The architecture and effect of participation: a systematic review of community participation for communicable disease control and elimination. Implications for malaria elimination

Pacific Malaria Initiative Support Centre, Australian Centre for International and Tropical Health, School of Population Health, University of Queensland, Brisbane, Australia.
Malaria Journal (Impact Factor: 3.49). 08/2011; 10:225. DOI: 10.1186/1475-2875-10-225
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT Community engagement and participation has played a critical role in successful disease control and elimination campaigns in many countries. Despite this, its benefits for malaria control and elimination are yet to be fully realized. This may be due to a limited understanding of the influences on participation in developing countries as well as inadequate investment in infrastructure and resources to support sustainable community participation. This paper reports the findings of an atypical systematic review of 60 years of literature in order to arrive at a more comprehensive awareness of the constructs of participation for communicable disease control and elimination and provide guidance for the current malaria elimination campaign.
Evidence derived from quantitative research was considered both independently and collectively with qualitative research papers and case reports. All papers included in the review were systematically coded using a pre-determined qualitative coding matrix that identified influences on community participation at the individual, household, community and government/civil society levels. Colour coding was also carried out to reflect the key primary health care period in which community participation programmes originated. These processes allowed exhaustive content analysis and synthesis of data in an attempt to realize conceptual development beyond that able to be achieved by individual empirical studies or case reports.
Of the 60 papers meeting the selection criteria, only four studies attempted to determine the effect of community participation on disease transmission. Due to inherent differences in their design, interventions and outcome measures, results could not be compared. However, these studies showed statistically significant reductions in disease incidence or prevalence using various forms of community participation. The use of locally selected volunteers provided with adequate training, supervision and resources are common and important elements of the success of the interventions in these studies. In addition, qualitative synthesis of all 60 papers elucidates the complex architecture of community participation for communicable disease control and elimination which is presented herein.
The current global malaria elimination campaign calls for a health systems strengthening approach to provide an enabling environment for programmes in developing countries. In order to realize the benefits of this approach it is vital to provide adequate investment in the 'people' component of health systems and understand the multi-level factors that influence their participation. The challenges of strengthening this component of health systems are discussed, as is the importance of ensuring that current global malaria elimination efforts do not derail renewed momentum towards the comprehensive primary health care approach. It is recommended that the application of the results of this systematic review be considered for other diseases of poverty in order to harmonize efforts at building 'competent communities' for communicable disease control and optimising health system effectiveness.

Download full-text


Available from: Lisa Fitzgerald, Jun 21, 2015
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: As a key principle of Primary Health Care (PHC) and Health Systems Reform, community participation has a prominent place in the current global dialogue. Participation is not only promoted in the context of provision and utilization of health services. Advocates also highlight participation as a key factor in the wider context of the importance of social determinants of health and health as a human right. However, the evidence that directly links community participation to improved health status is not strong. Its absence continues to be a barrier for governments, funding agencies and health professionals to promote community participation. The purpose of this article is to review research seeking to link community participation with improved health status outcomes programmes. It updates a review undertaken by the author in 2009. The search includes published articles in the English language and examines the evidence of in the context of health care delivery including services and promotion where health professionals have defined the community’s role. The results show that in most studies community participation is defined as the intervention seeking to identify a direct causal link between participation and improved health status modeled on Randomized Control studies (RCT). The majority of studies show it is not possible to examine the link because there is no standard definition of ‘community’ and ‘participation’. Where links are found, they are situation-specific and are unpredictable and not generalizable. In the discussion, an alternative research framework is proposed arguing that community participation is better understood as a process. Once concrete interventions are identified (i.e. improved birth outcomes) then the processes producing improved health status outcomes can be examined. These processes may include and can lead to community uptake, ownership and sustainability for health improvements. However, more research is needed to ensure their validity.
    Health Policy and Planning 10/2014; 2(Supple)::ii98–ii106. DOI:10.1093/heapol/czu076 · 3.00 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Lymphoedema and hydrocoele are the two most common clinical manifestations of lymphatic filariasis (LF). In order to effectively target morbidity management strategies, more information is rapidly needed on morbidity burden across all endemic countries. The purpose of this study was to develop and test an SMS tool (MeasureSMS) which enables trained community-based health workers to report basic information on all cases they identified. The tool was trialled in Chikwawa district, Malawi and Ahanta West district, Ghana in 2014. Salaried health surveillance assistants (HSAs) identified and reported cases in Malawi whereas volunteer community health workers (CHWs) were used in Ghana. Health workers were trained in recognising lymphoedema and hydrocoeles and submitting individual case data using MeasureSMS, after which they undertook a LF morbidity survey. After the reporting period, a random sample of reported cases was visited by a physician to verify the health workers' diagnoses. The proportion of correctly diagnosed cases i.e. the positive predictive value (PPV) was then calculated. HSAs in Malawi successfully reported 256 unique cases by SMS from 107 communities (166 hydrocoele, 88 lymphoedema, 2 with both), resulting in an estimated adult prevalence of 17.7 per 10,000 and 33.0 per 10,000 for lymphoedema and hydrocoele respectively. In Ghana, despite being less experienced in using SMS, CHWs successfully reported 360 unique cases by SMS from 33 communities (169 hydrocoele, 185 lymphoedema, 6 with both), resulting in an estimated adult prevalence of 76.9 per 10,000 and 70.5 per 10,000 adults for lymphoedema and hydrocoele respectively. The verification exercise resulted in a PPV for lymphoedema and hydrocoele diagnosis of 90 % (n = 42, 95 % CI 76.5 - 96.9) and 92 % (n = 49, 95 % CI 79.5 - 97.4) in Malawi and 94 % (n = 34, 95 % CI 78.9 %-99.0 %) and 47 % (n = 59, 35.1 %-61.7 %) in Ghana, indicating that non-invasive methods for diagnosing hydrocoeles needed to be further emphasised. The study concludes that given the appropriate education and tools, community-based health workers are exceptionally well-placed to participate in quantifying LF morbidity burden, and other NTDs with observable symptoms. This concept has the potential to enable national programmes to more effectively monitor their community impact in an efficient, timely and cost-effective way.
    BMC Infectious Diseases 05/2015; 15(1):214. DOI:10.1186/s12879-015-0946-4 · 2.56 Impact Factor
  • Source