BMC health services research · 2024
Evaluation of the implementation of a community health worker-led COVID-19 contact tracing intervention in Chiapas, Mexico, from March 2020 to December 2021.
Наблюдательное исследованиеСтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Aranda Zeus, Vázquez Sandra, Gopaluni Anuraag, Martínez Laura, Ramírez Mayra, Jiménez Ariwame, Bernal Daniel, Rodríguez Ana L, Chacón Selene, Vargas Bruno, Fulcher Isabel R, Barnhart Dale A, Partners In Health Cross-Site COVID-19 Cohort Technical Working Group
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: Mexico is one of the countries with the greatest excess death due to COVID-19. Chiapas, the poorest state in the country, has been particularly affected. Faced with an exacerbated shortage of health professionals, medical supplies, and infrastructure to respond to the pandemic, the non-governmental organization Compañeros En Salud (CES) implemented a COVID-19 infection prevention and control program to limit the impact of the pandemic in the region. We evaluated CES's implementation of a community health worker (CHW)-led contact tracing intervention in eight rural communities in Chiapas.
METHODS: Our retrospective observational study used operational data collected during the contract tracing intervention from March 2020 to December 2021. We evaluated three outcomes: contact tracing coverage, defined as the proportion of named contacts that were located by CHWs, successful completion of contact tracing, and incidence of suspected COVID-19 among contacts. We described how these outcomes changed over time as the intervention evolved. In addition, we assessed associations between these three main outcomes and demographic characteristics of contacts and intervention period (pre vs. post March 2021) using univariate and multivariate logistic regression.
RESULTS: From a roster of 2,177 named contacts, 1,187 (54.5%) received at least one home visit by a CHW and 560 (25.7%) had successful completion of contact tracing according to intervention guidelines. Of 560 contacts with complete contact tracing, 93 (16.6%) became suspected COVID-19 cases. We observed significant associations between sex and coverage (p = 0.006), sex and complete contact tracing (p = 0.049), community of residence and both coverage and complete contact tracing (p < 0.001), and intervention period and both coverage and complete contact tracing (p < 0.001).
CONCLUSIONS: Our analysis highlights the promises and the challenges of implementing CHW-led COVID-19 contact tracing programs. To optimize implementation, we recommend using digital tools for data collection with a human-centered design, conducting regular data quality assessments, providing CHWs with sufficient technical knowledge of the data collection system, supervising CHWs to ensure contact tracing guidelines are followed, involving communities in the design and implementation of the intervention, and addressing community member needs and concerns surrounding stigmatization arising from lack of privacy.
METHODS: Our retrospective observational study used operational data collected during the contract tracing intervention from March 2020 to December 2021. We evaluated three outcomes: contact tracing coverage, defined as the proportion of named contacts that were located by CHWs, successful completion of contact tracing, and incidence of suspected COVID-19 among contacts. We described how these outcomes changed over time as the intervention evolved. In addition, we assessed associations between these three main outcomes and demographic characteristics of contacts and intervention period (pre vs. post March 2021) using univariate and multivariate logistic regression.
RESULTS: From a roster of 2,177 named contacts, 1,187 (54.5%) received at least one home visit by a CHW and 560 (25.7%) had successful completion of contact tracing according to intervention guidelines. Of 560 contacts with complete contact tracing, 93 (16.6%) became suspected COVID-19 cases. We observed significant associations between sex and coverage (p = 0.006), sex and complete contact tracing (p = 0.049), community of residence and both coverage and complete contact tracing (p < 0.001), and intervention period and both coverage and complete contact tracing (p < 0.001).
CONCLUSIONS: Our analysis highlights the promises and the challenges of implementing CHW-led COVID-19 contact tracing programs. To optimize implementation, we recommend using digital tools for data collection with a human-centered design, conducting regular data quality assessments, providing CHWs with sufficient technical knowledge of the data collection system, supervising CHWs to ensure contact tracing guidelines are followed, involving communities in the design and implementation of the intervention, and addressing community member needs and concerns surrounding stigmatization arising from lack of privacy.