Assessing the scalability of a health management-strengthening intervention at the district level: a qualitative study in Ghana, Malawi and Uganda

Susan Bulthuis*, Maryse Kok, Olivier Onvlee, Tim Martineau, Joanna Raven, Freddie Ssengooba, Justine Namakula, Hastings Banda, Patricia Akweongo, Marjolein Dieleman

*Corresponding author for this work

Research output: Contribution to JournalArticleAcademicpeer-review

Abstract

Background: The scale-up of successfully tested public health interventions is critical to achieving universal health coverage. To ensure optimal use of resources, assessment of the scalability of an intervention is recognized as a crucial step in the scale-up process. This study assessed the scalability of a tested health management-strengthening intervention (MSI) at the district level in Ghana, Malawi and Uganda. Methods: Qualitative interviews were conducted with intervention users (district health management teams, DHMTs) and implementers of the scale-up of the intervention (national-level actors) in Ghana, Malawi and Uganda, before and 1 year after the scale-up had started. To assess the scalability of the intervention, the CORRECT criteria from WHO/ExpandNet were used during analysis. Results: The MSI was seen as credible, as regional- and national-level Ministry of Health officials were championing the intervention. While documented evidence on intervention effectiveness was limited, district- and national-level stakeholders seemed to be convinced of the value of the intervention. This was based on its observed positive results regarding management competencies, teamwork and specific aspects of health workforce performance and service delivery. The perceived need for strengthening of management capacity and service delivery showed the relevance of the intervention, and relative advantages of the intervention were its participatory and sustainable nature. Turnover within the DHMTs and limited (initial) management capacity were factors complicating implementation. The intervention was not contested and was seen as compatible with (policy) priorities at the national level. Conclusion: We conclude that the MSI is scalable. However, to enhance its scalability, certain aspects should be adapted to better fit the context in which the intervention is being scaled up. Greater involvement of regional and national actors alongside improved documentation of results of the intervention can facilitate scale-up. Continuous assessment of the scalability of the intervention with all stakeholders involved is necessary, as context, stakeholders and priorities may change. Therefore, adaptations of the intervention might be required. The assessment of scalability, preferably as part of the monitoring of a scale-up strategy, enables critical reflections on next steps to make the intervention more scalable and the scale-up more successful.

Original languageEnglish
Article number85
Pages (from-to)1-14
Number of pages14
JournalHealth Research Policy and Systems
Volume20
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 30 Jul 2022

Bibliographical note

Funding Information:
This work was funded by the European Union’s Horizon 2020 research and innovation programme (Grant Number 733360).

Funding Information:
Ethical approval was provided by the Liverpool School of Tropical Medicine Research Ethics Committee, the Ghana Health Service Ethics Review Committee, the Uganda National Council for Science and Technology, the ethics committee of the School of Public Health (Makerere University) and the National Commission for Science and Technology in Malawi. Participants provided written consent before participating in the interviews and/or group discussions and they were conducted at a place where privacy could be assured. Permission for recording was requested, and full confidentiality and anonymity was ensured during the management, storage, analysis and presentation of the data.

Funding Information:
Ethical approval was provided by the LSTM Research Ethics Committee, the Ghana Health Service Ethics Review Committee, the Uganda National Council for Science and Technology, the ethics committee of the School of Public Health (Makerere University) and the National Commission for Science and Technology in Malawi. Informed consent processes were followed with written consent being provided. Permission was sought before recording of the interviews.

Publisher Copyright:
© 2022, The Author(s).

Funding

This work was funded by the European Union’s Horizon 2020 research and innovation programme (Grant Number 733360). Ethical approval was provided by the Liverpool School of Tropical Medicine Research Ethics Committee, the Ghana Health Service Ethics Review Committee, the Uganda National Council for Science and Technology, the ethics committee of the School of Public Health (Makerere University) and the National Commission for Science and Technology in Malawi. Participants provided written consent before participating in the interviews and/or group discussions and they were conducted at a place where privacy could be assured. Permission for recording was requested, and full confidentiality and anonymity was ensured during the management, storage, analysis and presentation of the data. Ethical approval was provided by the LSTM Research Ethics Committee, the Ghana Health Service Ethics Review Committee, the Uganda National Council for Science and Technology, the ethics committee of the School of Public Health (Makerere University) and the National Commission for Science and Technology in Malawi. Informed consent processes were followed with written consent being provided. Permission was sought before recording of the interviews.

Keywords

  • CORRECT attributes
  • Ghana
  • Malawi
  • Management-strengthening intervention
  • Scalability
  • Scale-up
  • Uganda

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'Assessing the scalability of a health management-strengthening intervention at the district level: a qualitative study in Ghana, Malawi and Uganda'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this