Avaliação da assistência ao doente com tuberculose: aplicação do inquérito CAP – conhecimento, atitude e prática

Abstract

Assistance to patients with Tuberculosis can be performed in Primary Health Care or in the referral service, according to characteristics of the infection, presence of comorbidities and vulnerabilities. However, a great flow of patients is still observed, being assisted by the referral service to the detriment of Primary Health Care. In order to improve indicators, access and quality of care, and greater organization of the entire network, efforts have been made to the decentralization and independence of tuberculosis care in the reference service, and greater adherence and accountability of primary health care to this patient. Thus, the objective was to evaluate the Knowledge, Attitude and Practice of Family Health Strategy professionals regarding the care of the patient with tuberculosis in Primary Health Care. This was a cross sectional, evaluative type study with quantitative approach. The instrument had 42 questions divided into 4 stages that aimed to characterize the subjects and contemplate the three perspectives of the study: knowledge, attitude and practice. The study was composed of 121 professionals in Primary Health Care located in the urban area of Campina Grande-PB. Descriptive and bivariate analyzes were performed, with Mann-Whitney, Kruskal-Wallis, Spearman correlation, Decision tree analysis and Poisson regression analysis. The SPSS program was used for input and analysis of the data. The project was approved by the Research Ethics Committee. It was demonstrated that primary care professionals present unsatisfactory knowledge to assist patients with tuberculosis. It was identified that the professional category and the accomplishment or not of training were the factors most strongly associated to explain the best level of knowledge of professionals about TB. Regarding the KAP survey, the study found that the mean of general knowledge (M: 7.36) and attitude (M: 8.42) were not bad, however, due to the relevance of the issues addressed, a higher level of accuracy was expected. so that when analyzed clinically does not allow to characterize as satisfactory. The practice presented the worst mean (M: 5.93), its result is the most worrisome because it directly impacts the indicators of the disease. Inadequacy compromises disease indicators. It is necessary that new qualifications be offered contemplating the whole team.