Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34374420›Full record

ArticleHealth policy and planning2021

Changes in health worker knowledge and motivation in the context of a quality improvement programme in Ethiopia.

Matthew Quaife, Abiy Seifu Estafinos, Dorka Woldesenbet Keraga, Julia Lohmann, Zelee Hill, Abiyou Kiflie, Tanya Marchant, Josephine Borghi, Joanna Schellenberg

Open access · hybridAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Health policy and planning, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed
4.0field-weighted citation impact, top 7% 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

5 citing papers in PubMed, 16 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. 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

9 authors at 4 institutions in 2 countries.

Matthew QuaifeFaculty of Public Health and Policy, London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, 15-17 Tavistock Place, London WC1H 9SH, UK.ORCID 0000-0001-9291-1511
Abiy Seifu EstafinosSchool of Public Health, Addis Ababa University, Addis Ababa, Ethiopia.
Dorka Woldesenbet KeragaSchool of Public Health, Addis Ababa University, Addis Ababa, Ethiopia.
Julia LohmannFaculty of Public Health and Policy, London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, 15-17 Tavistock Place, London WC1H 9SH, UK.ORCID 0000-0003-4136-9296
Zelee HillInstitute for Global Health, University College London, Gower Street, London WC1E 6BT, UK.
Abiyou KiflieInstitute for Healthcare Improvement, Addis Ababa, Ethiopia.
Tanya MarchantFaculty of Infectious and Tropical Diseases, London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, Keppel Street, London WC1E 7HT, UK.
Josephine BorghiFaculty of Public Health and Policy, London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, 15-17 Tavistock Place, London WC1H 9SH, UK.
Joanna SchellenbergFaculty of Infectious and Tropical Diseases, London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, Keppel Street, London WC1E 7HT, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-0708-3676
London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine · GBAddis Ababa University · ETUniversity of London · GBUniversity College London · GB

Funding

Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation OPP1149259
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

A knowledgeable and motivated workforce is critical for health systems to provide high-quality services. Many low- and middle-income countries face shortages in human resources and low health worker motivation but are also home to a burgeoning number of quality improvement (QI) programmes. This study evaluates whether and how motivation and clinical knowledge in three cadres of health workers changed in the context of a QI programme for maternal and newborn health in Ethiopia. This mixed-methods study used a pre-post comparison group design with matched comparison areas. We interviewed 395 health workers at baseline in April 2018 and 404 at endline in June 2019 from seven districts (woredas) with QI and seven comparison woredas. Three cadres were interviewed: health extension workers, facility-based skilled midlevel maternal and newborn care providers, and non-patient-facing staff. A qualitative component sought to triangulate and further elucidate quantitative findings using in-depth interviews with 22 health workers. Motivation was assessed quantitatively, exploratory factor analysis was used to categorize motivation dimensions, and regression-based difference-in-difference analyses were conducted. Knowledge was assessed through a clinical vignette. Qualitative data were analysed in a deductive process based on a framework derived from quantitative results. Although knowledge of the QI programme was high (79%) among participants from QI woreda at endline, participation in QI teams was lower (56%). There was strong evidence that health worker knowledge increased more in areas with QI than comparison areas. Three motivation dimensions emerged from the data: (1) 'helping others', (2) 'pride and satisfaction' and (3) 'external recognition and support'. We found strong evidence that motivation across these factors improved in both QI and comparison areas, with weak evidence of greater increases in comparison areas. Qualitative data suggested the QI programme may have improved motivation by allowing staff to provide better care. This study suggests that although QI programmes can increase health worker knowledge, there may be little effect on motivation. Programme evaluations should measure a wide range of outcomes to fully understand their impact.

Indexed as

MotivationQuality ImprovementEthiopiaHealth PersonnelHealth WorkforceHumansInfant, NewbornEthiopiahealth worker knowledgehealth worker motivationmixed methodsQuality improvement

Identifiers

PMID34374420
PMCPMC8597962
OpenAlexW3189939758

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.