Search

Abstract Background Undiagnosed and untreated hypertension is a main driver of cardiovascular disease and disproportionately affects persons living with HIV (PLHIV) in low- and middle-income countries. Across sub-Saharan Africa, guideline application to screen and manage hypertension among PLHIV is inconsistent due to poor service readiness, low health worker motivation, and limited integration of hypertension screening and management within HIV care services. In Mozambique, where the adult HIV prevalence is over 13%, an estimated 39% of adults have hypertension. As the only scaled chronic care service in the county, the HIV treatment platform presents an opportunity to standardize and scale hypertension care services. Low-cost, multi-component systems-level strategies such as the Systems Analysis and Improvement Approach (SAIA) have been found effective at integrating hypertension and HIV services to improve the effectiveness of hypertension care delivery for PLHIV, reduce drop-offs in care, and improve service quality. To build off lessons learned from a recently completed cluster randomized trial (SAIA-HTN) and establish a robust evidence base on the effectiveness of SAIA at scale, we evaluated a scaled-delivery model of SAIA (SCALE SAIA-HTN) using existing district health management structures to facilitate SAIA across six districts of Maputo Province, Mozambique. Methods This study employs a stepped-wedge design with randomization at the district level. The SAIA strategy will be “scaled up” with delivery by district health supervisors (rather than research staff) and will be “scaled out” via expansion to Southern Mozambique, to 18 facilities across six districts in Maputo Province. SCALE SAIA-HTN will be introduced over three, 9-month waves of intensive intervention, where technical support will be provided to facilities and district managers by study team members from the Mozambican National Institute of Health. Our evaluation of SCALE SAIA-HTN will be guided by the RE-AIM framework and will seek to estimate the budget impact from the payer’s perspective. Discussion SAIA packages user-friendly systems engineering tools to support decision-making by frontline health workers and to identify low-cost, contextually relevant improvement strategies. By integrating SAIA delivery into routine management structures, this pragmatic trial will determine an effective strategy for national scale-up and inform program planning. Trial registration ClinicalTrials.gov NCT05002322 (registered 02/15/2023).

Abstract Background Healthcare systems in low-resource settings need simple, low-cost interventions to improve services and address gaps in care. Though routine data provide opportunities to guide these efforts, frontline providers are rarely engaged in analyzing them for facility-level decision making. The Systems Analysis and Improvement Approach (SAIA) is an evidence-based, multi-component implementation strategy that engages providers in use of facility-level data to promote systems-level thinking and quality improvement (QI) efforts within multi-step care cascades. SAIA was originally developed to address HIV care in resource-limited settings but has since been adapted to a variety of clinical care systems including cervical cancer screening, mental health treatment, and hypertension management, among others; and across a variety of settings in sub-Saharan Africa and the USA. We aimed to extend the growing body of SAIA research by defining the core elements of SAIA using established specification approaches and thus improve reproducibility, guide future adaptations, and lay the groundwork to define its mechanisms of action. Methods Specification of the SAIA strategy was undertaken over 12 months by an expert panel of SAIA-researchers, implementing agents and stakeholders using a three-round, modified nominal group technique approach to match core SAIA components to the Expert Recommendations for Implementing Change (ERIC) list of distinct implementation strategies. Core implementation strategies were then specified according to Proctor’s recommendations for specifying and reporting, followed by synthesis of data on related implementation outcomes linked to the SAIA strategy across projects. Results Based on this review and clarification of the operational definitions of the components of the SAIA, the four components of SAIA were mapped to 13 ERIC strategies. SAIA strategy meetings encompassed external facilitation, organization of provider implementation meetings, and provision of ongoing consultation. Cascade analysis mapped to three ERIC strategies: facilitating relay of clinical data to providers, use of audit and feedback of routine data with healthcare teams, and modeling and simulation of change. Process mapping matched to local needs assessment, local consensus discussions and assessment of readiness and identification of barriers and facilitators. Finally, continuous quality improvement encompassed tailoring strategies, developing a formal implementation blueprint, cyclical tests of change, and purposefully re-examining the implementation process. Conclusions Specifying the components of SAIA provides improved conceptual clarity to enhance reproducibility for other researchers and practitioners interested in applying the SAIA across novel settings.

Abstract Introduction In 2018, Mozambique's Ministry of Health launched a guideline for a nationwide implementation of eight differentiated service delivery models to optimize HIV service delivery and achieve universal coverage of HIV care and treatment. The models were (1) Fast‐track, (2) Three‐month Antiretrovirals Dispensing, (3) Community Antiretroviral Therapy Groups, (4) Adherence Clubs, (5) Family‐approach, and three one‐stop shop models for (6) Tuberculosis, (7) Maternal and Child Health, and (8) Adolescent‐friendly Health Services. This study identified drivers of implementation success and failure across these differentiated service delivery models. Methods Twenty in‐depth individual interviews were conducted with managers and providers from the Ministry of Health and implementing partners from all levels of the health system between July and September 2021. National‐level participants were based in the capital city of Maputo, and participants at provincial, district and health facility levels were from Sofala province, a purposively selected setting. The Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR) guided data collection and thematic analysis. Deductively selected constructs were assessed while allowing for additional themes to emerge inductively. Results The CFIR constructs of Relative Advantage, Complexity, Patient Needs and Resources, and Reflecting and Evaluating were identified as drivers of implementation, whereas Available Resources and Access to Knowledge and Information were identified as barriers. Fast‐track and Three‐month Antiretrovirals Dispensing models were deemed easier to implement and more effective in reducing workload. Adherence Clubs and Community Antiretroviral Therapy Groups were believed to be less preferred by clients in urban settings. COVID‐19 (an inductive theme) improved acceptance and uptake of individual differentiated service delivery models that reduced client visits, but it temporarily interrupted the implementation of group models. Conclusions This study described important determinants to be addressed or leveraged for the successful implementation of differentiated service delivery models in Mozambique. The models were considered advantageous overall for the health system and clients when compared with the standard of care. However, successful implementation requires resources and ongoing training for frontline providers. COVID‐19 expedited individual models by loosening the inclusion criteria; this experience can be leveraged to optimize the design and implementation of differentiated service delivery models in Mozambique and other countries.