Patient-Centered Innovations, Education and Technology for Cancer Care and Cancer Research

Environmental conditions (water, sanitation, hygiene, waste management, cleaning, energy, building design) are important for a safe and functional healthcare environment. Yet their full range of impacts are not well understood. In this study, we assessed the impact of environmental conditions on healthcare workers’ wellbeing and quality of care, using qualitative interviews with 81 healthcare workers at 26 small healthcare facilities in rural Niger. We asked participants to report successes and challenges with environmental conditions and their impacts on wellbeing (physical, social, mental, and economic) and quality of care. We found that all environmental conditions contributed to healthcare workers’ wellbeing and quality of care. The norm in facilities of our sample was poor environmental conditions, and thus participants primarily reported detrimental effects. We identified previously documented effects on physical health and safety from pathogen exposure, but also several novel effects on healthcare workers’ mental and economic wellbeing and on efficiency, timeliness, and patient centeredness of care. Key wellbeing impacts included pathogen exposure for healthcare workers, stress from unsafe and chaotic working environments, staff dissatisfaction and retention challenges, out-of-pocket spending to avoid stockouts, and uncompensated labor. Key quality of care impacts included pathogen exposure for patients, healthcare worker time dedicated to non-medical tasks like water fetching (i.e., reduced efficiency), breakdowns and spoilage of equipment and supplies, and patient satisfaction with cleanliness and privacy. Inefficiency due to time lost and damaged supplies and equipment likely have substantial economic value and warrant greater consideration in research and policy making. Impacts on staff retention and care efficiency also have implications for health systems. We recommend that future research and decision making for policy and practice incorporate more holistic impact measures beyond just healthcare acquired infections and reconsider the substantial contribution that environmental conditions make to the safety of healthcare facilities and strength of health systems.

The majority of disease transmission during the 2014-16 West Africa Ebola epidemic was driven by community-based behaviors that proved difficult to change in a social paradigm of misinformation, denial, and deep-seated distrust of government representatives and institutions. In Liberia, perceptions and beliefs about Ebola during and since the epidemic can provide insights useful to public health strategies aimed at improving community preparedness. In this 2018 study, we conducted nine focus groups with Liberians from three communities who experienced Ebola differently, to evaluate behaviors, attitudes, and trust during and after the epidemic. Focus group participants reported that some behaviors adopted during Ebola have persisted (e.g. handwashing and caretaking practices), while others have reverted (e.g. physical proximity and funeral customs); and reported ongoing distrust of the government and denial of the Ebola epidemic. These findings suggest that a lack of trust in the biomedical paradigm and government health institutions persists in Liberia. Future public health information campaigns may benefit from community engagement addressed at understanding beliefs and sources of trust and mistrust in the community to effect behavior change and improve community-level epidemic preparedness.

The West African Ebola Virus Disease epidemic of 2014-16 cost more than 11,000 lives. Interventions targeting key behaviors to curb transmission, such as safe funeral practices and reporting and isolating the ill, were initially unsuccessful in a climate of fear, mistrust, and denial. Building trust was eventually recognized as essential to epidemic response and prioritized, and trust was seen to improve toward the end of the epidemic as incidence fell. However, little is understood about how and why trust changed during Ebola, what factors were most influential to community trust, and how different institutions might have been perceived under different levels of exposure to the outbreak. In this large-N household survey conducted in Liberia in 2018, we measured self-reported trust over time retrospectively in three different communities with different exposures to Ebola. We found trust was consistently higher for non-governmental organizations than for the government of Liberia across all time periods. Trust reportedly decreased significantly from the start to the peak of the epidemic in the study site of highest Ebola incidence. This finding, in combination with a negative association found between knowing someone infected and trust of both iNGOs and the government, indicates the experience of Ebola may have itself caused a decline of trust in the community. These results suggest that national governments should aim to establish trust when engaging communities to change behavior during epidemics. Further research on the relationship between trust and epidemics may serve to improve epidemic response efficacy and behavior uptake.

Hand hygiene is central to hospital infection control. During the 2014–2016 West Africa Ebola virus disease epidemic in Liberia, gaps in hand hygiene infrastructure and health worker training contributed to hospital-based Ebola transmission. Hand hygiene interventions were undertaken post-Ebola, but many improvements were not sustainable. This study characterizes barriers to, and facilitators of, hand hygiene in rural Liberian hospitals and evaluates readiness for sustainable, locally derived interventions to improve hand hygiene. Research enumerators collected data at all hospitals in Bong and Lofa counties, Liberia, in the period March–May 2020. Enumerators performed standardized spot checks of hand hygiene infrastructure and supplies, structured observations of hand hygiene behavior, and semi-structured key informant interviews for thematic analysis. During spot checks, hospital staff reported that handwashing container water was always available in 89% (n = 42) of hospital wards, piped running water in 23% (n = 11), and soap in 62% (n = 29). Enumerators observed 5% of wall-mounted hand sanitizer dispensers (n = 8) and 95% of pocket-size dispensers (n = 53) to be working. In interviews, hospital staff described willingness to purchase personal hand sanitizer dispensers when hospital-provided supplies were unavailable. Low-cost, sustainable interventions should address supply and infrastructure-related obstacles to hospital hand hygiene improvement.

Healthcare facility environmental conditions – including water, sanitation, hygiene, waste management, cleaning, energy, and building design – contribute to safe and quality care delivery. However, how environmental conditions shape patient experiences have not been systematically assessed. We conducted a case study to examine the impacts of environmental conditions on patient well-being and quality of care through interviews with 56 patients and caregivers from all service delivery levels and geographic areas in public healthcare facilities in Malawi. We analyzed interview data to identify impacts of environmental conditions on multiple dimensions of well-being (physical, mental, social, and economic well-being) and quality of care (patient-centeredness, equity, safety, efficiency, and timeliness). Many participants reported poor environmental conditions and extensive impacts on well-being. Patients felt stress, fear of infection, and dissatisfaction with inadequate water, sanitation, and hygiene services. To cope with poor conditions, patients and family caregivers cleaned areas, fetched water, or spent money on supplies, leading to economic impacts. Facility conditions influenced perceptions of dignified and respectful care. Inadequate or overcrowded conditions led to negative encounters with other patients and healthcare workers. Patients felt more satisfied and respected when they observed healthcare workers performing hand hygiene or maintaining the facility. Findings demonstrate that environmental conditions influence numerous aspects of patient experience and well-being. The development of quantitative measures for well-being and quality of care would allow programs to routinely monitor these impacts and detect changes over time. Patient perspectives and priorities should be considered in future efforts to evaluate and improve environmental conditions in healthcare facilities.