Compared to workers of larger companies it is less clear what health promoting interventions might be beneficial for employees of small businesses and self-employed individuals.

OBJECTIVE

Our aim was to critically appraise trials investigating health promotion programs among small business workers and self-employed individuals, by means of a systematic review.

METHODS

We conducted a search of primary studies using MEDLINE, Web of Science, LIVIVO and the Cochrane library. Our assessment followed the recommendations of the Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions and PRISMA.

RESULTS

We identified six trials including 5,854 participants from Asia, North America and Australia. Most were of moderate methodological quality, only one was of low quality. Some of the supervised psycho-educational lifestyle programs focusing on individual behavior changes showed benefits in terms of stress reduction and increased physical activity levels among small enterprise employees.

CONCLUSIONS

There is a huge knowledge gap on evidence-based health promotion interventions for self-employed and for small business workers, especially in Europe.

Gynaecological Cancers in India: The Less Heard Perspectives of Healthcare Providers

There has been mounting evidence on the role of healthcare providers in chronic illnesses such as cancer. The specific complexities in their roles to enable health are less heard. Gynaecological cancers have several undercurrents beyond the obvious. Semi-structured interviews were conducted with healthcare providers in Southern India (n = 35) and the data presented in this article were collected as a part of a larger study on the role of communication in the management of gynaecological cancers in India. Thematic analysis of the qualitative data provided information on the providers' perspectives of gynaecological cancers. Patient numbers, cost, time, cultural norms, context, and institutional constraints in cancer care provision are just some of the factors impacting care provision. Healthcare providers are typically acknowledged for the criticality of their roles in the continuum of care. However, our research suggests that the psychological harm and challenges they themselves may face in providing that care are severely neglected. Through listening to healthcare provider voices, clear solutions emerge to better support the practice of those who are responsible for cancer care.

'We are the bridge': an implementation research study of SEWA Shakti Kendras to improve community engagement in publicly funded health insurance in Gujarat, India

INTRODUCTION

India's efforts towards universal health coverage include a national health insurance scheme that aims to protect the most vulnerable from catastrophic health expenditure. However, emerging evidence on publicly funded health insurance, as well as experience from community-based schemes, indicates that women face specific barriers to access and utilisation. Community engagement interventions have been shown to improve equitable utilisation of public health services, but there is limited research specific to health insurance. We examined how existing community-based resource centres implemented by a women's organisation could improve women's access to, and utilisation of, health insurance.

METHODS

We conducted an implementation research study in Gujarat, India to examine how SEWA Shakti Kendras, established by the Self-Employed Women's Association, worked to improve community engagement in health insurance. SEWA organises women in the informal sector and provides social protection through health, insurance and childcare services. We examined administrative data, programme reports and conducted 30 in-depth qualitative interviews with users and staff. Data were analysed thematically to examine intervention content, context, and implementation processes and to identify enablers and barriers to improving women's access to health insurance through SEWA's community engagement approach.

RESULTS

The centres worked through multiple channels-doorstep services, centre-based support and health system navigation-to strengthen women's capability to access health insurance. Each centre's approach varied by contextual factors, such as women's digital literacy levels and rural-urban settings. Effective community engagement required local leadership, strong government partnerships and the flexibility to address a range of public services, with implementation by trusted local health workers.

CONCLUSION

SEWA Shakti Kendras demonstrate how a local, flexible and community-based model can serve as a bridge to improve utilisation of health insurance, by engaging women and their households through multiple channels. Scaling up this approach will require investing in partnerships with community-based organisations as part of strategies towards universal health coverage.

