RT Journal Article
SR Electronic
T1 Coaching visits and supportive supervision for primary care facilities to improve malaria service data quality in Ghana: an intervention case study
JF medRxiv
FD Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory Press
SP 2024.08.07.24311636
DO 10.1101/2024.08.07.24311636
A1 Asiedu, Amos
A1 Haws, Rachel A.
A1 Mohammed, Wahjib
A1 Boye-Doe, Joseph
A1 Agblanya, Charles
A1 Ntumy, Raphael
A1 Malm, Keziah
A1 Boateng, Paul
A1 Tetteh, Gladys
A1 Oseni, Lolade
YR 2024
UL http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2024/08/08/2024.08.07.24311636.abstract
AB Effective decision-making for malaria prevention and control depends on timely, accurate, and appropriately analyzed and interpreted data. Poor quality data reported into national health management information systems (HMIS) prevent managers at the district level from planning effectively for malaria in Ghana. We analyzed reports from data coaching visits and follow-up supervision conducted to 231 health facilities in six of Ghana’s 16 regions between February and November 2021. The visits targeted health workers’ knowledge and skills in malaria data recording, HMIS reporting, and how managers visualized and used HMIS data for planning and decision making. A before-after design was used to assess how data coaching visits affected data documentation practices and compliance with standards of practice, quality and completeness of national HMIS data, and use of facility-based malaria indicator wall charts for decision-making at health facilities. The percentage of health workers demonstrating good understanding of standards of practice in documentation, reporting and data use increased from 72 to 83% (p<0.05). At first follow-up, reliability of HMIS data entry increased from 29 to 65% (p<0.001); precision increased from 48 to 78% (p<0.001); and timeliness of reporting increased from 67 to 88% (p<0.001). HMIS data showed statistically significant improvement in data completeness (from 62 to 87% (p<0.001)) and decreased error rate (from 37 to 18% (p<0.001)) from baseline to post-intervention. By the second follow-up visit, 98% of facilities had a functional data management system (a 26-percentage-point increase from the first follow-up visit, p<0.0001), 77% of facilities displayed wall charts, and 63% reported using data for decision-making and local planning. There are few documented examples of data coaching to improve malaria surveillance and service data quality. Data coaching provides support and mentorship to improve data quality, visualization, and use, modeling how other malaria programs can use HMIS data effectively at the local level.Competing Interest StatementThe authors have declared no competing interest.Funding StatementThis analysis was supported through the U.S. President’s Malaria Initiative (PMI) Impact Malaria project activity (Contract Number 7200AA18C00014) in collaboration with the U.S. Agency for International Development and the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. The funders had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, or preparation of the manuscript, but did review and approve the manuscript for submission. The opinions expressed herein are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of the U.S. President’s Malaria Initiative, the U.S. Agency for International Development, the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, or other employing organizations or sources of funding.Author DeclarationsI confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.YesThe details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:This assessment obtained a non-human subjects research determination from the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health Institutional Review Board, Maryland, USA (IRB# 21543). Study participants who completed the satisfaction survey gave their written informed consent.I confirm that all necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived, and that any patient/participant/sample identifiers included were not known to anyone (e.g., hospital staff, patients or participants themselves) outside the research group so cannot be used to identify individuals.YesI understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).YesI have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines, such as any relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material, if applicable.YesThe datasets used and/or analyzed during the current study are available from the corresponding author on reasonable request.