确定障碍和潜在解决方案,改善肯尼亚中部地区公平获得社区眼科服务的机会:一项快速探索性顺序混合方法研究

Luke Allen, Sarah Karanja, Michael Gichangi, Cosmas Bunywera, Emmaculate Muturi, Dickson Gachobi, Purity Kathure, Elizabeth Mutile Muasa, Lorna Mutwiri, Lorna Kajuju, Faith Kagwiria, Benjamin Ntabathia, Hillary Rono, David Macleod, Min Jung Kim, Malebogo Tlhajoane, Matthew J Burton, Jacqueline Ramke, Nigel M Bolster, Andrew Bastawrous
{"title":"确定障碍和潜在解决方案,改善肯尼亚中部地区公平获得社区眼科服务的机会:一项快速探索性顺序混合方法研究","authors":"Luke Allen, Sarah Karanja, Michael Gichangi, Cosmas Bunywera, Emmaculate Muturi, Dickson Gachobi, Purity Kathure, Elizabeth Mutile Muasa, Lorna Mutwiri, Lorna Kajuju, Faith Kagwiria, Benjamin Ntabathia, Hillary Rono, David Macleod, Min Jung Kim, Malebogo Tlhajoane, Matthew J Burton, Jacqueline Ramke, Nigel M Bolster, Andrew Bastawrous","doi":"10.1101/2024.03.13.24304156","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Background: Recent research has found that less than half of people identified with an eye problem in Meru countys screening programme were able to access care, with younger adults being the least likely to receive the care they needed. We aimed to interview and survey members of this \"left-behind\" group to explore barriers and identify potential solutions using a rapid mixed-methods approach. Methods: First, we conducted interviews to explore perceptions of barriers and potential solutions. Next, we asked a representative sample to rank the suggested solutions by likely impact. Finally, we held a multistakeholder meeting to identify which of the top-ranked interventions offered the best balance of impact, feasibility, cost, and potential risks. We used a deductive matrix and thematic analysis to rapidly analyse the interview data. Results: We conducted 67 interviews. Barriers to access included long queues, conflicting work engagements, and lack of clear information. Proposed solutions focused on reducing queue lengths, providing better counselling and clinic information, holding mop-up clinics, and maintaining adequate stocks & supplies. We conducted ranking surveys with 401 additional people from the left-behind group. All proposed solutions were ranked at moderately-to-highly likely to improve equitable access. Fifteen people attended the multistakeholder meeting, including community representatives. Workshop participants unanimously selected enhanced counselling and SMS reminders as the interventions that offered the best balance of impact, risk, cost, and feasibility. The other proposed solutions were deemed impractical or unaffordable. Conclusion: Rapid mixed-methods and multistakeholder collaboration were used to identify a range of potential service modifications that will be implemented within the ongoing programme. Our approach was centred on the experiences and perceptions of those who face the highest barriers to care.","PeriodicalId":501556,"journal":{"name":"medRxiv - Health Systems and Quality Improvement","volume":"148 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-03-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Identifying barriers and potential solutions to improve equitable access to community eye services in central Kenya: a rapid exploratory sequential mixed methods study\",\"authors\":\"Luke Allen, Sarah Karanja, Michael Gichangi, Cosmas Bunywera, Emmaculate Muturi, Dickson Gachobi, Purity Kathure, Elizabeth Mutile Muasa, Lorna Mutwiri, Lorna Kajuju, Faith Kagwiria, Benjamin Ntabathia, Hillary Rono, David Macleod, Min Jung Kim, Malebogo Tlhajoane, Matthew J Burton, Jacqueline Ramke, Nigel M Bolster, Andrew Bastawrous\",\"doi\":\"10.1101/2024.03.13.24304156\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Background: Recent research has found that less than half of people identified with an eye problem in Meru countys screening programme were able to access care, with younger adults being the least likely to receive the care they needed. We aimed to interview and survey members of this \\\"left-behind\\\" group to explore barriers and identify potential solutions using a rapid mixed-methods approach. Methods: First, we conducted interviews to explore perceptions of barriers and potential solutions. Next, we asked a representative sample to rank the suggested solutions by likely impact. Finally, we held a multistakeholder meeting to identify which of the top-ranked interventions offered the best balance of impact, feasibility, cost, and potential risks. We used a deductive matrix and thematic analysis to rapidly analyse the interview data. Results: We conducted 67 