Dataset Information

Social accountability in primary health care facilities in Tanzania: Results from Star Rating Assessment.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Star Rating Assessment (SRA) was initiated in 2015 in Tanzania aiming at improving the quality of services provided in Primary Healthcare (PHC) facilities. Social accountability (SA) is among the 12 assessment areas of SRA tools. We aimed to assess the SA performance and its predictors among PHC facilities in Tanzania based on findings of a nationwide reassessment conducted in 2017/18.

Methods

We used the SRA database with results of 2017/2018 to perform a cross-sectional secondary data analysis on SA dataset. We used proportions to determine the performance of the following five SA indicators: functional committees/boards, display of information on available resources, addressing local concerns, health workers' engagement with local community, and involvement of community in facility planning process. A facility needed four indicators to be qualified as socially accountable. Adjusted odds ratios (AOR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI) were used to determine facilities characteristics associated with SA, namely location (urban or rural), ownership (private or public) and level of service (hospital, health centre or dispensary).

Results

We included a total of 3,032 PHC facilities of which majority were dispensaries (86.4%), public-owned (76.3%), and located in rural areas (76.0%). On average, 30.4% of the facilities were socially accountable; 72.0% engaged with local communities; and 65.5% involved communities in facility planning process. Nevertheless, as few as 22.5% had functional Health Committees/Boards. A facility was likely to be socially-accountable if public-owned [AOR 5.92; CI: 4.48-7.82, p = 0.001], based in urban areas [AOR 1.25; 95% CI: 1.01-1.53, p = 0.038] or operates at a level higher than Dispensaries (Health centre or Hospital levels).

Conclusion

Most of the Tanzanian PHC facilities are not socially accountable and therefore much effort in improving the situation should be done. The efforts should target the lower-level facilities, private-owned and rural-based PHC facilities. Regional authorities must capacitate facility committees/boards and ensure guidelines on SA are followed.

SUBMITTER: Kinyenje ES

PROVIDER: S-EPMC9312412 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:Accurate disease diagnosis relies on a well-organized and reliable laboratory system. This study assesses the quality of laboratory services in Tanzania based on the nationwide Star Rating Assessment (SRA) of Primary Healthcare (PHC) facilities conducted in 2017/18. This cross-sectional study utilized secondary data from all the country's PHC facilities stored in the SRA database. Laboratory service quality was assessed by aggregating scores as percentages of the maximum achievable score across various indicators: dedicated laboratory department/room, adequate equipment, staffing levels, adherence to testing protocols, establishment of turnaround times, internal and external quality controls, and safety and supplies management. Scores equal to or exceeding 80% were deemed compliant. Multiple linear regression was used to determine the influence of facility characteristics (level, ownership, location, staffing) on quality scores, with statistical significance set at p < 0.05. The study included 6,663 PHC facilities (85.9% dispensaries, 11% health centers, 3.2% hospital-level-1), with the majority being public (82.3% vs. 17.7%) and located in rural areas (77.1% vs. 22.9%). On average, facilities scored 30.8% (SD = 35.7), and only 26.6% met staffing requirements. Compliance with quality standards was higher in private (63% vs. 19%, p<0.001) and urban facilities (62% vs. 16%, p<0.001). More than half of the facilities did not meet either of the eight quality indicators. Quality was positively linked to staffing compliance (Beta = 5.770) but negatively impacted by dispensaries (Beta = -6.342), rural locations (Beta = -0.945), and public ownership (Beta = -1.459). A score of 30% falls significantly short of the national target of 80%. Improving laboratory staffing levels at PHC facilities could improve the quality of laboratory services, especially in public facilities that are based in rural areas. There is a need to further strengthen laboratory services in PHC facilities to ensure the quality of laboratory services and clients' satisfaction.

