10
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
1 collections
    0
    shares

      To submit to this journal, please click here

      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Health-seeking behaviour and beliefs around sore throat in The Gambia: A qualitative study

      research-article

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Group A Streptococcus (Strep A) bacteria causes a broad spectrum of diseases. The most common manifestations of Strep A infection are sore throat and pus-producing skin infections such as impetigo. Complications of Strep A infection can lead to inflammation in the bones, muscles, joints, and internal organs causing acute rheumatic fever and rheumatic heart disease (RHD). In The Gambia, the RHD burden is thought to be very high. However, epidemiological data is minimal, and Strep A control programmes do not exist. This study aimed to explore common beliefs and practices related to sore throats among primary caregivers of children, and healthcare providers in a community with a high Strep A disease burden. Four informal conversations with providers and fifteen semi-structured interviews with caregivers were conducted in the peri-urban area of Sukuta, The Gambia. Sampling was purposive and gradual, beginning from households identified to have recently experienced sore throat through a parallel cohort study. Themes explored in qualitative analysis included: sore throat causal attributions and diagnoses, care practises, health-seeking behaviour, and perceived barriers to using the biomedical sector. We found that sore throats were typically perceived to affect one child in a family, disproportionately or exclusively. Sore throats were rarely perceived as life-threatening, and awareness of links between sore throat and ARF or RHD was not reported among caregivers or providers in this study population. Most cases of sore throat were initially managed at home using traditional medicine which delayed resort to antibiotics, though in two instances of severe pain with the presence of exudate, fear that the child’s life was at risk prompted care-seeking through the formal health system. Our findings can inform the development of tailored strategies to increase community knowledge of the potential long-term consequences of sore throats and appropriate care-seeking, alongside improvements in the health system, to prevent Strep A sequelae effectively.

          Related collections

          Most cited references27

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Consolidated criteria for reporting qualitative research (COREQ): a 32-item checklist for interviews and focus groups.

          Qualitative research explores complex phenomena encountered by clinicians, health care providers, policy makers and consumers. Although partial checklists are available, no consolidated reporting framework exists for any type of qualitative design. To develop a checklist for explicit and comprehensive reporting of qualitative studies (in depth interviews and focus groups). We performed a comprehensive search in Cochrane and Campbell Protocols, Medline, CINAHL, systematic reviews of qualitative studies, author or reviewer guidelines of major medical journals and reference lists of relevant publications for existing checklists used to assess qualitative studies. Seventy-six items from 22 checklists were compiled into a comprehensive list. All items were grouped into three domains: (i) research team and reflexivity, (ii) study design and (iii) data analysis and reporting. Duplicate items and those that were ambiguous, too broadly defined and impractical to assess were removed. Items most frequently included in the checklists related to sampling method, setting for data collection, method of data collection, respondent validation of findings, method of recording data, description of the derivation of themes and inclusion of supporting quotations. We grouped all items into three domains: (i) research team and reflexivity, (ii) study design and (iii) data analysis and reporting. The criteria included in COREQ, a 32-item checklist, can help researchers to report important aspects of the research team, study methods, context of the study, findings, analysis and interpretations.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            The global burden of group A streptococcal diseases.

            The global burden of disease caused by group A streptococcus (GAS) is not known. We review recent population-based data to estimate the burden of GAS diseases and highlight deficiencies in the available data. We estimate that there are at least 517,000 deaths each year due to severe GAS diseases (eg, acute rheumatic fever, rheumatic heart disease, post-streptococcal glomerulonephritis, and invasive infections). The prevalence of severe GAS disease is at least 18.1 million cases, with 1.78 million new cases each year. The greatest burden is due to rheumatic heart disease, with a prevalence of at least 15.6 million cases, with 282,000 new cases and 233,000 deaths each year. The burden of invasive GAS diseases is unexpectedly high, with at least 663,000 new cases and 163,000 deaths each year. In addition, there are more than 111 million prevalent cases of GAS pyoderma, and over 616 million incident cases per year of GAS pharyngitis. Epidemiological data from developing countries for most diseases is poor. On a global scale, GAS is an important cause of morbidity and mortality. These data emphasise the need to reinforce current control strategies, develop new primary prevention strategies, and collect better data from developing countries.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: found
              Is Open Access