interviews. Barriers to access included long queues, conflicting work engagements, and lack of clear information. Proposed solutions focused on reducing queue lengths, providing better counselling and clinic information, holding mop-up clinics, and maintaining adequate stocks & supplies. We conducted ranking surveys with 401 additional people from the left-behind group. All proposed solutions were ranked at moderately-to-highly likely to improve equitable access. Fifteen people attended the multistakeholder meeting, including community representatives. Workshop participants unanimously selected enhanced counselling and SMS reminders as the interventions that offered the best balance of impact, risk, cost, and feasibility. The other proposed solutions were deemed impractical or unaffordable. Conclusion: Rapid mixed-methods and multistakeholder collaboration were used to identify a range of potential service modifications that will be implemented within the ongoing programme. Our approach was centred on the experiences and perceptions of those who face the highest barriers to care.\",\"PeriodicalId\":501556,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"medRxiv - Health Systems and Quality Improvement\",\"volume\":\"148 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-03-15\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"medRxiv - Health Systems and Quality Improvement\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1101/2024.03.13.24304156\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"medRxiv - Health Systems and Quality Improvement","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1101/2024.03.13.24304156","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:最近的研究发现,在梅鲁县的眼科筛查项目中,只有不到一半的眼疾患者能够得到治疗,其中年轻人最不可能得到所需的治疗。我们的目标是采访和调查这一 "被遗忘 "群体的成员,通过快速混合方法探讨障碍并找出潜在的解决方案。方法:首先,我们进行了访谈,以探讨对障碍和潜在解决方案的看法。然后,我们要求一个具有代表性的样本按照可能产生的影响对建议的解决方案进行排序。最后,我们召开了一次多方利益相关者会议,以确定哪些排名靠前的干预措施能够在影响、可行性、成本和潜在风险之间取得最佳平衡。我们使用演绎矩阵和主题分析法对访谈数据进行了快速分析。结果我们进行了 67 次访谈。获取信息的障碍包括排队时间过长、工作任务冲突以及缺乏明确的信息。建议的解决方案主要集中在缩短排队时间、提供更好的咨询和诊所信息、举办清理诊所以及保持足够的库存&用品。我们又对留守群体中的 401 人进行了排名调查。所有建议的解决方案都被评为 "中度到高度有可能改善公平就医"。包括社区代表在内的 15 人参加了多方利益相关者会议。研讨会与会者一致认为,加强咨询和短信提醒是在影响、风险、成本和可行性之间取得最佳平衡的干预措施。其他建议的解决方案被认为不切实际或无法负担。结论我们采用快速混合方法和多方利益相关者合作的方式,确定了一系列可能的服务改进措施,这些措施将在正在进行的计划中实施。我们的方法以那些面临最大护理障碍的人的经验和看法为中心。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Identifying barriers and potential solutions to improve equitable access to community eye services in central Kenya: a rapid exploratory sequential mixed methods study
Background: Recent research has found that less than half of people identified with an eye problem in Meru countys screening programme were able to access care, with younger adults being the least likely to receive the care they needed. We aimed to interview and survey members of this "left-behind" group to explore barriers and identify potential solutions using a rapid mixed-methods approach. Methods: First, we conducted interviews to explore perceptions of barriers and potential solutions. Next, we asked a representative sample to rank the suggested solutions by likely impact. Finally, we held a multistakeholder meeting to identify which of the top-ranked interventions offered the best balance of impact, feasibility, cost, and potential risks. We used a deductive matrix and thematic analysis to rapidly analyse the interview data. Results: We conducted 67 interviews. Barriers to access included long queues, conflicting work engagements, and lack of clear information. Proposed solutions focused on reducing queue lengths, providing better counselling and clinic information, holding mop-up clinics, and maintaining adequate stocks & supplies. We conducted ranking surveys with 401 additional people from the left-behind group. All proposed solutions were ranked at moderately-to-highly likely to improve equitable access. Fifteen people attended the multistakeholder meeting, including community representatives. Workshop participants unanimously selected enhanced counselling and SMS reminders as the interventions that offered the best balance of impact, risk, cost, and feasibility. The other proposed solutions were deemed impractical or unaffordable. Conclusion: Rapid mixed-methods and multistakeholder collaboration were used to identify a range of potential service modifications that will be implemented within the ongoing programme. Our approach was centred on the experiences and perceptions of those who face the highest barriers to care.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信