BackgroundMultidrug resistant (MDR) tuberculosis (TB) represents TB which is simultaneous resistant to at least rifampicin (R) and isoniazid (H). Identifying inadequate therapy as the main cause of this form of the disease and explaining the factors leading to its occurrence, numerous social determinants that affect the risk of developing resistance are highlighted. The objectives of the study was to identify independent factors of MDR-TB among tuberculosis patients.MethodsCase-control study was conducted from 1st September 2009 to 1st June 2014 in 31 healthcare institutions in Serbia where MDR-TB and TB patients were treated. TB patients infected with MDR- M. tuberculosis and non MDR- M. tuberculosis strain were considered as cases and controls, respectively. Cases and controls were matched by the date of hospitalization. The data was collected using structured questionnaire with face to face interview. Bivariate and multivariable logistic regression analysis (MLRA) were used to identify determinants associated with MDR-TB.ResultsA total of 124 respondents, 31 cases and 93 controls were participated in the study. MLRA identified six significant independent risk factors for the occurrence of MDR-TB as follows: monthly income of the family (Odds ratio (OR) = 3.71; 95% Confidence Interval (CI) = 1.22–11.28), defaulting from treatment (OR = 3.33; 95% CI = 1.14–9.09), stigma associated with TB (OR = 2.97; 95% CI = 1.18–7.45), subjective feeling of sadness (OR = 4.05; 95% CI = 1.69–9.70), use of sedatives (OR = 2.79; 95% CI = 1.02–7.65) and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (OR = 4.51; 95% CI = 1.07–18.96).ConclusionIn order to reduce burden of drug resistance, strategies of controlling MDR-TB in Serbia should emphasize multi-sectorial actions, addressing health care and social needs of TB patients.

Given the fragmentation of the institutional infrastructure, the harmonisation of programme content and thinking is impressive. However, the educational capacity in the European Region is far from being sufficient if compared to aspired US levels.

BackgroundTraining is the systematic acquisition of skills, rules, concepts, or attitudes and is one of the most important components in any organization’s strategy. There is increasing demand for formal and informal training programs especially for physicians in leadership positions. This study determined the learning outcomes after a specific training program for hospital management teams.MethodsThe study was conducted during 2006 and 2007 at the Centre School of Public Health and Management, Faculty of Medicine, University of Belgrade and included 107 participants involved in the management in 20 Serbian general hospitals. The management teams were multidisciplinary, consisting of five members on average: the director of the general hospital, the deputy directors, the head nurse, and the chiefs of support services. The managers attended a training program, which comprised four modules addressing specific topics. Three reviewers independently evaluated the level of management skills at the beginning and 12 months after the training program. Principal component analysis and subsequent stepwise multiple linear regression analysis were performed to determine predictors of learning outcomes.ResultsThe quality of the SWOT (strengths, weaknesses, opportunities and threats) analyses performed by the trainees improved with differences between 0.35 and 0.49 on a Likert scale (p < 0.001). Principal component analysis explained 81% of the variance affecting their quality of strategic planning. Following the training program, the external environment, strategic positioning, and quality of care were predictors of learning outcomes. The four regression models used showed that the training program had positive effects (p < 0.001) on the ability to formulate a Strategic Plan comprising the hospital mission, vision, strategic objectives, and action plan.ConclusionThis study provided evidence that training for strategic planning and management enhanced the strategic decision-making of hospital management teams, which is a requirement for hospitals in an increasingly competitive, complex and challenging context. For the first time, half of state general hospitals involved in team training have formulated the development of an official strategic plan. The positive effects of the formal training program justify additional investment in future education and training.

HCWs require specific educational programmes and training protocols to ensure that they are adequately protected when carrying out high quality care.

Introduction:Conflicts, social unrest, and disasters can significantly affect the ability of a healthcare system to provide for the needs of its citizens. The collapse of the primary healthcare system in Serbia is a model of the effects that civil unrest can have on the health of a population. However, with improving social and political conditions, focus now can be turned towards the greatly needed development and reorganization of the primary healthcare system in Serbia.Due to the complexity of health-system reform in the post-conflict/post-disaster setting, attempts to restructure health services are fraught with pitfalls that often are unanticipated because of inadequate preliminary assessments. A multimodal assessment involving quantitative and qualitative methodologies may provide a more robust mechanism to identify key programmatic priorities and critical barriers for appropriate and sustainable health-system interventions. The purpose of this study is to describe a multimodal assessment using primary healthcare in post-conflict Serbia as a model.Methods:Integrated quantitative and qualitative methodologies—system characterization and observation, focus group discussions, free-response questionnaires, and Q-methodology—were used to identify needs, problems, and potential barriers to primary healthcare development in Serbia. Participants included primary healthcare providers and administrators from 13 institutions throughout Belgrade.Results:Demographic data indicate a well-established infrastructure of primary health centers and stations. However, focus group discussions and free-response questionnaires reveal significant impediments to delivery of care: (1) Inadequate equipment, supplies, and medications; (2) Poor financial investment; (3) Discouraging worker salaries; (4) Few opportunities for professional development; and (5) Little emphasis on or respect for primary healthcare. Q-methodology of provider perceptions and opinions supports these concerns, shows remarkable consensus among participants, and provides further insights toward system development by grouping respondents into distinctive types.Conclusions:This study identified the critical needs and barriers to development of primary healthcare in Serbia. This combined methodology may serve as a model for future health system assessments in the post-conflict and post-disaster settings.