↓ Skip to main content

Perspectives of key stakeholders regarding task shifting of care for HIV patients in Mozambique: a qualitative interview-based study with Ministry of Health leaders, clinicians, and donors

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

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age

Mentioned by

twitter
3 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
17 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
129 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
Perspectives of key stakeholders regarding task shifting of care for HIV patients in Mozambique: a qualitative interview-based study with Ministry of Health leaders, clinicians, and donors
Published in
Human Resources for Health, April 2015
DOI 10.1186/s12960-015-0009-3
Pubmed ID
Authors

Alison S Rustagi, Rosa Marlene Manjate, Stephen Gloyd, Grace John-Stewart, Mark Micek, Sarah Gimbel, Kenneth Sherr

Abstract

Task shifting is a common strategy to deliver antiretroviral therapy (ART) in resource-limited settings and is safe and effective if implemented appropriately. Consensus among stakeholders is necessary to formulate clear national policies that maintain high-quality care. We sought to understand key stakeholders' opinions regarding task shifting of HIV care in Mozambique and to characterize which specific tasks stakeholders considered appropriate for specific cadres of health workers. National and provincial Ministry of Health leaders, representatives from donor and non-governmental organizations (NGOs), and clinicians providing HIV care were intentionally selected to represent diverse viewpoints. Using open- and closed-ended questions, interviewees were asked about their general support of task shifting, its potential advantages and disadvantages, and whether each of seven cadres of non-physician health workers should perform each of eight tasks related to ART provision. Responses were tallied overall and stratified by current job category. Interviews were conducted between November 2007 and June 2008. Of 62 stakeholders interviewed, 44% held leadership positions in the Ministry of Health, 44% were clinicians providing HIV care, and 13% were donors or employed by NGOs; 89% held a medical degree. Stakeholders were highly supportive of physician assistants performing simple ART-related tasks and unanimous in opposing community health workers providing any ART-related services. The most commonly cited motives to implement task shifting were to increase ART access, decrease physician workload, and decrease patient wait time, whereas chief concerns included reduced quality of care and poor training and supervision. Support for task shifting was higher among clinicians than policy and programme leaders for three specific task/cadre combinations: general mid-level nurses to initiate ART in adults (supported by 75% of clinicians vs. 41% of non-clinicians) and in pregnant women (75% vs. 34%, respectively) and physician assistants to change ART regimens in adults (43% vs. 24%, respectively). Stakeholders agreed on some ART-related task delegation to lower health worker cadres. Clinicians were more likely to support task shifting than policy and programme leaders, perhaps motivated by their front-line experiences. Harmonizing policy and programme managers' views with those of clinicians will be important to formulate and implement clear policy.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 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 129 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 129 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 21 16%
Student > Master 18 14%
Student > Ph. D. Student 15 12%
Student > Doctoral Student 10 8%
Student > Bachelor 6 5%
Other 26 20%
Unknown 33 26%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 32 25%
Nursing and Health Professions 23 18%
Social Sciences 15 12%
Business, Management and Accounting 4 3%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 3 2%
Other 11 9%
Unknown 41 32%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 24 April 2015.
All research outputs
#15,739,010
of 25,371,288 outputs
Outputs from Human Resources for Health
#1,040
of 1,261 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#146,908
of 279,164 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Human Resources for Health
#25
of 28 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,371,288 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 37th percentile – i.e., 37% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
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 is in the 15th percentile – i.e., 15% 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 279,164 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 46th percentile – i.e., 46% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 28 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 3rd percentile – i.e., 3% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.