在 COVID-19 大流行期间,农村社区保健员在改善健康结果方面的有效性:系统性综述。

IF 2.2 3区 医学 Q2 PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH Global Health Action Pub Date : 2024-12-31 Epub Date: 2024-01-05 DOI:10.1080/16549716.2023.2292385
Neema Kaseje, Meghna Ranganathan, Monica Magadi, Kevin Oria, Andy Haines
{"title":"在 COVID-19 大流行期间,农村社区保健员在改善健康结果方面的有效性:系统性综述。","authors":"Neema Kaseje, Meghna Ranganathan, Monica Magadi, Kevin Oria, Andy Haines","doi":"10.1080/16549716.2023.2292385","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Rural community health workers [CHWs] play a critical role in improving health outcomes during non-pandemic times, but evidence on their effectiveness during the COVID-19 pandemic is limited. There is a need to focus on rural CHWs and rural health systems as they have limited material and human resources rendering them more vulnerable than urban health systems to severe disruptions during pandemics.</p><p><strong>Objectives: </strong>This systematic review aims to describe and appraise the current evidence on the effectiveness of rural CHWs in improving access to health services and health outcomes during the COVID-19 pandemic in low-and middle-income countries [LMICs].</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We searched electronic databases for articles published from 2020 to 2023 describing rural CHW interventions during the COVID-19 pandemic in LMICs. We extracted data on study characteristics, interventions, outcome measures, and main results. We conducted a narrative synthesis of key results.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Fifteen studies from 10 countries met our inclusion criteria. Most of the studies were from Asia [10 of 15 studies]. Study designs varied and included descriptive and analytical studies. The evidence suggested that rural CHW interventions led to increased household access to health services and may be effective in improving COVID-19 and non-COVID-19 health outcomes. Overall, however, the quality of evidence was poor due to methodological limitations; 14 of 15 studies had a high risk of bias.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Rural CHWs may have improved access to health services and health outcomes during the COVID-19 pandemic in LMICs but more rigorous studies are needed during future pandemics to evaluate their effectiveness in improving health outcomes in different settings and to assess appropriate support required to ensure their impact at scale.</p>","PeriodicalId":49197,"journal":{"name":"Global Health Action","volume":"17 1","pages":"2292385"},"PeriodicalIF":2.2000,"publicationDate":"2024-12-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10773683/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The effectiveness of rural community health workers in improving health outcomes during the COVID-19 pandemic: a systematic review.\",\"authors\":\"Neema Kaseje, Meghna Ranganathan, Monica Magadi, Kevin Oria, Andy Haines\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/16549716.2023.2292385\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Rural community health workers [CHWs] play a critical role in improving health outcomes during non-pandemic times, but evidence on their effectiveness during the COVID-19 pandemic is limited. There is a need to focus on rural CHWs and rural health systems as they have limited material and human resources rendering them more vulnerable than urban health systems to severe disruptions during pandemics.</p><p><strong>Objectives: </strong>This systematic review aims to describe and appraise the current evidence on the effectiveness of rural CHWs in improving access to health services and health outcomes during the COVID-19 pandemic in low-and middle-income countries [LMICs].</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We searched electronic databases for articles published from 2020 to 2023 describing rural CHW interventions during the COVID-19 pandemic in LMICs. We extracted data on study characteristics, interventions, outcome measures, and main results. We conducted a narrative synthesis of key results.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Fifteen studies from 10 countries met our inclusion criteria. Most of the studies were from Asia [10 of 15 studies]. Study designs varied and included descriptive and analytical studies. The evidence suggested that rural CHW interventions led to increased household access to health services and may be effective in improving COVID-19 and non-COVID-19 health outcomes. Overall, however, the quality of evidence was poor due to methodological limitations; 14 of 15 studies had a high risk of bias.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Rural CHWs may have improved access to health services and health outcomes during the COVID-19 pandemic in LMICs but more rigorous studies are needed during future pandemics to evaluate their effectiveness in improving health outcomes in different settings and to assess appropriate support required to ensure their impact at scale.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":49197,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Global Health Action\",\"volume\":\"17 1\",\"pages\":\"2292385\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-12-31\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10773683/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Global Health Action\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/16549716.2023.2292385\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2024/1/5 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Global Health Action","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/16549716.2023.2292385","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/1/5 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:农村社区保健员(CHWs)在非大流行期间对改善健康结果起着至关重要的作用,但在 COVID-19 大流行期间,有关其有效性的证据却很有限。有必要关注农村社区保健员和农村医疗系统,因为他们的物质和人力资源有限,在大流行期间比城市医疗系统更容易受到严重破坏:本系统性综述旨在描述和评估在 COVID-19 大流行期间,农村社区保健员在改善中低收入国家(LMICs)卫生服务的获取和卫生结果方面的有效性的现有证据:我们在电子数据库中检索了 2020 年至 2023 年间发表的描述 COVID-19 大流行期间中低收入国家(LMICs)农村社区保健员干预措施的文章。我们提取了有关研究特征、干预措施、结果测量和主要结果的数据。我们对主要结果进行了叙述性综述:来自 10 个国家的 15 项研究符合我们的纳入标准。大多数研究来自亚洲(15 项研究中的 10 项)。研究设计各不相同,包括描述性研究和分析性研究。证据表明,农村社区保健员干预措施增加了家庭获得医疗服务的机会,并可有效改善 COVID-19 和非 COVID-19 健康结果。但总体而言,由于方法上的局限性,证据的质量较差;15 项研究中有 14 项存在较高的偏倚风险:农村社区保健员可能会在 COVID-19 大流行期间改善低收入与中等收入国家的医疗服务获取途径和医疗效果,但在未来的大流行期间还需要进行更严格的研究,以评估他们在不同环境下改善医疗效果的有效性,并评估为确保他们的大规模影响所需的适当支持。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
The effectiveness of rural community health workers in improving health outcomes during the COVID-19 pandemic: a systematic review.