Project description:BACKGROUND:Health system performance is one of the important components of the health care delivery; its achievement depends on the quality of services rendered and the health system responsiveness of its beneficiaries. Health system responsiveness is a multi-dimensional concept and is usually measured through several domains. Health system responsiveness (HSR) remains to be a key indicator for evaluation of health system performance in any settings. This study aimed at assessing the situation of health system responsiveness in primary health facilities in Tanzania prior to introduction of the Direct Health Facility Financing (DHFF) program. METHODS:This was a cross sectional study conducted between January and February in 2018. We collected data from 42 primary health facilities (14 health centers and 28 dispensaries) where a questionnaire was administered to a total of 422 participants. The questionnaire collected information on attention, respect to dignity, clear communication, autonomy, access to care, respect to confidentiality and basic amenities. Descriptive analysis was done to determine the distribution of the variables whereas ANOVA and linear regression analysis was employed to discern the association between variables. RESULTS:More than 67% of participants had visited the same health facility more than 5 times. Sixty seven percent of the patients were residing within 5kms from the public primary health care facilities. The geographical access to health care scored the lowest (43.5% for Dispensaries and 36% for Health center) mean as compared to other domains of health system responsiveness. The highest score was in respect to confidentiality (86.7%) followed by respect to dignity (81.4%). Linear regression analysis revealed no statistical association between any of the social demographic features with the overall HSR performances. However, in post hoc analysis, Pwani and Shinyanga regions didn't differ significantly in terms of their performances whereas those two regions differ from all other regions. CONCLUSION:Based on the study findings health system responsiveness domains has performed relatively poor in many regions except for respect of dignity and confidentiality scored high of all the domains. Shinyanga and Pwani regions scored relatively well in all domains this could have been due to the effect of Results Based financing (RBF) in the respective regions. All in all the Government and other stakeholders in the health sector they should deliberately invest on the access to care domain as seem to be a challenge as compared to others.

Project description:BackgroundSince 2002, Tanzania has been implementing the focused Antenatal Care (ANC) model that recommended four antenatal care visits. In 2016, the World Health Organization (WHO) reintroduced the standard ANC model with more interventions including a minimum of eight contacts. However, cost-implications of these changes to the health system are unknown, particularly in countries like Tanzania, that failed to optimally implement the simpler focused ANC model. We compared the health system cost of providing ANC under the focused and the standard models at primary health facilities in Tanzania.MethodsWe used a micro-costing approach to identify and quantify resources used to implement the focused ANC model at six primary health facilities in Tanzania from July 2018 to June 2019. We also used the standard ANC implementation manual to identify and quantify additional resources required. We used basic salary and allowances to value personnel time while the Medical Store Department price catalogue and local market prices were used for other resources. Costs were collected in Tanzanian shillings and converted to 2018 US$.ResultsThe health system cost of providing ANC services at six facilities (2 health centres and 4 dispensaries) was US$185,282 under the focused model. We estimated that the cost would increase by about 90% at health centres and 97% at dispensaries to US$358,290 by introducing the standard model. Personnel cost accounted for more than one third of the total cost, and more than two additional nurses are required per facility for the standard model. The costs per pregnancy increased from about US$33 to US$63 at health centres and from about US$37 to US$72 at dispensaries.ConclusionIntroduction of a standard ANC model at primary health facilities in Tanzania may double resources requirement compared to current practice. Resources availability has been one of the challenges to effective implementation of the current focused ANC model. More research is required, to consider whether the additional costs are reasonable compared to the additional value for maternal and child health.

