Remote Consulting in Primary Health Care in Low- and Middle-Income Countries: Feasibility Study of an Online Training Program to Support Care Delivery During the COVID-19 Pandemic
Andrew Downie,Titus Mashanya,Beatrice Chipwaza,Frances Griffiths,Bronwyn Harris,Albino Kalolo,Sylvester Ndegese,Jackie Sturt,Nicole De Valliere,Senga Pemba
DOI: https://doi.org/10.2196/32964
2022-06-14
Abstract:Background: Despite acceleration of remote consulting throughout the COVID-19 pandemic, many health care professionals are practicing without training to offer teleconsultation to their patients. This is especially challenging in resource-poor countries, where the telephone has not previously been widely used for health care. Objective: As the COVID-19 pandemic dawned, we designed a modular online training program for REmote Consulting in primary Health care (REaCH). To optimize upscaling of knowledge and skills, we employed a train-the-trainer approach, training health workers (tier 1) to cascade the training to others (tier 2) in their locality. We aimed to determine whether REaCH training was acceptable and feasible to health workers in rural Tanzania to support their health care delivery during the pandemic. Methods: We developed and pretested the REaCH training program in July 2020 and created 8 key modules. The program was then taught remotely via Moodle and WhatsApp (Meta Platforms) to 12 tier 1 trainees and cascaded to 63 tier 2 trainees working in Tanzania's rural Ulanga District (August-September 2020). We evaluated the program using a survey (informed by Kirkpatrick's model of evaluation) to capture trainee satisfaction with REaCH, the knowledge gained, and perceived behavior change; qualitative interviews to explore training experiences and views of remote consulting; and documentary analysis of emails, WhatsApp texts, and training reports generated through the program. Quantitative data were analyzed using descriptive statistics. Qualitative data were analyzed thematically. Findings were triangulated and integrated during interpretation. Results: Of the 12 tier 1 trainees enrolled in the program, all completed the training; however, 2 (17%) encountered internet difficulties and failed to complete the evaluation. In addition, 1 (8%) opted out of the cascading process. Of the 63 tier 2 trainees, 61 (97%) completed the cascaded training. Of the 10 (83%) tier 1 trainees who completed the survey, 9 (90%) would recommend the program to others, reported receiving relevant skills and applying their learning to their daily work, demonstrating satisfaction, learning, and perceived behavior change. In qualitative interviews, tier 1 and 2 trainees identified several barriers to implementation of remote consulting, including lacking digital infrastructure, few resources, inflexible billing and record-keeping systems, and limited community awareness. The costs of data or airtime emerged as the greatest immediate barrier to supporting both the upscaling of REaCH training and subsequently the delivery of safe and trustworthy remote health care. Conclusions: The REaCH training program is feasible, acceptable, and effective in changing trainees' behavior. However, government and organizational support is required to facilitate the expansion of the program and remote consulting in Tanzania and other low-resource settings.