↓ Skip to main content

Frontline staff motivation levels and health care quality in rural and urban primary health facilities: a baseline study in the Greater Accra and Western regions of Ghana

Overview of attention for article published in Health Economics Review, August 2016
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
19 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
143 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
Frontline staff motivation levels and health care quality in rural and urban primary health facilities: a baseline study in the Greater Accra and Western regions of Ghana
Published in
Health Economics Review, August 2016
DOI 10.1186/s13561-016-0112-8
Pubmed ID
Authors

Robert Kaba Alhassan, Edward Nketiah-Amponsah

Abstract

The population of Ghana is increasingly becoming urbanized with about 70 % of the estimated 26.9 million people living in urban and peri-urban areas. Nonetheless, eight out of the ten regions in Ghana remain predominantly rural where only 32.1 % of the national health sector workforce works. Doctor-patient ratio in a predominantly rural region is about 1:18,257 compared to 1:4,099 in an urban region. These rural-urban inequities significantly account for the inability of Ghana to attain the health related Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) before the end of 2015. To ascertain whether or not rural-urban differences exist in health worker motivation levels and quality of health care in health facilities accredited by the National Health Insurance Authority in Ghana. This is a baseline quantitative study conducted in 2012 among 324 health workers in 64 accredited clinics located in 9 rural and 7 urban districts in Ghana. Ordered logistic regression was performed to determine the relationship between facility geographic location (rural/urban) and staff motivation levels, and quality health care standards. Quality health care and patient safety standards were averagely low in the sampled health facilities. Even though health workers in rural facilities were more de-motivated by poor availability of resources and drugs than their counterparts in urban facilities (p < 0.05), quality of health care and patient safety standards were relatively better in rural facilities. For Ghana to attain the newly formulated sustainable development goals on health, there is the need for health authorities to address the existing rural-urban imbalances in health worker motivation and quality health care standards in primary healthcare facilities. Future studies should compare staff motivation levels and quality standards in accredited and non-accredited health facilities since the current study was limited to health facilities accredited by the National Health Insurance Authority.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 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 143 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Brazil 1 <1%
Unknown 142 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 30 21%
Student > Bachelor 12 8%
Researcher 11 8%
Student > Ph. D. Student 11 8%
Student > Doctoral Student 9 6%
Other 24 17%
Unknown 46 32%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 25 17%
Nursing and Health Professions 23 16%
Social Sciences 16 11%
Economics, Econometrics and Finance 5 3%
Engineering 5 3%
Other 22 15%
Unknown 47 33%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 02 September 2016.
All research outputs
#17,813,370
of 22,884,315 outputs
Outputs from Health Economics Review
#302
of 430 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#244,101
of 337,459 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Health Economics Review
#13
of 17 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,884,315 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 19th percentile – i.e., 19% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 430 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.0. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
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 337,459 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 23rd percentile – i.e., 23% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 17 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 23rd percentile – i.e., 23% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.