Cultural advice

The Australian National University acknowledges, celebrates and pays our respects to the Ngunnawal and Ngambri people of the Canberra region and to all First Nations Australians on whose traditional lands we meet and work, and whose cultures are among the oldest continuing cultures in human history.

Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples are advised that ANU Library collections may include images, names, voices, and other representations of deceased persons.

Material in the collection may contain terms, language or views that reflect the period in which the item was created and may be considered inappropriate today.

Improving Delivery of Secondary Prophylaxis for Rheumatic Heart Disease in a High-Burden Setting: Outcome of a Stepped-Wedge, Community, Randomized Trial

Loading...
Thumbnail Image

Authors

Ralph, Anna P
de Dassel, Jessica L
Kirby, Adrienne
Read, Clancy
Mitchell, Alison G
Maguire, Graeme P
Currie, Bart J
Bailie, Ross S
Johnston, Vanessa
Carapetis, Jonathan R

Journal Title

Journal ISSN

Volume Title

Publisher

Wiley

Abstract

BACKGROUND Health system strengthening is needed to improve delivery of secondary prophylaxis against rheumatic heart disease. METHODS AND RESULTS We undertook a stepped-wedge, randomized trial in northern Australia. Five pairs of Indigenous community clinics entered the study at 3-month steps. Study phases comprised a 12 month baseline phase, 3 month transition phase, 12 month intensive phase and a 3- to 12-month maintenance phase. Clinics received a multicomponent intervention supporting activities to improve penicillin delivery, aligned with the chronic care model, with continuous quality-improvement feedback on adherence. The primary outcome was the proportion receiving ≥80% of scheduled penicillin injections. Secondary outcomes included "days at risk" of acute rheumatic fever recurrence related to late penicillin and acute rheumatic fever recurrence rates. Overall, 304 patients requiring prophylaxis were eligible. The proportion receiving ≥80% of scheduled injections during baseline was 141 of 304 (46%)-higher than anticipated. No effect attributable to the study was evident: in the intensive phase, 126 of 304 (41%) received ≥80% of scheduled injections (odds ratio compared with baseline: 0.78; 95% confidence interval, 0.54-1.11). There was modest improvement in the maintenance phase among high-adhering patients (43% received ≥90% of injections versus 30% [baseline] and 28% [intensive], P<0.001). Also, the proportion of days at risk in the whole cohort decreased in the maintenance phase (0.28 versus 0.32 [baseline] and 0.34 [intensive], P=0.001). Acute rheumatic fever recurrence rates did not differ between study sites during the intensive phase and the whole jurisdiction (3.0 versus 3.5 recurrences per 100 patient-years, P=0.65). CONCLUSIONS This strategy did not improve adherence to rheumatic heart disease secondary prophylaxis within the study time frame. Longer term primary care strengthening strategies are needed. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION URL: www.anzctr.org.au. Unique identifier: ACTRN12613000223730.

Description

Citation

Source

Journal of the American Heart Association

Book Title

Entity type

Access Statement

Open Access

License Rights

Restricted until