@article{fdi:010095836,
  title = {{A}cceptability of the routine use of pulse oximetry by healthcare workers and caregivers within primary healthcare in {W}est {A}frica : mixed-methods study},
  author = {{L}ouart, {S}. and {H}edible, {K}. {G}. {B}. and {B}alde, {H}. and {C}oulibaly, {A}. and {D}agobi, {A}. {E}. and {K}adio, {K}. and {N}eboua, {D}. and {Z}air, {Z}. and {L}eroy, {V}. and {R}idde, {V}al{\'e}ry},
  editor = {},
  language = {{ENG}},
  abstract = {{I}ntroduction {T}o better identify severe hypoxaemia as a major risk factor for specific illnesses in children aged under 5 years, the {A}m{\'e}liorer l'{I}dentification des d{\'e}tresses {R}espiratoires chez l'{E}nfant ({AIRE}) project implemented routine use of pulse oximetry within implementation of {I}ntegrated {M}anagement of {C}hildhood {I}llness ({IMCI}) guidelines at primary health centres ({PHC}s) in {B}urkina {F}aso, {G}uinea, {M}ali and {N}iger. {W}e aimed to measure and understand the acceptability of pulse oximeter ({PO}) use among healthcare workers ({HCW}s) and children's families ({CF}s).{M}ethods {B}ased on an original conceptual framework, we conducted a convergent mixed methods study to assess acceptability. {W}e conducted repeated cross-sectional studies among all {HCW}s on duty within the 202 {PHC}s involved in the {AIRE} project, using quantitative {L}ikert-scale questionnaires. {T}hese were administered at four key time points: (1) just before the {PO} use training, (2) immediately after the training, (3) 6 months after the introduction of {PO} devices in {PHC}s and (4) 2 months after the completion of all {AIRE} project activities. {W}e also conducted semistructured interviews with {HCW}s (n=100) and {CF}s (n=59). {Q}uantitative data were analysed using descriptive statistics and multivariable ordinal logistic regression. {Q}ualitative data were thematically analysed with {NV}ivo, and both were interpreted in light of the conceptual framework to explore convergence and divergence across acceptability dimensions.{R}esults {F}rom {M}arch 2021 to {D}ecember 2022, 486, 537, 538 and 476 {HCW}s completed the four acceptability surveys. {O}verall, 31% of {HCW}s had mixed feelings about {PO} use before the training, 46% found it somewhat acceptable and 23% strongly acceptable. {A}t the end of the project, it was respectively 15%, 34% and 51%. {PO} training was consistently associated with greater {HCW}s acceptability. {HCW}s reported many advantages in using {PO}, such as a more accurate diagnosis and a boost in their confidence in sick child management. {N}evertheless, challenges reported by {HCW}s included perceived increased workload and consultation time, as well as difficulties in referring children to hospital. {CF}s did not necessarily understand the device's purpose, but their opinions of the technology were generally positive.{C}onclusion {PO} use, integrated into {IMCI} consultations, was reported to be accepted by {HCW}s and {CF}s, although sustainable challenges in implementation remain.},
  keywords = {{C}hild health ; {R}espiratory infections ; {D}iagnostics and tools ; {C}ross-sectional survey ; {Q}ualitative study ; {BURKINA} {FASO} ; {GUINEE} ; {MALI} ; {NIGER} ; {AFRIQUE} {SUBSAHARIENNE} ; {AFRIQUE} {DE} {L}'{OUEST}},
  booktitle = {},
  journal = {{BMJ} {G}lobal {H}ealth},
  volume = {10},
  numero = {{S}uppl. 8},
  pages = {e017302 [13 p.]},
  ISSN = {2059-7908},
  year = {2025},
  DOI = {10.1136/bmjgh-2024-017302},
  URL = {https://www.documentation.ird.fr/hor/fdi:010095836},
}