Interventions promoting uptake of water, sanitation and hygiene (WASH) technologies in low- and middle-income countries: An evidence and gap map of effectiveness studies

Background

Lack of access to and use of water, sanitation and hygiene (WASH) cause 1.6 million deaths every year, of which 1.2 million are due to gastrointestinal illnesses like diarrhoea and acute respiratory infections like pneumonia. Poor WASH access and use also diminish nutrition and educational attainment, and cause danger and stress for vulnerable populations, especially for women and girls. The hardest hit regions are sub-Saharan Africa and South Asia. Sustainable Development Goal (SDG) 6 calls for the end of open defecation, and universal access to safely managed water and sanitation facilities, and basic hand hygiene, by 2030. WASH access and use also underpin progress in other areas such as SDG1 poverty targets, SDG3 health and SDG4 education targets. Meeting the SDG equity agenda to "leave none behind" will require WASH providers prioritise the hardest to reach including those living remotely and people who are disadvantaged.

Objectives

Decision makers need access to high-quality evidence on what works in WASH promotion in different contexts, and for different groups of people, to reach the most disadvantaged populations and thereby achieve universal targets. The WASH evidence map is envisioned as a tool for commissioners and researchers to identify existing studies to fill synthesis gaps, as well as helping to prioritise new studies where there are gaps in knowledge. It also supports policymakers and practitioners to navigate the evidence base, including presenting critically appraised findings from existing systematic reviews.

Methods

This evidence map presents impact evaluations and systematic reviews from the WASH sector, organised according to the types of intervention mechanisms, WASH technologies promoted, and outcomes measured. It is based on a framework of intervention mechanisms (e.g., behaviour change triggering or microloans) and outcomes along the causal pathway, specifically behavioural outcomes (e.g., handwashing and food hygiene practices), ill-health outcomes (e.g., diarrhoeal morbidity and mortality), nutrition and socioeconomic outcomes (e.g., school absenteeism and household income). The map also provides filters to examine the evidence for a particular WASH technology (e.g., latrines), place of use (e.g., home, school or health facility), location (e.g., global region, country, rural and urban) and group (e.g., people living with disability). Systematic searches for published and unpublished literature and trial registries were conducted of studies in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs). Searches were conducted in March 2018, and searches for completed trials were done in May 2020. Coding of information for the map was done by two authors working independently. Impact evaluations were critically appraised according to methods of conduct and reporting. Systematic reviews were critically appraised using a new approach to assess theory-based, mixed-methods evidence synthesis.

Results

There has been an enormous growth in impact evaluations and systematic reviews of WASH interventions since the International Year of Sanitation, 2008. There are now at least 367 completed or ongoing rigorous impact evaluations in LMICs, nearly three-quarters of which have been conducted since 2008, plus 43 systematic reviews. Studies have been done in 83 LMICs, with a high concentration in Bangladesh, India, and Kenya. WASH sector programming has increasingly shifted in focus from what technology to supply (e.g., a handwashing station or child's potty), to the best way in which to do so to promote demand. Research also covers a broader set of intervention mechanisms. For example, there has been increased interest in behaviour change communication using psychosocial "triggering", such as social marketing and community-led total sanitation. These studies report primarily on behavioural outcomes. With the advent of large-scale funding, in particular by the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, there has been a substantial increase in the number of studies on sanitation technologies, particularly latrines. Sustaining behaviour is fundamental for sustaining health and other quality of life improvements. However, few studies have been done of intervention mechanisms for, or measuring outcomes on sustained adoption of latrines to stop open defaecation. There has also been some increase in the number of studies looking at outcomes and interventions that disproportionately affect women and girls, who quite literally carry most of the burden of poor water and sanitation access. However, most studies do not report sex disaggregated outcomes, let alone integrate gender analysis into their framework. Other vulnerable populations are even less addressed; no studies eligible for inclusion in the map were done of interventions targeting, or reporting on outcomes for, people living with disabilities. We were only able to find a single controlled evaluation of WASH interventions in a health care facility, in spite of the importance of WASH in health facilities in global policy debates. The quality of impact evaluations has improved, such as the use of controlled designs as standard, attention to addressing reporting biases, and adequate cluster sample size. However, there remain important concerns about quality of reporting. The quality and usefulness of systematic reviews for policy is also improving, which draw clearer distinctions between intervention mechanisms and synthesise the evidence on outcomes along the causal pathway. Adopting mixed-methods approaches also provides information for programmes on barriers and enablers affecting implementation.

