Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27345024›Full record

ArticleGlobal health action2016

How to create more supportive supervision for primary healthcare: lessons from Ngamiland district of Botswana: co-operative inquiry group.

Oathokwa Nkomazana, Robert Mash, Silvia Wojczewski, Ruth Kutalek, Nthabiseng Phaladze

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Global health action, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 17 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
17citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
3.0field-weighted citation impact, top 9% 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

17 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 35 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Whole person medicine: Psychosocial issues in primary care.African journal of primary health care & family medicine · 2016
    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

5 authors at 3 institutions in 3 countries.

Oathokwa NkomazanaFaculty of Medicine, University of Botswana, Gaborone, Botswana; nkomazanao@mopipi.ub.bw.
Robert MashDivision of Family Medicine and Primary Care, Stellenbosch University, Stellenbosch, South Africa.
Silvia WojczewskiUnit Ethnomedicine and International Health, Department of General Practice and Family Medicine, Centre of Public Health, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria.
Ruth KutalekUnit Ethnomedicine and International Health, Department of General Practice and Family Medicine, Centre of Public Health, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria.
Nthabiseng PhaladzeSchool of Nursing, University of Botswana, Gaborone, Botswana.
Medical University of Vienna · ATUniversity of Botswana · BWStellenbosch University · ZA

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundSupportive supervision is a way to foster performance, productivity, motivation, and retention of health workforce. Nevertheless there is a dearth of evidence of the impact and acceptability of supportive supervision in low- and middle-income countries. This article describes a participatory process of transforming the supervisory practice of district health managers to create a supportive environment for primary healthcare workers.

objectiveThe objective of the study was to explore how district health managers can change their practice to create a more supportive environment for primary healthcare providers.

designA facilitated co-operative inquiry group (CIG) was formed with Ngamiland health district managers. CIG belongs to the participatory action research paradigm and is characterised by a cyclic process of observation, reflection, planning, and action. The CIG went through three cycles between March 2013 and March 2014.

resultsTwelve district health managers participated in the inquiry group. The major insights and learning that emerged from the inquiry process included inadequate supervisory practice, perceptions of healthcare workers' experiences, change in the managers' supervision paradigm, recognition of the supervisors' inadequate supervisory skills, and barriers to supportive supervision. Finally, the group developed a 10-point consensus on what they had learnt regarding supportive supervision.

conclusionNgamiland health district managers have come to appreciate the value of supportive supervision and changed their management style to be more supportive of their subordinates. They also developed a consensus on supportive supervision that could be adapted for use nationally. Supportive supervision should be prioritised at all levels of the health system, and it should be adequately resourced.

Indexed as

Attitude of Health PersonnelLeadershipPrimary Health CareBotswanaFemaleHealth PersonnelHealth Services ResearchHumansInservice TrainingMaleMotivationQualitative Researchco-operative inquiry groupdistrict health managershealthcare workersprimary healthcaresupportive supervision

Identifiers

PMID27345024
PMCPMC4921783
OpenAlexW2467453890

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.