A Human Factors Approach to Childhood Pneumonia A qualitative study in Malawian primary care

Introduction

Despite recent advances in reducing childhood mortality, pneumonia remains a major cause of morbidity and mortality among children aged under five years of age(1) In primary care the focus is on providing antibiotics, identifying those children at risk of severe illness, and ensuring they are referred to hospital. The WHO has identified severity criteria to guide referral to hospital and these criteria have been implemented in initiatives such as Integrated Management of Childhood Illness (IMCI)(2). However recent studies have highlighted concerns regarding changing markers of severity which may mean children with severe illness may not be appropriately identified(3). Also WHO markers of severity, which are used to guide referral for hospitalization in primary care, are currently based on clinical symptoms alone but the wider availability of technology allows the use of markers such as pulse oximetry to be more widely integrated to help determine severity. A greater understanding and characterisation of these changes is required to continue advances in reducing childhood mortality from pneumonia. Most studies have focused on the hospitalized population, and yet in developing countries it is in the community where these patients are most likely to present(4).

The aim of this study were to establish the views of healthcare workers, policy makers and caregivers regarding the current process in the assessment and management of childhood pneumonia in primary care focusing on assessment of severity and decision to prescribe antimicrobials.

Methods

This research was conducted at 10 health care facilities located in Northern Malawi and with policy makers in the Ministry of Health in Malawi in 2022. Semi-structured interviews were conducted to elicit in-depth accounts of the assessment process as experienced by staff and caregivers. This format was selected to ensure that there was enough structure to the interviews to allow them to be comparable but also allow enough flexibility to incorporate different staff levels without generating bias. Open questions were used to allow in-depth insight into the perspectives of participants. The SEIPS 101 framework was used to analyse them in order to highlight the system design in place and also how this design influences other connected processes within the clinic and referral to first level hospitals. This data, along with informal observations from the clinics, was used to construct a process map, detailing the flow of patients. Following this the tools in SEIPS 101 were used to identify gaps and possible solutions.

Results

Process mapping

Through interviews and informal observations around the facility a process map was developed. Figure 1. It shows the flow of patients through identifying illness at home, to community supports, attending the health surveillance assistant community health worker) and if necessary attending the hospital. It also shows involvement of informal health supports such as traditional healers, village elders and drug stores (informal pharmacies). Where applicable it shows tools used at each level. Fig. 1

• Download figure
• Open in new tab

Discussion

This needs assessment highlighted a number of issues with the assessment and management of childhood pneumonia and opportunities for intervention.

It highlighted the difficulties for parents and guardians in making a decision to seek care and who to seek care from as well as the financial implications of seeking care. Delays in seeking care are associated with worse outcomes and have been reported previously also(5). The prominent use of traditional healers in this study is different to previous studies. Previous studies have shown that of children who died in Malawi most caregivers brought their child to healthcare, and many sought care multiple times from different healthcare providers, suggesting issues in identifying children with severe pneumonia also(14). Quality of health services has been associated with better healthcare utilisation(6). Therefore a focus on improving quality of services and providing supports for healthworkers in terms of tools and resources is important. Although the majority of pneumonia episodes are non-severe and are managed in at primary healthcare facilities and therefore studies in primary care are vital(7). Although it may be presumed that if the illness worsens, the child may progress through the hierarchy of the healthcare system from primary to secondary or tertiary care other studies have shown that significant numbers of children die without ever attending hospital with one study showing that approximately two-thirds of children who die do so in the community (8). The WHO criteria for severe disease are used to guide referral to hospital from primary care. A study by our group in primary care in Malawi showed that WHO severity criteria were present in a minority (30.4%)(11) of children hospitalised, consistent with other recent work showing that 39% of fatal cases of pneumonia in children in hospital were defined as having non-severe pneumonia requiring only home treatment by the 2013 revision. The fact that the WHO criteria would have discharged these children with oral antibiotics highlights the need for new markers of severity, as these guidelines are used to guide primary care workers in their decision-making regarding escalation of care. Healthworkers in this study highlighted differences between their opinions of illness severity and what guidelines gave as severity markers. Developing dynamic systems of identifying changing patterns of risk will be important. Systems using analysis of routinely collected health data and artificial intelligence approaches may be an approach to this.

There is also growing concern regarding antimicrobial resistance driven by overuse of antibiotics and intercontinental spread of this resistance. The increased use of universal immunisation, including haemophilus influenzae type B (Hib) and pneumococcal vaccines has altered the proportion with viral illness(7,8). Current guidelines recommend that all children with WHO defined pneumonia receive antibiotics. However, a recent study has also shown that, in Malawi, the number of children with non-severe, fast-breathing pneumonia that needed amoxicillin treatment, for one child to benefit was 33(9). In order to reduce use of antibiotics point of care tests that are accurate in primary care and easily available in primary care are important. Similar approaches in malaria have yielded significant reductions in antimalarial prescription(10). The use of a test such as the malaria rapid diagnostic test was highlighted as a solution by health workers in this study.

This study had a number of limitations. Parents and guardians were recruited from health facilities and so were likely there with a sick child. This may have influenced opinions from the parents based on their recent experiences. A diverse cadre of staff were interviewed to provide different perspectives from the community to health policy. It may be beneficial to explore each role more thoroughly in future studies. The observations were also carried out within the healthcare facility by the researchers to assist in developing the SEIPS assessment. Although informal, the presence of researchers may have influenced how staff acted.

Overall the use of a diverse range of participants has allowed the researchers to identify the process, people, tools, tasks and outcomes for a child with pneumonia in the community. It highlights the areas where improvements are possible.