Training a Continent: A Process Evaluation of Virtual Training on Infection Prevention and Control in Africa During COVID-19.

BACKGROUND: Strengthening infection prevention and control (IPC) capacity was identified as a key intervention to prepare African Union member states to curb the COVID-19 pandemic. As part of the Africa Taskforce for Coronavirus, which helped implement the Africa Joint Continental Strategy for COVID-19 Outbreak response, the IPC Technical Working Group (IPC TWG) was convened to coordinate the development of IPC core components for preparedness, response, and recovery from COVID-19. As part of the IPC TWG's work, the Africa Centres for Disease Control and Prevention, in collaboration with the Infection Control Africa Network, delivered virtual IPC training sessions targeted to African Union member states. We aimed to undertake a process evaluation of this training to inform and improve both ongoing and future programming. METHODS: The scope of the evaluation was agreed upon through discussion with the training organizers and advisory members and a design workshop. A mixed-methods approach was used; data collection was partly prospective and partly retrospective due to the rapid start of some of the training activities. Existing available data included: usage analytics, the content of questions posed during the webinar and community of practice, and participant feedback survey results. In addition, in-depth qualitative interviews were conducted with a sample of webinar participants. RESULTS: The rapid development of this training was efficient and responsive. The training reached more than 3,000 participants across the 2 rounds, but the numbers varied substantially by location. Participants engaged well during the question period during each webinar, but the asynchronous community of practice was less utilized during the evaluation time frame. Many participants appreciated the African focus of the webinars and gave positive feedback on the practical and context-specific content. CONCLUSIONS: The move toward online training provides an important opportunity to improve IPC across the African continent.

Costs and cost-effectiveness of cervical cancer screening strategies in women living with HIV in Burkina Faso: The HPV in Africa Research Partnership (HARP) study.

INTRODUCTION: This study estimated the costs and incremental cost per case detected of screening strategies for high-grade cervical intraepithelial neoplasia (CIN2+) in women living with HIV (WLHIV) attending HIV clinics in Burkina Faso. METHODS: The direct healthcare provider costs of screening tests (visual inspection with acetic acid (VIA), VIA combined visual inspection with Lugol's iodine (VIA/VILI), cytology and a rapid HPV DNA test (careHPV)) and confirmatory tests (colposcopy, directed biopsy and systematic four-quadrant (4Q) biopsy) were collected alongside the HPV in Africa Research Partnership (HARP) study. A model was developed for a hypothetical cohort of 1000 WLHIV using data on CIN2+ prevalence and the sensitivity of the screening tests. Costs are reported in USD (2019). RESULTS: The study enrolled 554 WLHIV with median age 36 years (inter-quartile range, 31-41) and CIN2+ prevalence of 5.8%. The average cost per screening test ranged from US$3.2 for VIA to US$24.8 for cytology. Compared to VIA alone, the incremental cost per CIN2+ case detected was US$48 for VIA/VILI and US$814 for careHPV. Despite higher costs, careHPV was more sensitive for CIN2+ cases detected compared to VIA/VILI (97% and 56%, respectively). The cost of colposcopy was US$6.6 per person while directed biopsy was US$33.0 and 4Q biopsy was US$48.0. CONCLUSION: Depending on the willingness to pay for the detection of a case of cervical cancer, decision makers in Burkina Faso can consider a variety of cervical cancer screening strategies for WLHIV. While careHPV is more costly, it has the potential to be cost-effective depending on the willingness to pay threshold. Future research should explore the lifetime costs and benefits of cervical cancer screening to enable comparisons with interventions for other diseases.

Taking stock: protocol for evaluating a family planning supply chain intervention in Senegal.

BACKGROUND: In Senegal, only 12% of women of reproductive age in union (WRAU) were using contraceptives and another 29% had an unmet need for contraceptives in 2010-11. One potential barrier to accessing contraceptives is the lack of stock availability in health facilities where women seek them. Multiple supply chain interventions have been piloted in low- and middle-income countries with the aim of improving contraceptive availability in health facilities. However, there is limited evidence on the effect of these interventions on contraceptive availability in facilities, and in turn on family planning use in the population. This evaluation protocol pertains to a supply chain intervention using performance-based contracting for contraceptive distribution that was introduced throughout Senegal between 2012 and 2015. METHODS: This multi-disciplinary research project will include quantitative, qualitative and economic evaluations. Trained researchers in the different disciplines will implement the studies separately but alongside each other, sharing findings throughout the project to inform each other's data collection. A non-randomised study with stepped-wedge design will be used to estimate the effect of the intervention on contraceptive stock availability in health facilities, and on the modern contraceptive prevalence rate among women in Senegal, compared to the current pull-based distribution model used for other commodities. Secondary data from annual Service Provision Assessments and Demographic and Health Surveys will be used for this study. Data on stock availability and monthly family planning consultations over a 4-year period will be collected from 200 health facilities in five regions to perform time series analyses. A process evaluation will be conducted to understand the extent to which the intervention was implemented as originally designed, the acceptability of third-party logisticians within the health system and potential unintended consequences. These will be assessed using monthly indicator data from the implementer and multiple ethnographic methods, including in-depth interviews with key informants and stakeholders at all levels of the distribution system, observations of third-party logisticians and clinic diaries. An economic evaluation will estimate the cost of the intervention, as well as its cost-effectiveness compared to the current supply chain model. DISCUSSION: Given the very limited evidence base, there is an important need for a comprehensive standardised approach to evaluating supply chain management, and distribution specifically. This evaluation will help address this evidence gap by providing rigorous evidence on whether private performance-based contracting for distribution of contraceptives can contribute to improving access to family planning in low- and middle-income countries.

Family planning, antenatal and delivery care: cross-sectional survey evidence on levels of coverage and inequalities by public and private sector in 57 low- and middle-income countries.

OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to assess the role of the private sector in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs). We used Demographic and Health Surveys for 57 countries (2000-2013) to evaluate the private sector's share in providing three reproductive and maternal/newborn health services (family planning, antenatal and delivery care), in total and by socio-economic position. METHODS: We used data from 865 547 women aged 15-49, representing a total of 3 billion people. We defined 'met and unmet need for services' and 'use of appropriate service types' clearly and developed explicit classifications of source and sector of provision. RESULTS: Across the four regions (sub-Saharan Africa, Middle East/Europe, Asia and Latin America), unmet need ranged from 28% to 61% for family planning, 8% to 22% for ANC and 21% to 51% for delivery care. The private-sector share among users of family planning services was 37-39% across regions (overall mean: 37%; median across countries: 41%). The private-sector market share among users of ANC was 13-61% across regions (overall mean: 44%; median across countries: 15%). The private-sector share among appropriate deliveries was 9-56% across regions (overall mean: 40%; median across countries: 14%). For all three healthcare services, women in the richest wealth quintile used private services more than the poorest. Wealth gaps in met need for services were smallest for family planning and largest for delivery care. CONCLUSIONS: The private sector serves substantial numbers of women in LMICs, particularly the richest. To achieve universal health coverage, including adequate quality care, it is imperative to understand this sector, starting with improved data collection on healthcare provision.