Conclusion

Ensuring everyone has access to appropriate water, sanitation, and hygiene facilities is one of the most fundamental of challenges for poverty elimination. Researchers and funders need to consider carefully where there is the need for new primary evidence, and new syntheses of that evidence. This study suggests the following priority areas:Impact evaluations incorporating understudied outcomes, such as sustainability and slippage, of WASH provision in understudied places of use, such as health care facilities, and of interventions targeting, or presenting disaggregated data for, vulnerable populations, particularly over the life-course and for people living with a disability;Improved reporting in impact evaluations, including presentation of participant flow diagrams; andSynthesis studies and updates in areas with sufficient existing and planned impact evaluations, such as for diarrhoea mortality, ARIs, WASH in schools and decentralisation. These studies will preferably be conducted as mixed-methods systematic reviews that are able to answer questions about programme targeting, implementation, effectiveness and cost-effectiveness, and compare alternative intervention mechanisms to achieve and sustain outcomes in particular contexts, preferably using network meta-analysis.

Classroom, club or collective? Three types of community-based group intervention and why they matter for health

Interventions involving groups of laywomen, men and adolescents to promote health are increasingly popular, but past research has rarely distinguished between different types of intervention with groups. We introduce a simple typology that distinguishes three ideal types: classrooms, clubs and collectives. Classrooms treat groups as a platform for reaching a population with didactic behaviour change strategies. Clubs seek to build, strengthen and leverage relationships between group members to promote health. Collectives engage whole communities in assuming ownership over a health problem and taking action to address it. We argue that this distinction goes a long way towards explaining differences in achievable health outcomes using interventions with groups. First, classrooms and clubs are appropriate when policymakers primarily care about improving the health of group members, but collectives are better placed to achieve population-level impact. Second, classroom interventions implicitly assume bottleneck behaviours preventing a health outcome from being achieved can be reliably identified by experts, whereas collectives make use of local knowledge, skill and creativity to tackle complexity. Third, classroom interventions assume individual participants can address health issues largely on their own, while clubs and collectives are required to engender collective action in support of health. We invite public health researchers and policymakers to use our framework to align their own and communities’ ambitions with appropriate group-based interventions to test and implement for their context. We caution that our typology is meant to apply to groups of laypeople rather than professionalised groups such as whole civil society organisations.

Community interventions with women's groups to improve women's and children's health in India: a mixed-methods systematic review of effects, enablers and barriers

INTRODUCTION

India is home to over 6 million women's groups, including self-help groups. There has been no evidence synthesis on whether and how such groups improve women's and children's health.

METHODS

We did a mixed-methods systematic review of quantitative and qualitative studies on women's groups in India to examine effects on women and children's health and to identify enablers and barriers to achieving outcomes. We searched 10 databases and included studies published in English from 2000 to 2019 measuring health knowledge, behaviours or outcomes. Our study population included adult women and children under 5 years. We appraised studies using standard risk of bias assessments. We compared intervention effects by level of community participation, scope of capability strengthening (individual, group or community), type of women's group and social and behaviour change techniques employed. We synthesised quantitative and qualitative studies to identify barriers and enablers related to context, intervention design and implementation, and outcome characteristics.

FINDINGS

We screened 21 380 studies and included 99: 19 randomised controlled trial reports, 25 quasi-experimental study reports and 55 non-experimental studies (27 quantitative and 28 qualitative). Experimental studies provided moderate-quality evidence that health interventions with women's groups can improve perinatal practices, neonatal survival, immunisation rates and women's and children's dietary diversity, and help control vector-borne diseases. Evidence of positive effects was strongest for community mobilisation interventions that built communities' capabilities and went beyond sharing information. Key enablers were inclusion of vulnerable community members, outcomes that could be reasonably expected to change through community interventions and intensity proportionate to ambition. Barriers included limited time or focus on health, outcomes not relevant to group members and health system constraints.