Project description:ObjectiveTo assess respectful maternity care (RMC) in health facilities.DesignCross-sectional study.SettingForty-three (43) facilities across 15 districts in Bangladesh, 16 in Ghana and 12 in Tanzania.ParticipantsFacility managers; 325 providers (nurses/midwives/doctors)-Bangladesh (158), Ghana (86) and Tanzania (81); and 849 recently delivered women-Bangladesh (295), Ghana (381) and Tanzania (173)-were interviewed. Observation of 641 client-provider interactions was conducted-Bangladesh (387), Ghana (134) and Tanzania (120).AssessmentTrained social scientists and clinicians assessed infrastructure, policies, provision and women's experiences of RMC (emotional support, respectful care and communication).Primary outcomeRMC provided and/or experienced by women.ResultsThree (20%) facilities in Bangladesh, four (25%) in Ghana and three (25%) in Tanzania had no maternity clients' toilets and one-half had no handwashing facilities. Policies for RMC such as identification of client abuses were available: 81% (Ghana), 73% (Bangladesh) and 50% (Tanzania), but response was poor. Ninety-four (60%) Bangladeshi, 26 (30%) Ghanaian and 20 (25%) Tanzanian providers were not RMC trained. They provided emotional support during labour care to 107 (80%) women in Ghana, 95 (79%) in Tanzania and 188 (48.5%) in Bangladesh, and were often courteous with them-236 (61%) in Bangladesh, 119 (89%) in Ghana and 108 (90%) in Tanzania. Due to structural challenges, 169 (44%) women in Bangladesh, 49 (36%) in Ghana and 77 (64%) in Tanzania had no privacy during labour. Care was refused to 13 (11%) Tanzanian and 2 Bangladeshi women who could not pay illegal charges. Twenty-five (7%) women in Ghana, nine (6%) in Bangladesh and eight (5%) in Tanzania were verbally abused during care. Providers in all countries highly rated their care provision (95%-100%), and 287 (97%) of Bangladeshi women, 368 (97%) Ghanaians and 152 (88%) Tanzanians reported 'satisfaction' with the care they received. However, based on their facility experiences, significant (p<0.001) percentages-20% (Ghana) to 57% (Bangladesh)-will not return to the same facilities for future childbirth.ConclusionsFacilities in Bangladesh, Ghana and Tanzania have foundational systems that facilitate RMC. Structural inadequacies and policy gaps pose challenges. Many women were, however, unwilling to return to the same facilities for future deliveries although they (and providers) highly rated these facilities.

Project description:ImportanceThe Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services' Five-Star Quality Rating System combines results from nursing home recertification surveys and complaint investigations into a single indicator for health inspections. This combination may mask complaint investigation results.ObjectiveTo construct and compare star ratings specific to recertification surveys and specific to complaint investigations to discern whether they provide different information.Design, setting, and participantsIn this quality improvement study, the Nursing Home Compare Five-Star Quality Rating System was used to calculate three 5-star ratings: 1 overall health inspection rating combining recertification survey scores and complaint investigation scores, 1 using only recertification scores, and 1 using only complaint investigation scores. The study included US nursing homes. The sample calculated star ratings for nursing homes in November 2017. This sample included all whose most recent recertification surveys occurred in 2016 up to and including November 2017, and those with 36 months of data from the ASPEN Complaints/Incidents Tracking System and the Certification and Survey Provider Enhanced Reports. Data analyses were completed on different days in 2022, depending on which questions were being addressed.Main outcomes and measuresComparison of the 3 star rating distributions. The recertification survey and complaint investigation star ratings were compared with respect to the overall health investigation rating. The recertification and complaint star ratings were cross-tabulated.ResultsAmong the 15 499 nursing homes, 19.8% had 1 overall health inspection star, 23.2% had 2, 23.2% had 3, 23.2% had 4, and 9.8% had 5 overall health inspection stars. Most had the same overall and recertification star ratings; for example, 79.4% had 5 overall stars and 5 recertification survey stars. However, overall and complaint-based star ratings were discordant, with a relatively large proportion of nursing homes (25.7%) having no complaint deficiencies and therefore high star ratings.Conclusions and relevanceIn this quality improvement study assessing the 2 components of the Five-Star Quality Rating System, results of recertification surveys were largely similar to health inspection star ratings. However, recertification survey scores differed from complaint inspection scores, suggesting health inspection ratings may not reflect consumers' views of care, services, or other valued amenities. A complaint-focused metric may have utility. However, research is needed concerning the many nursing homes with no or very few complaint deficiencies.