Background: Rural community health workers [CHWs] play a critical role in improving health outcomes during non-pandemic times, but evidence on their effectiveness during the COVID-19 pandemic is limited. There is a need to focus on rural CHWs and rural health systems as they have limited material and human resources rendering them more vulnerable than urban health systems to severe disruptions during pandemics.

Objectives: This systematic review aims to describe and appraise the current evidence on the effectiveness of rural CHWs in improving access to health services and health outcomes during the COVID-19 pandemic in low-and middle-income countries [LMICs].

Methods: We searched electronic databases for articles published from 2020 to 2023 describing rural CHW interventions during the COVID-19 pandemic in LMICs. We extracted data on study characteristics, interventions, outcome measures, and main results. We conducted a narrative synthesis of key results.

Results: Fifteen studies from 10 countries met our inclusion criteria. Most of the studies were from Asia [10 of 15 studies]. Study designs varied and included descriptive and analytical studies. The evidence suggested that rural CHW interventions led to increased household access to health services and may be effective in improving COVID-19 and non-COVID-19 health outcomes. Overall, however, the quality of evidence was poor due to methodological limitations; 14 of 15 studies had a high risk of bias.

Conclusion: Rural CHWs may have improved access to health services and health outcomes during the COVID-19 pandemic in LMICs but more rigorous studies are needed during future pandemics to evaluate their effectiveness in improving health outcomes in different settings and to assess appropriate support required to ensure their impact at scale.

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
Global Health Action
Global Health Action PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH-
CiteScore
5.10
自引率
3.80%
发文量
108
审稿时长
16 weeks
期刊介绍: Global Health Action is an international peer-reviewed Open Access journal affiliated with the Unit of Epidemiology and Global Health, Department of Public Health and Clinical Medicine at Umeå University, Sweden. The Unit hosts the Umeå International School of Public Health and the Umeå Centre for Global Health Research. Vision: Our vision is to be a leading journal in the global health field, narrowing health information gaps and contributing to the implementation of policies and actions that lead to improved global health. Aim: The widening gap between the winners and losers of globalisation presents major public health challenges. To meet these challenges, it is crucial to generate new knowledge and evidence in the field and in settings where the evidence is lacking, as well as to bridge the gaps between existing knowledge and implementation of relevant findings. Thus, the aim of Global Health Action is to contribute to fuelling a more concrete, hands-on approach to addressing global health challenges. Manuscripts suggesting strategies for practical interventions and research implementations where none already exist are specifically welcomed. Further, the journal encourages articles from low- and middle-income countries, while also welcoming articles originated from South-South and South-North collaborations. All articles are expected to address a global agenda and include a strong implementation or policy component.
期刊最新文献
Prevalence and associated factors for poor mental health among young migrants in Sweden: a cross-sectional study. The effectiveness of rural community health workers in improving health outcomes during the COVID-19 pandemic: a systematic review. Adaptation and validation of the Children's Surgical Assessment Tool for Rwandan district hospitals. Electronic health record and primary care physician self-reported quality of care: a multilevel study in China. Recruiting hard-to-reach populations via respondent driven sampling for mobile phone surveys in Colombia: a qualitative study.
×
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
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 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 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1