Armas PL, Pérez CD, Castro PM, González DA, González OE

Language: Spanish
References: 19
Page: 28-40
PDF size: 167.38 Kb.

ABSTRACT

Objectives: To appreciate the validity, reliability, accessibility and feasibility of two composite indicators reflecting intensity and quality of tuberculosis case detection.
Methods: Is it a descriptive-qualitative study. The Indicators validation was carried out in different moments between March of 2009 and December of 2011, by expert’s evaluations. Ordinal numerical scales for the evaluative categories of the indicators intermediate variables were elaborated, calculating their arithmetical means and the position index (PI). For the cases finding indicator (Isiloc), were evaluate the aspect validity, context, predictive capacity, consistency, coherence, construct, accessibility and feasibility (minimum = 1 and maximum = 5). The variables for cases detection indicator (Isidec) were rated in terms of validity, reliability, comparability, specificity, sensibility, operability, affordability and feasibility (1= none to 5 = very). Both indicators were valued to the grade of valid, reproducible and feasible (3 = yes, 2 = partly and 1 = 0). Furthermore, we applied a semi-structured questionnaire to explore opinions of the users about their usefulness, feasibility and limitations.
Results: Isiloc obtained highest rating (5, PI = 1) for five evaluated approaches and 4,7 and 4,8 (PI 0,93 and 0,95) for other two approaches. For Isidec most of the approaches obtained averages between 4 and 5 (P ≥ 0,90, and the intermediate variables obtained mostly averages between 4,2 and 4,9 (IP 0,80 to 0,95). Both indicators in a third approaches obtained the highest rating (5, PI = 1) and were generally considered useful and feasible, although its application was limited by the lack of skills and resources of the users.
Conclusion: validation of these indicators has been satisfactory and should continue to apply its field test.

REFERENCES

1. Ministerio de Salud Pública. Objetivos de trabajo e indicadores. La Habana: MINSAP; 2011.

2. Ministerio de Salud Pública. Objetivos de trabajo y lineamientos para el año 2012. Área de Higiene y Epidemiología Ministerio de Salud Pública. La Habana, Cuba: MINSAP; Feb 2012.

3. Organización Panamericana de la Salud. Plan regional de tuberculosis 2006- 2015. Washington DC: OPS; 2006.

4. Arnadottir Th. Tuberculosis and Public Health. Policy and Principles in tuberculosis Control. Paris, France: International Union Against Tuberculosis and Lung Disease; 2009.

5. Hopewell PC, Pai M, Maher D, Uplekar M, Raviglione MC. Internacional Standard for tuberculosis care. Lancet Infect. Dis 2006;6:710-25.

6. WHO. Marco ampliado del DOTS. Un Marco ampliado para el control eficaz de la tuberculosis. Ginebra: OMS; 2002.

7. WHO. Compendium of indicators for monitoring and evaluating nacional tuberculosis programs. Geneva: WHO; 2004.

8. Minsap. Programa Nacional de Control de la Tuberculosis. Manual de normas y procedimientos. Primera reimpresión. La Habana: ECIMED; 2010.

9. Silva LC. Cultura estadística e investigación científica en ciencias de la salud; una mirada crítica. Madrid: Ediciones Díaz de Santos; 1997.

10. González E, Armas L. New Indicators Proposed to Assess Tuberculosis Control and Elimination in Cuba. MEDICC Review 2012;14(4):40-4.

11. Armas L, Medina NL, Peralta M, González E. Una propuesta de indicador sintético (Isiloc) para valorar la calidad de la detección de casos de tuberculosis. Rev Cubana Med Trop. 2009;61(1):63-9.

12. Gómez P, Méndez J, Armas L, Gonzalez E. Evaluación de la detección de casos de tuberculosis mediante un indicador sintético (Isiloc). Provincia de Matanzas. Rev Médica Electrónica. 2009 [citado 15 May 2011];31(4):[aprox 9 p.]. Disponible en : http://www.revmatanzas.sld.cu/revista%20medica/año%202009/en205.htm

13. Jordán T, Oramas R, Díaz O, González E, Armas L. Evaluación de la detección de casos de tuberculosis mediante un indicador sintético en dos municipios de Ciudad de la Habana. Rev Cubana Hig Epidemiol. 2008 [citado 7 Mar 2012];46(3):1-9. Disponible en: http://redalyc.uaemex.mx/src/inicio/ArtPdfRed.jsp?iCve=223217511004

14. González E, Armas L. Evaluación de la detección de casos de tuberculosis: una alternativa renovada. BOLIPK 2010;20(27):209-12.

15. González E, Jordán T, Armas L. Aplicación de un indicador sintético de la detección de casos de tuberculosis (ISIDEC). Bol IPK 2011 [citado 15 May 2011];21:105-7. Disponible en: http://files.sld.cu/ipk/files/2011/06/bol14-11.pdf

16. Milles MB, Huberman AM & Saldaña J. Qualitative data analysis. A methods sourcebook. 3rd edition. London: Sage publications; 2013.

17. Caraballoso Hernández M, Rojo Pérez N, Martínez Calvo S, Pérez Masa B, Bayarre-Vear H, Hernández Menéndez E. Investigación en sistemas y servicios de salud. Escuela Nacional de Salud Pública. La Habana: Ministerio de Salud Pública; 2006.

18. Golub JE, Dowdy DW. Screening for active tuberculosis: methodological challenges in implementation and evaluation. Int J Tuberc Lung Dis 2013;17:856-65.

19. Organización Mundial de la Salud. Consejo ejecutivo. Estrategia mundial y notas para la prevención, la atención y el control de la tuberculosis después de 2015. Ginebra. Suiza: OMS; 2013.