Perceived Health System Barriers to Tuberculosis Control Among Health Workers in South Africa
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: The healthcare workforce in high tuberculosis burden countries such as South Africa is at elevated risk of tuberculosis infection and disease with adverse consequences for their well-being and productivity. Despite the availability of international guidelines on protection of health workers from tuberculosis, research globally has focused on proximal deficiencies in practice rather than on health system barriers. Objective: This study sought to elicit perceptions of informed persons within the health system regarding health system barriers to protecting health workers from tuberculosis. Methods: Semi-structured interviews were conducted with 18 informants active in spheres related to workplace tuberculosis prevention and management in South Africa. Interviews were audio recorded and transcribed verbatim, validated and analysed to derive emergent themes. Responses were analysed using the World Health Organization building blocks as core elements of a health system bearing on protection of its health workforce. Findings: The following health system barriers were identified by informants: leadership and governance were "top-down" and fragmented; lack of funding was a major barrier; there were insufficient numbers of staff trained in infection prevention and control and occupational health; occupational health services were not comprehensively available and the ability to sustain protective technologies was questioned. A cross-cutting barrier was lack of priority afforded to workforce occupational health associated with lack of accurate information on cases of TB among health workers. Conclusions: We conclude that deficiencies in implementation of recommended infection control and tuberculosis management practices are unlikely to be corrected until health system barriers are addressed. More committed leadership from senior health system management and greater funding are needed. The process could be assisted by the development of indicators to characterise such barriers and monitor progress.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".