Browsing by Author "Chirehwa, Maxwell"

Now showing 1 - 3 of 3
  • Thumbnail Image
    Item
    Open Access
    Assessment of quality of obstetric care in Zimbabwe using the standard primipara
    (BioMed Central, 2018-06-04) Guzha, Bothwell T; Magwali, Thulani L; Mateveke, Bismark; Chirehwa, Maxwell; Nyandoro, George; Munjanja, Stephen P
    Background To improve maternity services in any country, there is need to monitor the quality of obstetric care. There is usually disparity of obstetric care and outcomes in most countries among women giving birth in different obstetric units. However, comparing the quality of obstetric care is difficult because of heterogeneous population characteristics and the difference in prevalence of complications. The concept of the standard primipara was introduced as a tool to control for these various confounding factors. This concept was used to compare the quality of obstetric care among districts in different geographical locations in Zimbabwe. Methods This was a substudy of the Zimbabwe Maternal and Perinatal Mortality Study. In the main study, cluster sampling was done with the provinces as clusters and 11 districts were randomly selected with one from each of the nine provinces and two from the largest province. This database was used to identify the standard primipara defined as; a woman in her first pregnancy without any known complications who has spontaneous onset of labour at term. Obstetric process and outcome indicators of the standard primipara were then used to compare the quality of care between rural and urban, across rural and across urban districts of Zimbabwe. Results A total of 45,240 births were recruited in the main study and 10,947 women met the definition of standard primipara. The maternal mortality ratio (MMR) and the perinatal mortality rate (PNMR) for the standard primiparae were 92/100000 live births and 15.4/1000 total births respectively. Compared to urban districts, the PNMR was higher in the rural districts (11/1000 total births vs 19/ 1000 total births, p < 0.001). In the urban to urban and rural to rural districts comparison, there were significant differences in most of the process indicators, but not in the PNMR. Conclusions The study has shown that the standard primipara can be used as a tool to measure and compare the quality of obstetric care in districts in different geographical areas. There is need to explore further how the quality of obstetric care can be improved in rural districts of Zimbabwe.
  • Thumbnail Image
    Item
    Open Access
    Diagnostic Performance and Usability of the Genedrive® HCV ID Kit in Two Decentralized Settings in Cameroon and Georgia
    (2021-04-22) Lamoury, Francois M J; Njouom, Richard; Amougou-Atsama, Marie; Yiagnigni Mfopou, Euloge; Berishvili, Nino; Sologashvili, Manana; Fajardo, Emmanuel; Malobela, Agnes; Macé, Aurélien; Chirehwa, Maxwell; Alkhazashvili, Maia; Ivanova Reipold, Elena
    Point-of-care diagnostics have the potential to increase diagnosis and linkage to care and help reach the WHO targets to eliminate hepatitis C virus (HCV) by 2030. Here, we evaluated the diagnostic accuracy of Genedrive HCV ID assay for the qualitative detection of HCV RNA in decentralized settings in two low- and middle-income countries using fresh plasma specimens from 426 participants. The Abbott RealTime HCV assay was used as the gold standard. Genedrive HCV ID assay was conducted by different users. Users also completed questionnaires to assess the usability of Genedrive. At detection thresholds of 12 IU/mL or 30 IU/mL, 1000 IU/mL, and 2362 IU/mL, the sensitivity was 96.2% (95% CI: 92.7–98.4), 100% (98.2–100), and 100% (98.2–100), respectively; the specificity was 99.5% (95% CI: 97.4–100), 99.5% (97.5–100), and 98.7% (96.1–100), respectively. All genotypes detected using the gold-standard assay were also detected with Genedrive. Users found Genedrive easy to use. Genedrive is a simple and accurate test to confirm chronic HCV infection in decentralized, real-life, resource-limited settings. This novel diagnostic tool could contribute to closing the current gap in HCV diagnosis.
  • Thumbnail Image
    Item
    Open Access
    Quality of pilot trial abstracts in heart failure is suboptimal: a systematic survey
    (BioMed Central, 2018-05-31) Isiguzo, Godsent C; Zunza, Moleen; Chirehwa, Maxwell; Mayosi, Bongani M; Thabane, Lehana
    Background: Pilot trials are miniature researches carried out with the sole aim of acting as the precursor for larger more definitive studies. Abstracts are used to summarize and introduce the findings to the reading audience. There is substantive empirical evidence showing that abstracts, despite their important roles, are not informative enough, lacking the necessary details. This systematic survey was designed to assess the quality of reporting of heart failure pilot trial abstracts. The quality of reporting was defined as the completeness of reporting based on adherence to the CONSORT extension for reporting of pilot trial abstracts. We also identified factors associated with reporting quality. Methods: We searched MEDLINE (PubMed), Cochrane Controlled Trials Register, Scopus, and African-wide information databases for abstracts from heart failure pilot trials in humans published from 1 January 1990 to 30 November 2016. These were assessed to determine the extent of adherence to CONSORT extension checklist for reporting of abstracts of pilot trials. We screened identified studies for inclusion based on title and abstract. Data were independently extracted by two reviewers using the checklist. We used regression analysis to assess the association between completeness of reporting (measured as the number of items in the CONSORT extension checklist for reporting of abstracts in pilot trials contained in each abstract) and factors influencing the quality of the reports. Results: Two hundred and twenty-eight (228) articles were retrieved, of which 92 met the inclusion criteria. The mean CONSORT extension score was 8.3/16 (standard deviation 1.7); the least reported items were the source of funding (1% [1/92]), trial registration (13% [12/92]), randomization sequence (13% [12/92]), number randomized to each arm (16% [15/92]), and number analyzed in each arm (16% [15/92]). Multivariable regression analysis showed that pharmacological intervention pilot trials [incidence rate ratio (IRR) = 0.88; 95% confidence interval (CI), 0.81–0.97] were significantly associated with better reporting. Other factors such as structured abstract (IRR = 1.10; 95% CI, 0.99–1.23) and CONSORT endorsement (IRR = 1.10; 95% CI, 0.99–1.23) only showed minimal relationship with better reporting quality. Conclusion: The quality of reporting of abstracts of heart failure pilot trials was suboptimal. Pharmacological intervention was significantly associated with better reporting. These findings are consistent with previous research on reporting of trials.