↓ Skip to main content

Supervision of community health workers in Mozambique: a qualitative study of factors influencing motivation and programme implementation

Overview of attention for article published in Human Resources for Health, September 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (80th percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (61st percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
10 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
76 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
238 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Supervision of community health workers in Mozambique: a qualitative study of factors influencing motivation and programme implementation
Published in
Human Resources for Health, September 2015
DOI 10.1186/s12960-015-0063-x
Pubmed ID
Authors

Sozinho Daniel Ndima, Mohsin Sidat, Celso Give, Hermen Ormel, Maryse Catelijne Kok, Miriam Taegtmeyer

Abstract

Community health workers (CHWs) in Mozambique (known as Agentes Polivalentes Elementares (APEs)) are key actors in providing health services in rural communities. Supervision of CHWs has been shown to improve their work, although details of how it is implemented are scarce. In Mozambique, APE supervision structures and scope of work are clearly outlined in policy and rely on supervisors at the health facility of reference. The aim of this study was to understand how and which aspects of supervision impact on APE motivation and programme implementation. Qualitative research methodologies were used. Twenty-nine in-depth interviews were conducted to capture experiences and perceptions of purposefully selected participants. These included APEs, health facility supervisors, district APE supervisors and community leaders. Interviews were recorded, translated and transcribed, prior to the development of a thematic framework. Supervision was structured as dictated by policy but in practice was irregular and infrequent, which participants identified as affecting APE's motivation. When it did occur, supervision was felt to focus more on fault-finding than being supportive in nature and did not address all areas of APE's work - factors that APEs identified as demotivating. Supervisors, in turn, felt unsupported and felt this negatively impacted performance. They had a high workload in health facilities, where they had multiple roles, including provision of health services, taking care of administrative issues and supervising APEs in communities. A lack of resources for supervision activities was identified, and supervisors felt caught up in administrative issues around APE allowances that they were unable to solve. Many supervisors were not trained in providing supportive supervision. Community governance and accountability mechanisms were only partially able to fill the gaps left by the supervision provided by the health system. The findings indicate the need for an improved supervision system to enhance support and motivation and ultimately performance of APEs. Our study found disconnections between the APE programme policy and its implementation, with gaps in skills, training and support of supervisors leading to sub-optimal supervision. Improved methods of supervision could be implemented including those that maximize the opportunities during face-to-face meetings and through community-monitoring mechanisms.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 10 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 238 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Sierra Leone 1 <1%
Netherlands 1 <1%
Congo, The Democratic Republic of the 1 <1%
South Africa 1 <1%
Unknown 234 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 64 27%
Researcher 35 15%
Student > Ph. D. Student 25 11%
Student > Postgraduate 13 5%
Student > Doctoral Student 12 5%
Other 41 17%
Unknown 48 20%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 49 21%
Nursing and Health Professions 41 17%
Social Sciences 38 16%
Business, Management and Accounting 6 3%
Computer Science 6 3%
Other 40 17%
Unknown 58 24%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 8. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 15 September 2015.
All research outputs
#4,534,499
of 25,371,288 outputs
Outputs from Human Resources for Health
#526
of 1,261 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#53,057
of 276,785 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Human Resources for Health
#12
of 31 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,371,288 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 82nd percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,261 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 13.3. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 57% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 276,785 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 80% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 31 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 61% of its contemporaries.