Managerial capacity among district health managers and its association with district performance: A comparative descriptive study of six districts in the Eastern Region of Ghana

Heerdegen, Anne Christine Stender; Aikins, Moses; Amon, Samuel; Agyemang, Samuel Agyei; Wyss, Kaspar

doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0227974

Cited by 22 publications

(23 citation statements)

References 56 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…It found a clear difference between the two districts (non-LMG districts - 56.7% and LMG districts - 63.8%). The results of this study are similar with previous findings where capacitating management improved management practices which is attributable to improved commitment [ 19 ]. Capacity building is also thought to improve team motivation and performance of planning skills and enhances management practices [ 20 ].…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 91%

Leadership, governance and management for improving district capacity and performance: the case of USAID transform: primary health care

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background Primary health care (PHC) in Ethiopia serves as the main entry point for preventive, promotive and curative health services. The district health office is responsible for the planning, implementation and evaluation of all district health activities. In addition, district health offices manage service delivery facilities working on provision of PHC – primary hospitals, health centers and health posts. As the leader of the health care system tier, district health management must ensure direction, alignment and commitment within teams and organizations and make sure that achievements are consistent with the vision, values and strategy of the organization. USAID Transform: Primary Health Care provides diverse support to improve district health manager competencies including in-service trainings followed by planning and implementation of performance improvement projects and on-the-job mentoring and support. Methods This study was conducted to compare district level capacity and performances between leadership, management and governance (LMG) and non-LMG districts. Project outcome monitoring data that shows the performance of districts was collected from 284 districts from January to December 2019. The study was carried out using a comparative-cross sectional study design, which assessed and compared district health office level indicators. Districts were classified into two categories: LMG and non-LMG districts. The study compared data from 94 LMG and 190 non-LMG districts. Propensity score matching was used to control the effect of differences between LMG and non-LMG districts. Results Results of the independent samples t-test revealed that LMG districts scored better average performances of 61.8 ± 121.45 standard deviation (SD) compared to non-LMG districts 56.89 ± 110.39 SD, with t (282243) = − 3.407317 and p < 0.001, two-tailed. The difference of 4.9 percentage unit in the average performance indicated a statistically significant difference between the LMG and non-LMG districts. Conclusion District level leadership development program contributes to improving district capacity, structure and management practices, and quality of care.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 91%

Leadership, governance and management for improving district capacity and performance: the case of USAID transform: primary health care

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…It found a clear difference between the two districts (non-LMG districts − 56.8% and LMG districts − 63.7%). The results of this study are similar with previous ndings where capacitating management improved management practices which is attributable to improved commitment (17). Capacity building is also thought to improve team motivation and performance of planning skills and enhances management practices (18).…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 89%

Leadership, governance and management for improving district capacity and performance: the case of USAID Transform: Primary Health Care

Desta

Abitew

Ismael

et al. 2020

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Primary health care (PHC) in Ethiopia serves as the main entry point for preventive, promotive and curative health services. The district health office is responsible for the planning, implementation and evaluation of all district health activities. In addition, district health offices manage service delivery facilities working on provision of PHC – primary hospitals, health centers and health posts. As the leader of the health care system tier, district health management must ensure direction, alignment and commitment within teams and organizations and make sure that achievements are consistent with the vision, values and strategy of the organization. USAID Transform: Primary Health Care provides diverse support to improve district health manager competencies including in-service trainings followed by planning and implementation of performance improvement projects and on-the-job mentoring and support. This study was conducted to compare district level capacity and performances between leadership, management and governance (LMG) and non-LMG districts. Project outcome monitoring data that shows the performance of districts was collected from 284 districts from January to December 2019. The study was carried out using a comparative-cross sectional study design, which assessed and compared district health office level indicators. Districts were classified into two categories: LMG and non-LMG districts. The study compared data from 94 LMG and 190 non-LMG districts. Results of the independent samples t-test revealed that LMG districts scored better average performances of 61.8 ± 12.4 standard deviation (SD) compared to non-LMG districts at 56.8 ± 11.3 SD, with t (282) = 3.407 and p < 0.001, two-tailed. The difference of 5.02 percentage unit in the average performance indicated a statistically significant difference between the LMG and non-LMG districts. The data analysis illustrated changes observed in management practices, district administrative capacity, capacity of districts in resource mobilization and use, service availability and quality in project implementation sites.

show abstract

“…It found a clear difference between the two districts (non-LMG districts -56.7% and LMG districts -63.8%). The results of this study are similar with previous ndings where capacitating management improved management practices which is attributable to improved commitment (19). Capacity building is also thought to improve team motivation and performance of planning skills and enhances management practices (20).…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 89%

Leadership, governance and management for improving district capacity and performance: the case of USAID Transform: Primary Health Care

Desta

Abitew

Beshir

et al. 2020

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: Primary health care (PHC) in Ethiopia serves as the main entry point for preventive, promotive and curative health services. The district health office is responsible for the planning, implementation and evaluation of all district health activities. In addition, district health offices manage service delivery facilities working on provision of PHC – primary hospitals, health centers and health posts. As the leader of the health care system tier, district health management must ensure direction, alignment and commitment within teams and organizations and make sure that achievements are consistent with the vision, values and strategy of the organization. USAID Transform: Primary Health Care provides diverse support to improve district health manager competencies including in-service trainings followed by planning and implementation of performance improvement projects and on-the-job mentoring and support. Methods: This study was conducted to compare district level capacity and performances between leadership, management and governance (LMG) and non-LMG districts. Project outcome monitoring data that shows the performance of districts was collected from 284 districts from January to December 2019. The study was carried out using a comparative-cross sectional study design, which assessed and compared district health office level indicators. Districts were classified into two categories: LMG and non-LMG districts. The study compared data from 94 LMG and 190 non-LMG districts. Propensity score matching was used to control the effect of differences between LMG and non-LMG districts. Results: Results of the independent samples t-test revealed that LMG districts scored better average performances of 61.8±121.45 standard deviation (SD) compared to non-LMG districts 56.89±110.39 SD, with t (282243) = -3.407317 and p < 0.001, two-tailed. The difference of 4.9 percentage unit in the average performance indicated a statistically significant difference between the LMG and non-LMG districts. Conclusion: District level leadership development program contributes to improving district capacity, structure and management practices, and quality of care.

show abstract

Managerial capacity among district health managers and its association with district performance: A comparative descriptive study of six districts in the Eastern Region of Ghana

Cited by 22 publications

References 56 publications

Leadership, governance and management for improving district capacity and performance: the case of USAID transform: primary health care

Leadership, governance and management for improving district capacity and performance: the case of USAID transform: primary health care

Leadership, governance and management for improving district capacity and performance: the case of USAID Transform: Primary Health Care

Leadership, governance and management for improving district capacity and performance: the case of USAID Transform: Primary Health Care

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About