...
首页> 外文期刊>BMC Public Health >The value of monitoring data in a process evaluation of hygiene behaviour change in Community Health Clubs to explain findings from a cluster-randomised controlled trial in Rwanda
【24h】

The value of monitoring data in a process evaluation of hygiene behaviour change in Community Health Clubs to explain findings from a cluster-randomised controlled trial in Rwanda

机译:社区健康俱乐部卫生行为变化过程评估中监测数据的价值,以解释卢旺达集群随机对照试验的结果

获取原文

摘要

BACKGROUND:A cluster-Randomised Controlled Trial evaluation of the impact of the Community Health Clubs (CHCs) in the Community Based Environmental Health Promotion Programme in Rwanda in 2015 appeared to find little uptake of 7 hygiene indicators 1 year after the end of the intervention, and low impact on prevention of diarrhoea and stunting.METHODS:Monitoring data was revisited through detailed community records with all the expected inputs, outputs and external determinants analysed for fidelity to the research protocol. Five household inventory observations were taken over a 40-month period including 2 years after the end of the cRCT in a random selection of the 50 intervention CHCs and data compared to that of the trial. Focus Group Discussion with all Environmental Health Officers of the Ministry of Health provided context to understand the long-term community dynamics of hygiene behaviour change.RESULTS:It was found that the intervention had been jeopardised by external determinants with only 54% fidelity to protocol. By the end of the designated intervention period in June 2014, the treatment had reached only 58% of households with 41% average attendance at training sessions by the 4056 registered members and 51% mean completion rate of 20+ sessions. Therefore only 10% of 50 CHCs provided the full so-called 'Classic' training as per-protocol. However, sustainability of the CHCs was high, with all 50 being active 2 years after the end of the cRCT and over 80% uptake of recommended practices of the same 7 key indicators as the trial was achieved by 2017.CONCLUSIONS:The cRCT conclusion that the case study of Rusizi District does not encourage the use of the CHC model for scaling up, raises concerns over the possible misrepresentation of the potential of the holistic CHC model to achieve health impact in a more realistic time frame. It also questions the appropriateness of apparently rigorous quantitative research, such as the cluster-Randomised Controlled Trial as conducted in Rusizi District, to adequately assess community dynamics in complex interventions.
机译:背景:2015年卢旺达社区环境卫生促进计划中的社区健康俱乐部(CHC)对社区环境健康促进计划的影响的集群随机对照试验评估似乎在干预结束结束后1年内发现了7年的7卫生指标。对预防腹泻和衰退的影响很低。方法:通过详细的社区记录重访,并在研究方案中分析保真度的所有预期投入,产出和外部决定因素进行了预订。在CRCT在随机选择50个干预CHCS和数据时,将五个家庭库存观察在40个月内完成了40个月的时间,包括在50个干预核证和数据的随机选择。重点小组讨论与卫生部的所有环境卫生官员提供了背景,以了解卫生行为变革的长期社区动态。结果:结果表明,外部决定因素仅受到议定书只有54%的保险费的干预措施。到2014年6月指定干预期结束时,该治疗仅达到了58%的家庭,在4056名注册会员中培训课程平均培训课程有41%,51%的平均完成率为20多个会议。因此,只有50个CHC的10%提供了全协议的全面所谓的“经典”培训。然而,CHCs的可持续性很高,所有50都在CRCT结束后有效2年,并且在2017年试验中取得了同一7个关键指标的推荐实践超过了80%.CRCT结论对Rusizi区的案例研究不鼓励使用CHC模型进行缩放,提出对整体CHC模型可能误唤醒的疑惑,以实现更现实的时间范围内的健康影响。它还提出了明显严谨的定量研究的适当性,例如在Rusizi区进行的集群随机对照试验,以充分评估复杂的干预措施的社区动态。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号