Search

Background: The increased recognition of governance, leadership, and management as determinants of health system performance has prompted calls for research focusing on the nature, quality, and measurement of this key health system building block. In low- or middle-income contexts (LMIC), where facility-level management and performance remain a challenge, valid tools to measure management have the potential to boost performance and accelerate improvements. We, therefore, sought to develop a Facility-level Management Scale (FMS) and test its reliability in the psychometric properties in three African contexts. Methods: The FMS was administered to 881 health workers in; Ghana (n = 287; 32.6%), Malawi (n = 66; 7.5%) and Uganda (n = 528; 59.9%). Half of the sample data was randomly subjected to exploratory factor analysis (EFA) and Monte Carlo Parallel Component Analysis to explore the FMS' latent structure. The construct validity of this structure was then tested on the remaining half of the sample using confirmatory factor analysis (CFA). The FMS' convergent and divergent validity, as well as internal consistency, were also tested. Results: Findings from the EFA and Monte Carlo PCA suggested the retention of three factors (labelled 'Supportive Management', 'Resource Management' and 'Time management'). The 3-factor solution explained 51% of the variance in perceived facility management. These results were supported by the results of the CFA (N = 381; χ2 = 256.8, df = 61, p < 0.001; CFI = 0.94; TLI = 0.92; RMSEA [95% CI] = 0.065 [0.057–0.074]; SRMR = 0.047). Conclusion: The FMS is an open-access, short, easy-to-administer scale that can be used to assess how health workers perceive facility-level management in LMICs. When used as a regular monitoring tool, the FMS can identify key strengths or challenges pertaining to time, resources, and supportive management functions at the health facility level. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: The need to scale up public health interventions in low- and middle-income countries to ensure equitable and sustainable impact is widely acknowledged. However, there has been little understanding of how projects have sought to address the importance of scale-up in the design and implementation of their initiatives. This paper aims to gain insight into the facilitators of the scale-up of a district-level health management strengthening intervention in Ghana, Malawi and Uganda. Methods: The study took a comparative case study approach with two rounds of data collection (2019 and 2021) in which a combination of different qualitative methods was applied. Interviews and group discussions took place with district, regional and national stakeholders who were involved in the implementation and scale-up of the intervention. Results: A shared vision among the different stakeholders about how to institutionalize the intervention into the existing system facilitated scale-up. The importance of champions was also identified, as they influence buy-in from key decision makers, and when decision makers are convinced, political and financial support for scale-up can increase. In two countries, a specific window of opportunity facilitated scale-up. Taking a flexible approach towards scale-up, allowing adaptations of the intervention and the scale-up strategy to the context, was also identified as a facilitator. The context of decentralization and the politics and power relations between stakeholders involved also influenced scale-up. Conclusions: Despite the identification of the facilitators of the scale-up, full integration of the intervention into the health system has proven challenging in all countries. Approaching scale-up from a systems change perspective could be useful in future scale-up efforts, as it focuses on sustainable systems change at scale (e.g. improving district health management) by testing a combination of interventions that could contribute to the envisaged change, rather than horizontally scaling up and trying to embed one particular intervention in the system. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Since 2017, PERFORM2Scale, a research consortium with partners from seven countries in Africa and Europe, has steered the implementation and scale-up of a district-level health management strengthening intervention in Ghana, Malawi and Uganda. This article presents PERFORM2Scale's theory of change (ToC) and reflections upon and adaptations of the ToC over time. The article aims to contribute to understanding the benefits and challenges of using a ToC-based approach for monitoring and evaluating the scale-up of health system strengthening interventions, because there is limited documentation of this in the literature.Methods: The consortium held annual ToC reflections that entailed multiple participatory methods, including individual scoring exercises, country and consortium-wide group discussions and visualizations. The reflections were captured in detailed annual reports, on which this article is based.Results: The PERFORM2Scale ToC describes how the management strengthening intervention, which targets district health management teams, was expected to improve health workforce performance and service delivery at scale, and which assumptions were instrumental to track over time. The annual ToC reflections proved valuable in gaining a nuanced understanding of how change did (and did not) happen. This helped in strategizing on actions to further steer the scale-up the intervention. It also led to adaptations of the ToC over time. Based on the annual reflections, these actions and adaptations related to: assessing the