Research activity, facilitators and barriers amongst trainee and early-career family physicians in sub-Saharan Africa: A cross-sectional survey.

BACKGROUND:  Primary health care systems in sub-Saharan Africa (SSA) need context-specific evidence to address current challenges. Increased family physician (FP) research activity could help fill this gap. AIM:  To describe the research activity, facilitators and barriers amongst AfriWon Renaissance members. SETTING:  An online programme was designed to improve research activity amongst members of AfriWon Renaissance, an organisation of early-career and trainee FPs in SSA. This article provides a baseline description of their research activity. METHODS:  All AfriWon Renaissance members were invited to participate in an online survey. A content-validated study tool assessed research activity, including participation in research meetings, engagement in research mentorship, number of projects and published articles. Facilitators and barriers were assessed via Likert scales and two open-ended questions. The researchers conducted descriptive statistics using Epi Info 7, a content analysis of open-ended responses and triangulation. RESULTS:  Amongst the 77 respondents, 49 (63.6%) were still in training. Over two-thirds (71.4%) had participated in a research discussion in the past month. Whilst more than half (63.5%) reported having a manuscript under development, only 26 (33.8%) reported a recent publication. Nearly all (94.8%) intend to continue research in their FP careers. The most common facilitators were the institutional requirement to conduct research and having supportive peers and mentors. The most predominant barriers were time constraints and a lack of training on analysis. CONCLUSION:  There is a cohort of committed young FP researchers who would benefit from efforts to address identified barriers and support for their ongoing research activity, in order to increase primary care research outputs in SSA.

Implementation of Online Research Training and Mentorship for Sub-Saharan African Family Physicians.

Background: To improve the delivery and reach of primary health care, a robust scientific foundation driven by research is needed. However, few family physicians conduct research, especially in sub-Saharan Africa. Early-career and trainee family physicians are a key part of the primary care research pipeline and have an expressed need for research training and mentorship. Objective: AfriWon Research Collaborative (ARC) was an online research training and mentorship pilot program whose objective was to increase research activity among participants from AfriWon Renaissance, the family physician young doctors' movement of sub-Saharan Africa. Methods: ARC utilized a 10-module online curriculum, supported by peer and faculty e-mentorship, to guide participants through writing a research protocol. The feasibility, acceptability, and scalability of this program was evaluated via a mixed-methods RE-AIM-guided process evaluation using descriptive statistics and inductive/deductive thematic analysis. Findings: The pilot reached participants from Botswana, Democratic Republic of the Congo, Ghana, Nigeria and Sierra Leone and was adopted by mentors from 11 countries across three continents. Four of the 10 pilot participants completed a full research protocol by the end of the six-month core program. Seven out of the 10 participants, and nine out of the 15 mentors, planned to continue their mentorship relationships beyond the core program. The program helped instill a positive research culture in active participants. Some participants' and mentors' engagement with the ARC program was limited by confusion over mentorship structure and role, poor network connectivity, and personal life challenges. Conclusions: Online research training and mentorship for trainee and early-career family physicians in sub-Saharan Africa is feasible and acceptable to participants and mentors. Similar programs must pay careful attention to mentorship training and provide a flexible yet clearly organized structure for mentee-mentor engagement. Additional work is needed to determine optimal implementation strategies and ability to scale.

Magnitude of missed opportunities for prediabetes screening among non-diabetic adults attending the family practice clinic in Western Nigeria: Implication for diabetes prevention.

BACKGROUND: For many decades, hypertension guidelines recommended dual-arm blood pressure measurement. However, this practice is poor in Nigeria and its significance is largely unidentified. Hence, this study was done to determine the point prevalence of inter-arm blood pressure difference and its relationship with hypertension and diabetes mellitus. METHODS: A cross-sectional study was conducted among 214 respondents at the general outpatient clinic of a tertiary hospital in Nigeria. Demographic characteristics and anthropometric indices were obtained. Blood pressure readings were obtained through sequentially repeated measurements in respondents' arms. RESULTS: One-hundred and eighty-six respondents had complete data given a completion rate of 86.9%. Systolic blood pressure was higher on the right and left arm in 102 (54.8%) and 56 (30.1%) of the respondents, respectively. Diastolic blood pressure was higher on the right and left arm in 73 (39.2%) and 63 (33.9%) of the respondents, respectively. The overall prevalence of significant systolic inter-arm difference (≥ 10 mmHg) and diastolic inter-arm difference (≥ 10 mmHg) were 24.2% and 18.8%, respectively. Significant systolic inter-arm difference (p = 0.033) and diastolic inter-arm difference (p = 0.01) were significantly more among respondents with hypertension and/or diabetes mellitus. CONCLUSION: The blood pressure readings in both arms were different among the majority of the respondents, being higher on the right arm in many of them. The prevalence of significant inter-arm difference was high in the unselected primary care patients studied especially among patients with hypertension and/or diabetes mellitus. Blood pressure measurement in both arms should become a routine practice during initial patients' visits in primary care.