              A simple method to assess and report thematic saturation in qualitative research

              Data saturation is the most commonly employed concept for estimating sample sizes in qualitative research. Over the past 20 years, scholars using both empirical research and mathematical/statistical models have made significant contributions to the question: How many qualitative interviews are enough? This body of work has advanced the evidence base for sample size estimation in qualitative inquiry during the design phase of a study, prior to data collection, but it does not provide qualitative researchers with a simple and reliable way to determine the adequacy of sample sizes during and/or after data collection. Using the principle of saturation as a foundation, we describe and validate a simple-to-apply method for assessing and reporting on saturation in the context of inductive thematic analyses. Following a review of the empirical research on data saturation and sample size estimation in qualitative research, we propose an alternative way to evaluate saturation that overcomes the shortcomings and challenges associated with existing methods identified in our review. Our approach includes three primary elements in its calculation and assessment: Base Size, Run Length, and New Information Threshold. We additionally propose a more flexible approach to reporting saturation. To validate our method, we use a bootstrapping technique on three existing thematically coded qualitative datasets generated from in-depth interviews. Results from this analysis indicate the method we propose to assess and report on saturation is feasible and congruent with findings from earlier studies.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                Role: ConceptualizationRole: Data curationRole: Formal analysisRole: InvestigationRole: MethodologyRole: ValidationRole: VisualizationRole: Writing – original draftRole: Writing – review & editing
                Role: MethodologyRole: Writing – review & editing
                Role: MethodologyRole: Writing – review & editing
                Role: MethodologyRole: Writing – review & editing
                Role: SupervisionRole: Writing – review & editing
                Role: Writing – review & editing
                Role: InvestigationRole: ResourcesRole: SupervisionRole: Writing – review & editing
                Role: ConceptualizationRole: MethodologyRole: SupervisionRole: Writing – review & editing
                Role: ConceptualizationRole: InvestigationRole: MethodologyRole: Project administrationRole: ResourcesRole: SupervisionRole: Writing – review & editing
                Role: ConceptualizationRole: Funding acquisitionRole: InvestigationRole: MethodologyRole: Project administrationRole: ResourcesRole: SupervisionRole: Writing – review & editing
                Role: Editor
                Journal
                PLOS Glob Public Health
                PLOS Glob Public Health
                plos
                PLOS Global Public Health
                Public Library of Science (San Francisco, CA USA )
                2767-3375
                25 March 2024
                2024
                : 4
                : 3
                : e0002257
                Affiliations
                [1 ] Department of Disease Control, London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, London, United Kingdom
                [2 ] The Medical Research Council Unit The Gambia at the London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, Fajara, The Gambia
                [3 ] Clinical Research Department, London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, London, United Kingdom
                [4 ] Molecular Bacteriology Laboratory, Faculty of Medicine, Free University of Brussels, Brussels, Belgium
                [5 ] Division of Clinical Medicine, School of Medicine and Population Health, The University of Sheffield, Sheffield, United Kingdom
                University of Western Australia, AUSTRALIA
                Author notes

                The authors have declared that no competing interests exist.

                ¶ Membership of the MRCG Strep A Study Group is provided in the acknowledgments.

                Author information
                https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3607-0302
                https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4700-8600
                https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7777-722X
                https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1125-4260
                Article
                PGPH-D-23-01240
                10.1371/journal.pgph.0002257
                10962789
                38527043
                a6a3abd2-e760-4cda-a341-94e113d1c152
                © 2024 Suau Sans et al

                This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.

                History
                : 26 July 2023
                : 21 February 2024
                Page count
                Figures: 0, Tables: 1, Pages: 13
                Funding
                Funded by: funder-id http://dx.doi.org/10.13039/100010269, Wellcome Trust;
                Award ID: 110058/Z/15/Z
                Award Recipient :
                Funded by: funder-id http://dx.doi.org/10.13039/100010269, Wellcome Trust;
                Award ID: 222927/Z/21/Z
                Award Recipient :
                Funded by: funder-id http://dx.doi.org/10.13039/501100002661, Fonds De La Recherche Scientifique - FNRS;
                Award ID: ASP/A622
                Award Recipient :
                TIdS is supported by a Wellcome Trust Intermediate Clinical Fellowship (110058/Z/15/Z). EPA is supported by a Wellcome Trust Clinical Ph.D. fellowship in Global Health (222927/Z/21/Z). GdC is supported by an FNRS doctoral fellowship (ref:ASP/A622). AJK is supported by a Wellcome Trust Clinical Ph.D. fellowship in Global Health (225467/Z/22/Z). The funders had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript.
                Categories
                Research Article
                Biology and Life Sciences
                Anatomy
                Neck
                Throat
                Medicine and Health Sciences
                Anatomy
                Neck
                Throat
                Medicine and Health Sciences
                Health Care
                Caregivers
                People and Places
                Population Groupings
                Age Groups
                Children
                People and Places
                Population Groupings
                Families
                Children
                People and Places
                Population Groupings
                Professions
                Medical Personnel
                Nurses
                Medicine and Health Sciences
                Health Care
                Health Care Providers
                Nurses
                Medicine and Health Sciences
                Medical Conditions
                Cardiovascular Diseases
                Medicine and Health Sciences
                Cardiology
                Cardiovascular Medicine
                Cardiovascular Diseases
                Medicine and Health Sciences
                Public and Occupational Health
                Behavioral and Social Aspects of Health
                Medicine and Health Sciences
                Complementary and Alternative Medicine
                Traditional Medicine
                Medicine and Health Sciences
                Health Care
                Health Care Facilities
                Custom metadata
                Transcripts can be reviewed by accessing the "S1 Data" Word document submitted for peer-reviewing purposes. This document can be included in the supporting documents section of the publication.

                Comments

                Comment on this article