CONCLUSION

Interventions with women's groups can improve women's and children's health in India. The most effective interventions go beyond using groups to disseminate health information and seek to build communities' capabilities.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

The review was registered with PROSPERO: CRD42019130633.

Promoting women's and children's health through community groups in low-income and middle-income countries: a mixed-methods systematic review of mechanisms, enablers and barriers

INTRODUCTION

Community mobilisation through group activities has been used to improve women's and children's health in a range of low-income and middle-income contexts, but the mechanisms through which it works deserve greater consideration. We did a mixed-methods systematic review of mechanisms, enablers and barriers to the promotion of women's and children's health in community mobilisation interventions.

METHODS

We searched for theoretical and empirical peer-reviewed articles between January 2000 and November 2018. First, we extracted and collated proposed mechanisms, enablers and barriers into categories. Second, we extracted and synthesised evidence for them using narrative synthesis. We assessed risk of bias with adapted Downs and Black and Critical Appraisal Skills Programme checklists. We assigned confidence grades to each proposed mechanism, enabler and barrier.

RESULTS

78 articles met the inclusion criteria, of which 39 described interventions based on a participatory group education model, 19 described community-led structural interventions to promote sexual health in marginalised populations and 20 concerned other types of intervention or multiple interventions at once. We did not have high confidence in any mechanism, enabler or barrier. Two out of 15 proposed mechanisms and 10 out of 12 proposed enablers and barriers reached medium confidence. A few studies provided direct evidence relating proposed mechanisms, enablers or barriers to health behaviours or health outcomes. Only two studies presented mediation or interaction analysis for a proposed mechanism, enabler or barrier.

CONCLUSION

We uncovered multiple proposed mechanisms, enablers and barriers to health promotion through community groups, but much work remains to provide a robust evidence base for proposed mechanisms, enablers and barriers.

PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER

CRD42018093695.

Frequency and determinants of health care utilization for symptomatic reproductive tract infections in rural Indian women: A cross-sectional study

Introduction

The public health burden of reproductive tract infections (RTIs) among women in rural areas of low-income countries is poorly addressed because health care seeking for treatment of RTIs is inadequate. There are gaps in knowledge about whether low care seeking behavior stems from challenges in accessing health care versus women's recognition of and response to RTI-specific disease symptoms. We aim to identify determinants of care seeking behavior and analyze the difference in utilization of health care resources in response to symptoms of an RTI versus non-RTI disease symptoms in rural India. This will aid in the design of interventions that promote RTI care seeking behavior.

Methods

Our analysis uses data from a cross-sectional, population-based surveillance survey among rural, non-pregnant women in Odisha, India, from 2013–2014 (n = 3,600). We utilized bivariate logistic regression to determine the degree that certain determinants are associated with a woman’s likelihood to seek RTI treatment, and chi-Squared tests to assess for differences in health care resources used for non-RTI versus RTI symptoms.

Results

Married women were significantly more likely to seek health care for RTI symptoms (Odds Ratio (OR) = 1.9, 95% Confidence Interval (CI): 1.2–3.0) while unmarried adolescents were less likely to seek treatment (OR = 0.4, CI: 0.2–0.6). There was no association between RTI health care seeking with education level, belief about whether symptoms can be treated, or poverty. The majority (73.8%) of women who did not seek treatment for RTI symptoms reported not seeking treatment because they did not know treatment was needed. Women utilized formal health care providers at a higher rate in response to RTI symptoms than in response to their most recent symptoms of any kind (p = 0.003).

Conclusions

Community-based reproductive health education interventions are needed to increase health care seeking behavior for RTIs in rural Indian women. Interventions should target unmarried women and focus on both sexual health education and access to care.