Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorNeupane, Sunisha
dc.contributor.authorOdendaal, Willem
dc.contributor.authorFriedman, Irwin
dc.contributor.authorJassat, Waasila
dc.contributor.authorSchneider, Helen
dc.contributor.authorDoherty, Tanya
dc.date.accessioned2015-05-20T07:23:52Z
dc.date.available2015-05-20T07:23:52Z
dc.date.issued2014
dc.identifier.citationNeupane, S. et al (2004). Comparing a paper based monitoring and evaluation system to a mHealth system to support the national community health worker Programme, South Africa: an evaluation.BMC Medical Informatics & Decision Making, 14 (69):1-9en_US
dc.identifier.issn1472-6947
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10566/1470
dc.description.abstractBACKGROUND: In an attempt to address a complex disease burden, including improving progress towards MDGs 4 and 5, South Africa recently introduced a re-engineered Primary Health Care (PHC) strategy, which has led to the development of a national community health worker (CHW) programme. The present study explored the development of a cell phone-based and paper-based monitoring and evaluation (M&E) system to support the work of the CHWs. METHODS: One sub-district in the North West province was identified for the evaluation. One outreach team comprising ten CHWs maintained both the paper forms and mHealth system to record household data on community-based services. A comparative analysis was done to calculate the correspondence between the paper and phone records. A focus group discussion was conducted with the CHWs. Clinical referrals, data accuracy and supervised visits were compared and analysed for the paper and phone systems. RESULTS: Compared to the mHealth system where data accuracy was assured, 40% of the CHWs showed a consistently high level (>90% correspondence) of data transfer accuracy on paper. Overall, there was an improvement over time, and by the fifth month, all CHWs achieved a correspondence of 90% or above between phone and paper data. The most common error that occurred was summing the total number of visits and/or activities across the five household activity indicators. Few supervised home visits were recorded in either system and there was no evidence of the team leader following up on the automatic notifications received on their cell phones. CONCLUSIONS: The evaluation emphasizes the need for regular supervision for both systems and rigorous and ongoing assessments of data quality for the paper system. Formalization of a mHealth M&E system for PHC outreach teams delivering community based services could offer greater accuracy of M&E and enhance supervision systems for CHWs.en_US
dc.language.isoenen_US
dc.publisherBioMed Centralen_US
dc.rightsThis is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly credited. 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.
dc.source.urihttp://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1472-6947-14-69
dc.subjectCommunity health workersen_US
dc.subjectMonitoring and evaluationen_US
dc.subjectMhealthen_US
dc.subjectCommunity based servicesen_US
dc.titleComparing a paper based monitoring and evaluation system to a mHealth system to support the national community health worker programme, South Africa: an evaluationen_US
dc.typeArticleen_US
dc.privacy.showsubmitterfalse
dc.status.ispeerreviewedtrue
dc.description.accreditationWeb of Scienceen_US


Files in this item

Thumbnail

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record