ArticleBMC health services research2018
Implementation of district-based clinical specialist teams in South Africa: Analysing a new role in a transforming system.
Article in BMC health services research, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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.
Who cites it
11 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- What can healthcare systems learn from looking at tensions in innovation processes? A systematic literature review.BMC health services research · 2022Pooled it
- Article
- The Meso-Level in Quality Improvement: Perspectives From a Maternal-Neonatal Health Partnership in South Africa.International journal of health policy and management · 2024Article
- Implementing an intervention to improve leadership/management of public healthcare services in the Free State Province, South Africa: lessons learned.African health sciences · 2023Article
- Promoting Awareness of the Role of the District Clinical Specialist Team in the Amathole District, South Africa: A Valuable Specialty in Improving Healthcare Access and Quality.Tropical medicine and infectious disease · 2022Article
- Early Reflections on Mphatlalatsane, a Maternal and Neonatal Quality Improvement Initiative Implemented During COVID-19 in South Africa.Global health, science and practice · 2022Article
- Improving public health sector service delivery in the Free State, South Africa: development of a provincial intervention model.BMC health services research · 2022Article
- Testing the contextual Interaction theory in a UHC pilot district in South Africa.BMC health services research · 2022Article
- Article
- What we need is health system transformation and not health system strengthening for universal health coverage to work: Perspectives from a National Health Insurance pilot site in South Africa.South African family practice : official journal of the South African Academy of Family Practice/Primary Care · 2020Article
- Towards national health insurance: Alignment of strategic human resources in South Africa.African journal of primary health care & family medicine · 2019Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundImproving the quality of health care is a national priority in many countries to help reduce unacceptable levels of variation in health system practices, performance and outcomes. In 2012, South Africa introduced district-based clinical specialist teams (DCSTs) to enhance clinical governance at the lowest level of the health system. This paper examines the expectations and responses of local health system actors in the introduction and early implementation of this new DCST role.
methodsBetween 2013 and 2015, we carried out 258 in-depth interviews and three focus group discussions with managers, implementers and intended beneficiaries of the DCST innovation. Data were collected in three districts using a theory of change approach for programme evaluation. We also embarked on role charting through policy document review. Guided by role theory, we analysed data thematically and compared findings across the three districts.
resultsWe found role ambiguity and conflict in the implementation of the new DCST role. Individual, organisational and systemic factors influenced actors' expectations, behaviours, and adjustments to the new clinical governance role. Local contextual factors affected the composition and scope of DCSTs in each site, while leadership and accountability pathways shaped system adaptiveness across all three. Two key contributions emerge; firstly, the responsiveness of the system to an innovation requires time in planning, roll-out, phasing, and monitoring. Secondly, the interconnectedness of quality improvement processes adds complexity to innovation in clinical governance and may influence the (in) effectiveness of service delivery.
conclusionRole ambiguity and conflict in the DCST role at a system-wide level suggests the need for effective management of implementation systems. Additionally, improving quality requires anticipating and addressing a shortage of inputs, including financing for additional staff and skills for health care delivery and careful integration of health care policy guidelines.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.