Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26872824›Full record

ArticleHuman resources for health2016

Using a mHealth tutorial application to change knowledge and attitude of frontline health workers to Ebola virus disease in Nigeria: a before-and-after study.

Akaninyene Otu, Bassey Ebenso, Okey Okuzu, Egbe Osifo-Dawodu

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Human resources for health, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 50 papers, 5 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
50citing papers in PubMed, 5 pooled it
9.0field-weighted citation impact, top 3% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

50 citing papers in PubMed, 5 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 82 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Trial
  7. Observational
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.

Akaninyene OtuDepartment of Internal Medicine, College of Medical Sciences, University of Calabar, P.M.B. 11115, Calabar, Cross River State, Nigeria. akanotu@yahoo.com.
Bassey EbensoNuffield Centre for International Health and Development, Leeds Institute for Health Sciences, University of Leeds, Leeds, UK.
Okey OkuzuInstrat Global Health Solutions, New Jersey, USA.
Egbe Osifo-DawoduAnadach Group, Azusa, CA, USA.
University of Calabar · NGUniversity of Leeds · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe Ebola epidemic exposed the weak state of health systems in West Africa and their devastating effect on frontline health workers and the health of populations. Fortunately, recent reviews of mobile technology demonstrate that mHealth innovations can help alleviate some health system constraints such as balancing multiple priorities, lack of appropriate tools to provide services and collect data, and limited access to training in health fields such as mother and child health, HIV/AIDS and sexual and reproductive health. However, there is little empirical evidence of mHealth improving health system functions during the Ebola epidemic in West Africa.

methodsWe conducted quantitative cross-sectional surveys in 14 health facilities in Ondo State, Nigeria, to assess the effect of using a tablet computer tutorial application for changing the knowledge and attitude of health workers regarding Ebola virus disease.

resultsOf 203 participants who completed pre- and post-intervention surveys, 185 people (or 91%) were female, 94 participants (or 46.3%) were community health officers, 26 people (13 %) were nurses/midwives, 8 people (or 4%) were laboratory scientists and 75 people (37%) belonged to a group called others. Regarding knowledge of Ebola: 178 participants (or 87.7%) had foreknowledge of Ebola before the study. Further analysis showed an 11% improvement in average knowledge levels between pre- and post-intervention scores with statistically significant differences (P < 0.05) recorded for questions concerning the transmission of the Ebola virus among humans, common symptoms of Ebola fever and whether Ebola fever was preventable. Additionally, there was reinforcement of positive attitudes of avoiding the following: contact with Ebola patients, eating bush meat and risky burial practices as indicated by increases between pre- and post-intervention scores from 83 to 92%, 57 to 64% and 67 to 79%, respectively. Moreover, more participants (from 95 to 97%) reported a willingness to practice frequent hand washing and disinfecting surfaces and equipment following the intervention, and more health workers were willing (from 94 to 97%) to use personal protective equipment to prevent the transmission of Ebola.

conclusionsThe modest improvements in knowledge and reported attitudinal change toward Ebola virus disease suggests mHealth tutorial applications could hold promise for training health workers and building resilient health systems to respond to epidemics in West Africa.

Indexed as

Clinical CompetenceHealth Knowledge, Attitudes, PracticeHealth PersonnelHemorrhagic Fever, EbolaMobile ApplicationsTelemedicineCross-Sectional StudiesEpidemicsHealth FacilitiesHumansNigeriaSurveys and Questionnaires

Identifiers

PMID26872824
PMCPMC4751664
OpenAlexW2267602260

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.