Cargando…

Stakeholders’ perceptions of policy options to support the integration of community health workers in health systems

BACKGROUND: Community health workers (CHWs) are an important component of the health workforce in many countries. The World Health Organization (WHO) has developed a guideline to support the integration of CHWs into health systems. This study assesses stakeholders’ valuation of outcomes of interest,...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Ajuebor, Onyema, Cometto, Giorgio, Boniol, Mathieu, Akl, Elie A.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2019
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6379925/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30777095
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12960-019-0348-6
_version_ 1783396211317800960
author Ajuebor, Onyema
Cometto, Giorgio
Boniol, Mathieu
Akl, Elie A.
author_facet Ajuebor, Onyema
Cometto, Giorgio
Boniol, Mathieu
Akl, Elie A.
author_sort Ajuebor, Onyema
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Community health workers (CHWs) are an important component of the health workforce in many countries. The World Health Organization (WHO) has developed a guideline to support the integration of CHWs into health systems. This study assesses stakeholders’ valuation of outcomes of interest, acceptability and feasibility of policy options considered for the CHW guideline development. METHODS: A cross-sectional mixed methods (quantitative and qualitative) study targeting stakeholders involved directly or indirectly in country implementation of CHW programmes was conducted in 2017. Data was collected from 96 stakeholders from five WHO regions using an online questionnaire. A Likert scale (1 to 9) was used to grade participants’ assessments of the outcomes of interest, and the acceptability and feasibility of policy options were considered. RESULTS: All outcomes of interest were considered by at least 90% of participants as ‘important’ or ‘critical’. Most critical outcomes were ‘improved quality of CHW health services’ and ‘increased health service coverage’ (91.5% and 86.2% participants judging them as ‘critical’ respectively). Out of 40 policy options, 35 were considered as ‘definitely acceptable’ and 36 ‘definitely feasible’ by most participants. The least acceptable option (37% of participants rating ‘definitely not acceptable’) was the selection of candidates based on age. The least feasible option (29% of participants rating ‘definitely not feasible’) was the selection of CHWs with a minimum of secondary education. CONCLUSION: Outcomes of interest and policy options proposed were rated highly by most stakeholders. This finding helps to reinforce their usefulness in meeting the expectations of the CHW guideline end-users to properly integrate CHWs into health systems. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (10.1186/s12960-019-0348-6) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-6379925
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2019
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-63799252019-02-28 Stakeholders’ perceptions of policy options to support the integration of community health workers in health systems Ajuebor, Onyema Cometto, Giorgio Boniol, Mathieu Akl, Elie A. Hum Resour Health Research BACKGROUND: Community health workers (CHWs) are an important component of the health workforce in many countries. The World Health Organization (WHO) has developed a guideline to support the integration of CHWs into health systems. This study assesses stakeholders’ valuation of outcomes of interest, acceptability and feasibility of policy options considered for the CHW guideline development. METHODS: A cross-sectional mixed methods (quantitative and qualitative) study targeting stakeholders involved directly or indirectly in country implementation of CHW programmes was conducted in 2017. Data was collected from 96 stakeholders from five WHO regions using an online questionnaire. A Likert scale (1 to 9) was used to grade participants’ assessments of the outcomes of interest, and the acceptability and feasibility of policy options were considered. RESULTS: All outcomes of interest were considered by at least 90% of participants as ‘important’ or ‘critical’. Most critical outcomes were ‘improved quality of CHW health services’ and ‘increased health service coverage’ (91.5% and 86.2% participants judging them as ‘critical’ respectively). Out of 40 policy options, 35 were considered as ‘definitely acceptable’ and 36 ‘definitely feasible’ by most participants. The least acceptable option (37% of participants rating ‘definitely not acceptable’) was the selection of candidates based on age. The least feasible option (29% of participants rating ‘definitely not feasible’) was the selection of CHWs with a minimum of secondary education. CONCLUSION: Outcomes of interest and policy options proposed were rated highly by most stakeholders. This finding helps to reinforce their usefulness in meeting the expectations of the CHW guideline end-users to properly integrate CHWs into health systems. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (10.1186/s12960-019-0348-6) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users. BioMed Central 2019-02-18 /pmc/articles/PMC6379925/ /pubmed/30777095 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12960-019-0348-6 Text en © The Author(s). 2019 Open AccessThis article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated.
spellingShingle Research
Ajuebor, Onyema
Cometto, Giorgio
Boniol, Mathieu
Akl, Elie A.
Stakeholders’ perceptions of policy options to support the integration of community health workers in health systems
title Stakeholders’ perceptions of policy options to support the integration of community health workers in health systems
title_full Stakeholders’ perceptions of policy options to support the integration of community health workers in health systems
title_fullStr Stakeholders’ perceptions of policy options to support the integration of community health workers in health systems
title_full_unstemmed Stakeholders’ perceptions of policy options to support the integration of community health workers in health systems
title_short Stakeholders’ perceptions of policy options to support the integration of community health workers in health systems
title_sort stakeholders’ perceptions of policy options to support the integration of community health workers in health systems
topic Research
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6379925/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30777095
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12960-019-0348-6
work_keys_str_mv AT ajueboronyema stakeholdersperceptionsofpolicyoptionstosupporttheintegrationofcommunityhealthworkersinhealthsystems
AT comettogiorgio stakeholdersperceptionsofpolicyoptionstosupporttheintegrationofcommunityhealthworkersinhealthsystems
AT boniolmathieu stakeholdersperceptionsofpolicyoptionstosupporttheintegrationofcommunityhealthworkersinhealthsystems
AT akleliea stakeholdersperceptionsofpolicyoptionstosupporttheintegrationofcommunityhealthworkersinhealthsystems