The role of the family physician in the fight against Coronavirus disease 2019 in Nigeria.

The Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has been ravaging Nigeria and the world with increasing morbidity and mortality. Despite efforts by the Nigerian government implemented through the Nigerian Centre for Disease Control (NCDC) to reduce the scourge of the disease through public enlightenment and regular updates, the number of new cases and mortalities from COVID-19 are still increasing. Family physicians (FPs) who are the first contact of care for most patients accessing private and public health facilities in Nigeria have been working tirelessly to reduce the scourge of the pandemic in Nigeria. They continuously update themselves through regular webinars and online resources and guidelines provided by the Society of Family Physicians of Nigeria (SOFPON). Measures adopted by FPs across the country in the fight against the scourge include triaging patients as they present to the family medicine clinics; health education and enlightenment of the populace; and ensuring social distancing, regular handwashing and compulsory use of face mask by both physicians and patients during clinical consultations. Other measures include incorporating family-focused behavioural interventions in their practice, home-based care to reduce the number of persons visiting the hospital, telemedicine and Hospice and palliative care services to the elderly and terminally ill. In conclusion, FPs in Nigeria are helping to reduce the scourge of COVID-19 through patient education and innovative healthcare delivery that does not put patients at increased risk of the disease whilst promptly recognising potential COVID-19 patients and referring them for early diagnosis and treatment.

Variation between pragmatic and standardised blood pressure measurements in a Nigerian primary care clinic.

BACKGROUND: A significant difference in the blood pressure (BP) value of a patient taken by different health workers has been a subject of discussion among health workers. This study investigated the variations between usual-care and guideline-concordant BP measurement protocols and evaluated the implications of the disparities on diagnosis and treatment decision. METHODS: A cross-sectional study was conducted among 206 participants. The usual-care and guideline-concordant BP readings taken from each participant by the regular clinic nurses and research-trained nurses, respectively, were obtained. RESULTS: Majority of the regular clinic nurses following the usual-care protocol used the left arm for BP measurement (59.7%). The systolic BP (SBP) and diastolic BP (DBP) readings were higher on the right arm in 55.3% and 39.2% of the participants, respectively. The mean guideline-concordant BP was 7.67 mmHg higher than the mean usual-care for SBP (p ≤ 0.05) and 7.14 mmHg higher for DBP (p ≤ 0.05). The proportion of participants classified as having hypertension and uncontrolled BP was 11.8% and 15.0% lower when using usual-care BP compared to guideline-concordant BP, respectively. Fifty-one (24.8%) respondents were advised incorrect treatment based on usual-care BP measurement. The Bland-Altman plot showed that limits of agreement were wider than within the 10 mmHg clinical reference range and unacceptable for clinical purposes. CONCLUSION: The usual-care and guideline-concordant BP measurement protocols were significantly different, and the disparity had significant consequences on the diagnosis and treatment of hypertension. Health workers should strictly adhere to the guidelines on BP measurement to avoid mismanagement of patients.

Variation between pragmatic and standardised blood pressure measurements in a Nigerian primary care clinic

Background: A significant difference in the blood pressure (BP) value of a patient taken by different health workers has been a subject of discussion among health workers. This study investigated the variations between usual-care and guideline-concordant BP measurement protocols and evaluated the implications of the disparities on diagnosis and treatment decision.Methods: A cross-sectional study was conducted among 206 participants. The usual-care and guideline-concordant BP readings taken from each participant by the regular clinic nurses and research-trained nurses, respectively, were obtained.Results: Majority of the regular clinic nurses following the usual-care protocol used the left arm for BP measurement (59.7%). The systolic BP (SBP) and diastolic BP (DBP) readings were higher on the right arm in 55.3% and 39.2% of the participants, respectively. The mean guideline-concordant BP was 7.67 mmHg higher than the mean usual-care for SBP (p ≤ 0.05) and 7.14 mmHg higher for DBP (p ≤ 0.05). The proportion of participants classified as having hypertension and uncontrolled BP was 11.8% and 15.0% lower when using usual-care BP compared to guideline-concordant BP, respectively. Fifty-one (24.8%) respondents were advised incorrect treatment based on usual-care BP measurement. The Bland-Altman plot showed that limits of agreement were wider than within the 10 mmHg clinical reference range and unacceptable for clinical purposes.Conclusion: The usual-care and guideline-concordant BP measurement protocols were significantly different, and the disparity had significant consequences on the diagnosis and treatment of hypertension. Health workers should strictly adhere to the guidelines on BP measurement to avoid mismanagement of patients