Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29439743›Full record

ArticleHuman resources for health2018

Supportive supervision and constructive relationships with healthcare workers support CHW performance: Use of a qualitative framework to evaluate CHW programming in Uganda.

Teralynn Ludwick, Eleanor Turyakira, Teddy Kyomuhangi, Kimberly Manalili, Sheila Robinson, Jennifer L Brenner

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Human resources for health, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 49 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
49citing papers in PubMed, 4 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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

49 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. An integrated support model for lay health care workers to improve clients' retention in HIV care.South African family practice : official journal of the South African Academy of Family Practice/Primary Care · 2025
    Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  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

6 authors.

Teralynn LudwickSchool of Public Health, University of Alberta, 116 St & 85 Ave, Edmonton, AB, T6G 2R3, Canada.
Eleanor TuryakiraDepartment of Community Health, Faculty of Medicine, Mbarara University of Science and Technology, P.O BOX 1410, Mbarara, Uganda.
Teddy KyomuhangiMaternal, Newborn, and Child Health Institute, Mbarara University of Science and Technology, P.O BOX 1410, Mbarara, Uganda.
Kimberly ManaliliDepartment of Community Health Sciences, Cumming School of Medicine, University of Calgary, 2500 University Dr NW, Calgary, AB, T2N 1N4, Canada.
Sheila RobinsonDepartment of Community Health Sciences, Cumming School of Medicine, University of Calgary, 2500 University Dr NW, Calgary, AB, T2N 1N4, Canada.
Jennifer L BrennerPediatrics, Cumming School of Medicine, University of Calgary, 2500 University Dr NW, Calgary, AB, T2N 1N4, Canada. jennbrenner@me.com.

Funding

Global Affairs Canada Project S065346-001
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundWhile evidence supports community health worker (CHW) capacity to improve maternal and newborn health in less-resourced countries, key implementation gaps remain. Tools for assessing CHW performance and evidence on what programmatic components affect performance are lacking. This study developed and tested a qualitative evaluative framework and tool to assess CHW team performance in a district program in rural Uganda.

methodsA new assessment framework was developed to collect and analyze qualitative evidence based on CHW perspectives on seven program components associated with effectiveness (selection; training; community embeddedness; peer support; supportive supervision; relationship with other healthcare workers; retention and incentive structures). Focus groups were conducted with four high/medium-performing CHW teams and four low-performing CHW teams selected through random, stratified sampling. Content analysis involved organizing focus group transcripts according to the seven program effectiveness components, and assigning scores to each component per focus group.

resultsFour components, 'supportive supervision', 'good relationships with other healthcare workers', 'peer support', and 'retention and incentive structures' received the lowest overall scores. Variances in scores between 'high'/'medium'- and 'low'-performing CHW teams were largest for 'supportive supervision' and 'good relationships with other healthcare workers.' Our analysis suggests that in the Bushenyi intervention context, CHW team performance is highly correlated with the quality of supervision and relationships with other healthcare workers. CHWs identified key performance-related issues of absentee supervisors, referral system challenges, and lack of engagement/respect by health workers. Other less-correlated program components warrant further study and may have been impacted by relatively consistent program implementation within our limited study area.

conclusionsApplying process-oriented measurement tools are needed to better understand CHW performance-related factors and build a supportive environment for CHW program effectiveness and sustainability. Findings from a qualitative, multi-component tool developed and applied in this study suggest that factors related to (1) supportive supervision and (2) relationships with other healthcare workers may be strongly associated with variances in performance outcomes within a program. Careful consideration of supervisory structure and health worker orientation during program implementation are among strategies proposed to increase CHW performance.

Indexed as

Community Health WorkersMaternal-Child Health ServicesPersonnel ManagementProgram EvaluationQuality of Health CareRural Health ServicesWork PerformanceAdultChildFemaleFocus GroupsHumansInfant HealthInfant, NewbornMaternal HealthMotivation

Identifiers

PMID29439743
PMCPMC5812047

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.