Validity and reliability of a health care service evaluation instrument for tuberculosis

OBJECTIVE To evaluate the validity and reliability of an instrument that evaluates the structure of primary health care units for the treatment of tuberculosis.METHODS This cross-sectional study used simple random sampling and evaluated 1,037 health care professionals from five Brazilian municipalities (Natal, state of Rio Grande do Norte; Cabedelo, state of Paraíba; Foz do Iguaçu, state of Parana; Sao José do Rio Preto, state of Sao Paulo, and Uberaba, state of Minas Gerais) in 2011. Structural indicators were identified and validated, considering different methods of organization of the health care system in the municipalities of different population sizes. Each structure represented the organization of health care services and contained the resources available for the execution of health care services: physical resources (equipment, consumables, and facilities); human resources (number and qualification); and resources for maintenance of the existing infrastructure and technology (deemed as the organization of health care services). The statistical analyses used in the validation process included reliability analysis, exploratory factor analysis, and confirmatory factor analysis.RESULTS The validation process indicated the retention of five factors, with 85.9% of the total variance explained, internal consistency between 0.6460 and 0.7802, and quality of fit of the confirmatory factor analysis of 0.995 using the goodness-of-fit index. The retained factors comprised five structural indicators: professionals involved in the care of tuberculosis patients, training, access to recording instruments, availability of supplies, and coordination of health care services with other levels of care. Availability of supplies had the best performance and the lowest coefficient of variation among the services evaluated. The indicators of assessment of human resources and coordination with other levels of care had satisfactory performance, but the latter showed the highest coefficient of variation. The performance of the indicators “training” and “access to recording instruments” was inferior to that of other indicators.CONCLUSIONS The instrument showed feasibility of application and potential to assess the structure of primary health care units for the treatment of tuberculosis.

Institutional and matrix support and its relationship with primary healthcare

OBJECTIVE To analyze whether the level of institutional and matrix support is associated with better certification of primary healthcare teams.METHODS In this cross-sectional study, we evaluated two kinds of primary healthcare support – 14,489 teams received institutional support and 14,306 teams received matrix support. Logistic regression models were applied. In the institutional support model, the independent variable was “level of support” (as calculated by the sum of supporting activities for both modalities). In the matrix support model, in turn, the independent variables were the supporting activities. The multivariate analysis has considered variables with p < 0.20. The model was adjusted by the Hosmer-Lemeshow test.RESULTS The teams had institutional and matrix supporting activities (84.0% and 85.0%), respectively, with 55.0% of them performing between six and eight activities. For the institutional support, we have observed 1.96 and 3.77 chances for teams who had medium and high levels of support to have very good or good certification, respectively. For the matrix support, the chances of their having very good or good certification were 1.79 and 3.29, respectively. Regarding to the association between institutional support activities and the certification, the very good or good certification was positively associated with self-assessment (OR = 1.95), permanent education (OR = 1.43), shared evaluation (OR = 1.40), and supervision and evaluation of indicators (OR = 1.37). In regards to the matrix support, the very good or good certification was positively associated with permanent education (OR = 1.50), interventions in the territory (OR = 1.30), and discussion in the work processes (OR = 1.23).CONCLUSIONS In Brazil, supporting activities are being incorporated in primary healthcare, and there is an association between the level of support, both matrix and institutional, and the certification result.