Assessment of laboratory capacity in conflict-affected low-resource settings using two World Health Organization laboratory assessment tools
Author:
Markby Jessica1, Gygax Monika2, Savoy Catherine2, Giebens Yves2, Janjanin Sanja2, Machoka Felicity2, Mawina Justin Kinziagu3, Ghanem Sahar M.M.4, Vetter Beatrice Natalie1
Affiliation:
1. FIND , Geneva , Switzerland 2. International Committee of the Red Cross , Geneva , Switzerland 3. Ministère de la Santé Publique , Kinshasa , Democratic Republic of the Congo 4. Ministry of Health , Gaza , Palestine
Abstract
Abstract
Objectives
Laboratory diagnostic services are essential to drive evidence-based treatment decisions, manage outbreaks, and provide population-level data. Many low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) lack sufficient diagnostic capacity, often further exacerbated in conflict-affected areas. This project assessed laboratory services in conflict-affected LMICs to understand gaps and opportunities for improving laboratory capacity.
Methods
The World Health Organization Laboratory Assessment Tool Facility Questionnaire (WHO Laboratory Tool) and Stepwise Laboratory Improvement Process Towards Accreditation (SLIPTA) checklist were used to assess five laboratories in Eastern Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC) and five in Gaza, Palestine. Total scores and percentage outcomes by indicator were calculated.
Results
Average WHO Laboratory Tool score across all facilities was 41% (range 32–50%) in DRC and 78% (range 72–84%) in Gaza. Lowest scoring indicators in DRC were Biorisk management (13%, range 8–21%), Documentation (14%, range 6–21%), and in Gaza, were Facilities (59%, range 46–75%) and Documentation (60%, range 44–76%). Highest scoring indicators in DRC were Facilities (70%, range 45–83%) and Data and Information Management (61%, range 38–80%), and in Gaza were Data Information and Management (96%) and Public Health Function (91%, range 88–94%). In DRC, no laboratory achieved a SLIPTA star rating. In Gaza, two laboratories had a 3-star SLIPTA rating, one had a 2-star rating and two had a 1-star rating.
Conclusions
Laboratory systems in conflict-affected LMICs have significant gaps. Implementating improvement strategies in such settings may be especially challenging.
Funder
International Committee of the Red Cross
Publisher
Walter de Gruyter GmbH
Subject
Biochemistry (medical),Clinical Biochemistry,General Medicine
Reference23 articles.
1. Wilson, ML, Fleming, KA, Kuti, MA, Looi, LM, Lago, N, Ru, K. Access to pathology and laboratory medicine services: a crucial gap. Lancet 2018;391:1927–38. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0140-6736(18)30458-6. 2. Nkengasong, JN, Yao, K, Onyebujoh, P. Laboratory medicine in low-income and middle-income countries: progress and challenges. Lancet 2018;391:1873–5. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0140-6736(18)30308-8. 3. Leslie, HH, Spiegelman, D, Zhou, X, Kruk, ME. Service readiness of health facilities in Bangladesh, Haiti, Kenya, Malawi, Namibia, Nepal, Rwanda, Senegal, Uganda and the United Republic of Tanzania. Bull World Health Organ 2017;95:738–48. https://doi.org/10.2471/blt.17.191916. 4. Turner, P, Rupali, P, Opintan, JA, Jaoko, W, Feasey, NA, Peacock, SJ, et al.. Laboratory informatics capacity for effective antimicrobial resistance surveillance in resource-limited settings. Lancet Infect Dis 2021;21:e170–4. https://doi.org/10.1016/s1473-3099(20)30835-5. 5. Leatherman, S, Tawfik, L, Jaff, D, Jaworski, G, Neilson, M, Syed, SB, et al.. Quality health care in extreme adversity-an action framework. Int J Qual Health Care 2019;31:G133–5. https://doi.org/10.1093/intqhc/mzz066.
Cited by
2 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献
|
|