Cited by 99Nursing Roles and PracticesChronic Disease Management StrategiesHealth Policy Implementation Science

Educational outreach with an integrated clinical tool for nurse-led non-communicable chronic disease management in primary care in South Africa: a pragmatic cluster randomised controlled trial

Open access
Fairall, Lara R., Folb, Naomi, Timmerman, Venessa, Lombard, Carl, Steyn, Krisela, Bachmann, Max O., Bateman, Eric D., Lund, Crick +6 more·2016·PLoS Medicine

Abstract

BACKGROUND: In many low-income countries, care for patients with non-communicable diseases (NCDs) and mental health conditions is provided by nurses. The benefits of nurse substitution and supplementation in NCD care in high-income settings are well recognised, but evidence from low- and middle-income countries is limited. Primary Care 101 (PC101) is a programme designed to support and expand nurses' role in NCD care, comprising educational outreach to nurses and a clinical management tool with enhanced prescribing provisions. We evaluated the effect of the programme on primary care nurses' capacity to manage NCDs. METHODS AND FINDINGS: In a cluster randomised controlled trial design, 38 public sector primary care clinics in the Western Cape Province, South Africa, were randomised. Nurses in the intervention clinics were trained to use the PC101 management tool during educational outreach sessions delivered by health department trainers and were authorised to prescribe an expanded range of drugs for several NCDs. Control clinics continued use of the Practical Approach to Lung Health and HIV/AIDS in South Africa (PALSA PLUS) management tool and usual training. Patients attending these clinics with one or more of hypertension (3,227), diabetes (1,842), chronic respiratory disease (1,157) or who screened positive for depression (2,466), totalling 4,393 patients, were enrolled between 28 March 2011 and 10 November 2011. Primary outcomes were treatment intensification in the hypertension, diabetes, and chronic respiratory disease cohorts, defined as the proportion of patients in whom treatment was escalated during follow-up over 14 mo, and case detection in the depression cohort. Primary outcome data were analysed for 2,110 (97%) intervention and 2,170 (97%) control group patients. Treatment intensification rates in intervention clinics were not superior to those in the control clinics (hypertension: 44% in the intervention group versus 40% in the control group, risk ratio [RR] 1.08 [95% CI 0.94 to 1.24; p = 0.252]; diabetes: 57% versus 50%, RR 1.10 [0.97 to 1.24; p = 0.126]; chronic respiratory disease: 14% versus 12%, RR 1.08 [0.75 to 1.55; p = 0.674]), nor was case detection of depression (18% versus 24%, RR 0.76 [0.53 to 1.10; p = 0.142]). No adverse effects of the nurses' expanded scope of practice were observed. Limitations of the study include dependence on self-reported diagnoses for inclusion in the patient cohorts, limited data on uptake of PC101 by users, reliance on process outcomes, and insufficient resources to measure important health outcomes, such as HbA1c, at follow-up. CONCLUSIONS: Educational outreach to primary care nurses to train them in the use of a management tool involving an expanded role in managing NCDs was feasible and safe but was not associated with treatment intensification or improved case detection for index diseases. This notwithstanding, the intervention, with adjustments to improve its effectiveness, has been adopted for implementation in primary care clinics throughout South Africa. TRIAL REGISTRATION: The trial is registered with Current Controlled Trials (ISRCTN20283604).

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1371/journal.pmed.1002178

Cites

61 of 61 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • The authors of the South Africa trial noted that these trial findings assessing the effectiveness of complex interventions in real world settings were difficult to interpret and noted several challenges including a co-intervention, called the Chronic Disease Season, triggered by the trial, and not expanding access to antidepressant prescribing or psychological therapies.

    “The authors noted that these trial findings assessing the effectiveness of complex interventions in real world settings, were difficult to interpret and noted several challenges including a co-intervention, called the Chronic Disease Season, triggered by the trial, and not expanding access to antidepressant prescribing or psychological therapies 41 68 .”
  • The chronic care model was shown not to be effective for people with depression when delivered using training of health providers alone, without resourcing the health system to expand access to anti-depressants or psychological treatments.

    “But the model was shown not to be effective for people with depression when delivered using training of health providers alone, without resourcing the health system to expand access to anti-depressants or psychological treatments identified as an additional pre-requisite 41 .”

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Fairall, L. R., Folb, N., Timmerman, V., Lombard, C., Steyn, K., Bachmann, M. O., Bateman, E. D., Lund, C., Cornick, R., Faris, G., Gaziano, T., Georgeu-Pepper, D., Zwarenstein, M., & Levitt, N. S.
Affiliations
  • University of Cape Town (ZA)
  • South African Medical Research Council (ZA)
  • University of East Anglia (GB)
  • Brigham and Women's Hospital (US)
  • Western University (CA)
Corresponding author
Fairall, Lara R.
Venue
PLoS Medicine
Published
2016-11-22
Volume
13
Issue
11
Pages
e1002178
ISSN
  • 1549-1277 (ISSN-L)
  • 1549-1676
OpenAlex
W2554606173
Cited by
99
References
61
Citations by year
2026: 4 · 2025: 9 · 2024: 10 · 2023: 14 · 2022: 11 · 2021: 11 · 2020: 10 · 2019: 9 · 2018: 17 · 2017: 4
FWCI
18.61
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • PLoS Medicine (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • UEA Digital Repository (University of East Anglia) (acceptedVersion)
  • Research Portal (King's College London) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
  • Figshare (submittedVersion, cc-by)
Funders
  • National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute (HHSN268200900030C)
  • United Health, USA
  • Department of Health of the Provincial Government of the Western Cape
  • Department of Medicine, University of Cape Town, South Africa
  • United Kingdom Department for International Development
  • University of Cape Town Lung Institute, South Africa
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Nursing Roles and Practices
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Epidemiology › Chronic Disease Management Strategies
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Health Policy Implementation Science
Keywords
nurse-led care, non-communicable diseases, chronic disease management, primary care, educational outreach, hypertension, diabetes mellitus, chronic respiratory disease, treatment intensification, low- and middle-income countries, South Africa, Western Cape, health workforce capacity building, mental health integration
MeSH terms
Adult, Chronic Disease, Depression, Diabetes Mellitus, Female, Humans, Hypertension, Male, Middle Aged, Primary Health Care, Respiratory Tract Diseases, South Africa, Cohort Studies, Disease Management, Primary Care Nursing

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review