scalability of the intervention, documentation and dissemination of evidence about the effects of the intervention, understanding power relationships between key stakeholders, the importance of developing and monitoring a scale-up strategy and identification of opportunities to integrate (parts of) the intervention into existing structures and strategies.Conclusions: PERFORM2Scale's experience provides lessons for using ToCs to monitor and evaluate the scale-up of health system strengthening interventions. ToCs can help in establishing a common vision on intervention scale-up. ToC-based approaches should include a variety of stakeholders and require their continued commitment to reflection and learning on intervention implementation and scale-up. ToC-based approaches can help in adapting interventions as well as scale-up processes to be in tune with contextual changes and stakeholders involved, to potentially increase chances for successful scale-up. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: In post-conflict settings, many state and non-state actors interact at the sub-national levels in rebuilding health systems by providing funds, delivering vital interventions and building capacity of local governments to shoulder their roles. Aid relationships among actors at sub-national level represent a vital lever for health system development. This study was undertaken to assess the aid-effectiveness in post-conflict districts of northern Uganda.Method: This was a three district cross sectional study conducted from January to April 2013. A two stage snowball approach used to construct a relational-network for each district. Managers of organizations (ego) involved service delivery were interviewed and asked to list the external organizations (alters) that contribute to three key services. For each inter-organizational relationship (tie) a custom-made tool designed to reflect the aid-effectiveness in the Paris Declaration was used.Results: Three hundred eighty four relational ties between the organizations were generated from a total of 85 organizations interviewed. Satisfaction with aid relationships was mostly determined by 1) the extent ego was able to negotiate own priorities, 2) ego's awareness of expected results, and 3) provision of feedback about ego's performance. Respectively, the B coefficients were 16%, 38% and 19%. Disaggregated analysis show that satisfaction of fund-holders was also determined by addressing own priorities (30%), while provider satisfaction was mostly determined by awareness of expected results (66%) and feedback on performance (23%). All results were significant at p-value of 0.05. Overall, the regression models in these analyses accounted for 44% to 62% of the findings.Conclusion: Sub-national assessment of aid effectiveness is feasible with indicators adapted from the global parameters. These findings illustrate the focus on "results" domain and less on "ownership" and "resourcing" domains. The capacity and space for sub-national level authorities to negotiate local priorities requires more attention especially for health system development in post-conflict settings. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: The scale-up of successfully tested public health interventions is critical to achieving universal health coverage. To ensure optimal use of resources, assessment of the scalability of an intervention is recognized as a crucial step in the scale-up process. This study assessed the scalability of a tested health management-strengthening intervention (MSI) at the district level in Ghana, Malawi and Uganda., Methods: Qualitative interviews were conducted with intervention users (district health management teams, DHMTs) and implementers of the scale-up of the intervention (national-level actors) in Ghana, Malawi and Uganda, before and 1 year after the scale-up had started. To assess the scalability of the intervention, the CORRECT criteria from WHO/ExpandNet were used during analysis., Results: The MSI was seen as credible, as regional- and national-level Ministry of Health officials were championing the intervention. While documented evidence on intervention effectiveness was limited, district- and national-level stakeholders seemed to be convinced of the value of the intervention. This was based on its observed positive results regarding management competencies, teamwork and specific aspects of health workforce performance and service delivery. The perceived need for strengthening of management capacity and service delivery showed the relevance of the intervention, and relative advantages of the intervention were its participatory and sustainable nature. Turnover within the DHMTs and limited (initial) management capacity were factors complicating implementation. The intervention was not contested and was seen as compatible with (policy) priorities at the national level., Conclusion: We conclude that the MSI is scalable. However, to enhance its scalability, certain aspects should be adapted to better fit the context in which the intervention is being scaled up. Greater involvement of regional and national actors alongside improved documentation of results of the intervention can facilitate scale-up. Continuous assessment of the scalability of the intervention with all stakeholders involved is necessary, as context, stakeholders and priorities may change. Therefore, adaptations of the intervention might be required. The assessment of scalability, preferably as part of the monitoring of a scale-up strategy, enables critical reflections on next steps to make the intervention more scalable and the scale-up more successful., (© 2022. The Author(s).)