Strengthening primary care for diabetes and hypertension in Eswatini: study protocol for a nationwide cluster-randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Diabetes and hypertension are increasingly important population health challenges in Eswatini. Prior to this project, healthcare for these conditions was primarily provided through physician-led teams at tertiary care facilities and accessed by only a small fraction of people living with diabetes or hypertension. This trial tests and evaluates two community-based healthcare service models implemented at the national level, which involve health care personnel at primary care facilities and utilize the country's public sector community health worker cadre (the rural health motivators [RHMs]) to help generate demand for care. METHODS: This study is a cluster-randomized controlled trial with two treatment arms and one control arm. The unit of randomization is a primary healthcare facility along with all RHMs (and their corresponding service areas) assigned to the facility. A total of 84 primary healthcare facilities were randomized in a 1:1:1 ratio to the three study arms. The first treatment arm implements differentiated service delivery (DSD) models at the clinic and community levels with the objective of improving treatment uptake and adherence among clients with diabetes or hypertension. In the second treatment arm, community distribution points (CDPs), which previously targeted clients living with human immunodeficiency virus, extend their services to clients with diabetes or hypertension by allowing them to pick up medications and obtain routine nurse-led follow-up visits in their community rather than at the healthcare facility. In both treatment arms, RHMs visit households regularly, screen clients at risk, provide personalized counseling, and refer clients to either primary care clinics or the nearest CDP. In the control arm, primary care clinics provide diabetes and hypertension care services but without the involvement of RHMs and the implementation of DSD models or CDPs. The primary endpoints are mean glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c) and systolic blood pressure among adults aged 40 years and older living with diabetes or hypertension, respectively. These endpoints will be assessed through a household survey in the RHM service areas. In addition to the health impact evaluation, we will conduct studies on cost-effectiveness, syndemics, and the intervention's implementation processes. DISCUSSION: This study has the ambition to assist the Eswatini government in selecting the most effective delivery model for diabetes and hypertension care. The evidence generated with this national-level cluster-randomized controlled trial may also prove useful to policy makers in the wider Sub-Saharan African region. TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT04183413. Trial registration date: December 3, 2019.

The Evaluation of a Family-Engagement Approach to Increase Physical Activity, Healthy Nutrition, and Well-Being in Children and Their Parents.

Prevention programs often are directed at either parents or children separately, thereby ignoring the intergenerational aspect of health and well-being. Engaging the family is likely to improve both the uptake and long-term impact of health behavior change. We integrated an intergenerational approach into a frequently used shared assessment tool for children's care needs. The current study's aim was 2-fold: to monitor this family-engagement tool's effects on both children and their parents' health behaviors and well-being, and to examine the different dynamics of health behavioral change within a family. Method: We followed 12 children ages 10-14 years and their parents for 12 weeks using an explanatory mixed-methods design comprising interviews, questionnaires, and an n-of-1 study. During home visits at the beginning and end of the study, we interviewed children and their parents about their expectations and experiences, and measured their height and weight. Furthermore, we collected secondary data, such as notes from phone and email conversations with parents, as well as evaluation forms from professionals. In the n-of-1 study, families were prompted three times a week to describe their day and report on their vegetable intake, minutes of exercise, health behavior goals, and psychosomatic well-being. The interviews, notes, and evaluation forms were analyzed using qualitative content analyses. For the n-of-1 study, we performed multi-level time-series analyses across all families to assess changes in outcomes after consulting the family-engagement tool. Using regression analyses with autocorrelation correction, we examined changes within individual families. Results: Five child-mother dyads and three child-mother-father triads provided sufficient pre- and post-data. The mean minutes of children's physical activity significantly increased, and mothers felt more energetic, but other outcomes did not change. In consultations related to overweight, the family-engagement tool often was used without setting specific or family goals. Conclusions: The family-engagement approach elicited positive effects on some families' health and well-being. For multifaceted health problems, such as obesity, family-engagement approaches should focus on setting specific goals and strategies in different life domains, and for different family members.

Syndemic contexts: findings from a review of research on non-communicable diseases and interviews with experts.

BACKGROUND: Syndemics are characterized by the clustering of two or more health conditions, their adverse interaction, and contextual factors that create the conditions for clustering and/or interaction that worsens health outcomes. Studying syndemics entails drawing on diverse disciplines, including epidemiology and anthropology. This often means collaboration between researchers with different scholarly backgrounds, who share and - ideally - integrate their findings. OBJECTIVE: This article examines how context within syndemics has been defined and studied. METHODS: A literature review of empirical studies focusing on syndemics involving non-communicable diseases (NCDs) and mental health conditions was conducted and the full text of 13 articles was analyzed. The review was followed-up with semi-structured interviews with 11 expert researchers working in the field. RESULTS: The review and interviews highlighted a relatively consistent definition of syndemics. The reviewed studies of NCD-related syndemics tended to focus on micro-level context, suggesting a need to analyze further underlying structural factors. In their syndemics research, respondents described working with other disciplines and, although there were some challenges, welcomed greater disciplinary diversity. Methodological gaps, including a lack of mixed methods and longitudinal studies, were identified, for which further interdisciplinary collaborations would be beneficial. CONCLUSIONS: NCD-related syndemics research would benefit from further analysis of structural factors and the interconnections between syndemic components across multiple levels, together with more ambitious research designs integrating quantitative and qualitative methods. Research on the COVID-19 pandemic can benefit from a syndemics approach, particularly to understand vulnerability and the unequal impacts of this public health crisis.