Understanding community health worker employment preferences in Malang district, Indonesia, using a discrete choice experiment.
community-based survey
health economics
health policy
Journal
BMJ global health
ISSN: 2059-7908
Titre abrégé: BMJ Glob Health
Pays: England
ID NLM: 101685275
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
08 2022
08 2022
Historique:
received:
28
02
2022
accepted:
28
07
2022
entrez:
11
8
2022
pubmed:
12
8
2022
medline:
16
8
2022
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
Community health workers (CHWs) play a critical role in supporting health systems, and in improving accessibility to primary healthcare. In many settings CHW programmes do not have formalised employment models and face issues of high attrition and poor performance. This study aims to determine the employment preferences of CHWs in Malang district, Indonesia, to inform policy interventions. A discrete choice experiment was conducted with 471 CHWs across 28 villages. Attributes relevant to CHW employment were identified through a multistage process including literature review, focus group discussions and expert consultation. Respondents' choices were analysed with a mixed multinomial logit model and latent class analyses. Five attributes were identified: (1) supervision; (2) training; (3) monthly financial benefit; (4) recognition; and (5) employment structure. The most important influence on choice of job was a low monthly financial benefit (US$~2) (β=0.53, 95% CI=0.43 to 0.63), followed by recognition in the form of a performance feedback report (β=0.13, 95% CI=0.07 to 0.20). A large monthly financial benefit (US$~20) was most unappealing to respondents (β=-0.13, 95% CI=-0.23 to -0.03). Latent class analysis identified two groups of CHWs who differed in their willingness to accept either job presented and preferences over specific attributes. Preferences diverged based on respondent characteristics including experience, hours' worked per week and income. CHWs in Malang district, Indonesia, favour a small monthly financial benefit which likely reflects the unique cultural values underpinning the programme and a desire for remuneration that is commensurate with the limited number of hours worked. CHWs also desire enhanced methods of performance feedback and greater structure around training and their rights and responsibilities. Fulfilling these conditions may become increasingly important should CHWs work longer hours.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
Community health workers (CHWs) play a critical role in supporting health systems, and in improving accessibility to primary healthcare. In many settings CHW programmes do not have formalised employment models and face issues of high attrition and poor performance. This study aims to determine the employment preferences of CHWs in Malang district, Indonesia, to inform policy interventions.
METHODS
A discrete choice experiment was conducted with 471 CHWs across 28 villages. Attributes relevant to CHW employment were identified through a multistage process including literature review, focus group discussions and expert consultation. Respondents' choices were analysed with a mixed multinomial logit model and latent class analyses.
RESULTS
Five attributes were identified: (1) supervision; (2) training; (3) monthly financial benefit; (4) recognition; and (5) employment structure. The most important influence on choice of job was a low monthly financial benefit (US$~2) (β=0.53, 95% CI=0.43 to 0.63), followed by recognition in the form of a performance feedback report (β=0.13, 95% CI=0.07 to 0.20). A large monthly financial benefit (US$~20) was most unappealing to respondents (β=-0.13, 95% CI=-0.23 to -0.03). Latent class analysis identified two groups of CHWs who differed in their willingness to accept either job presented and preferences over specific attributes. Preferences diverged based on respondent characteristics including experience, hours' worked per week and income.
CONCLUSION
CHWs in Malang district, Indonesia, favour a small monthly financial benefit which likely reflects the unique cultural values underpinning the programme and a desire for remuneration that is commensurate with the limited number of hours worked. CHWs also desire enhanced methods of performance feedback and greater structure around training and their rights and responsibilities. Fulfilling these conditions may become increasingly important should CHWs work longer hours.
Identifiants
pubmed: 35953209
pii: bmjgh-2022-008936
doi: 10.1136/bmjgh-2022-008936
pmc: PMC9379506
pii:
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Informations de copyright
© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2022. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.
Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts
Competing interests: None declared.
Références
Bull World Health Organ. 2013 Nov 1;91(11):847-52
pubmed: 24347709
Value Health. 2011 Jun;14(4):403-13
pubmed: 21669364
Bull World Health Organ. 2011 Dec 1;89(12):919-23
pubmed: 22271950
Hum Resour Health. 2019 Dec 17;17(1):101
pubmed: 31847909
Hum Resour Health. 2018 Aug 16;16(1):39
pubmed: 30115074
Pharmacoeconomics. 2018 Feb;36(2):175-187
pubmed: 28975582
Bull World Health Organ. 2010 May;88(5):333-41
pubmed: 20458371
Health Policy Plan. 2021 Oct 12;36(9):1418-1427
pubmed: 34313307
Trop Med Int Health. 2011 Sep;16(9):1044-53
pubmed: 21707877
BMJ Open. 2021 Jul 5;11(7):e048059
pubmed: 34226227
Value Health. 2016 Jun;19(4):300-15
pubmed: 27325321
JAMA Cardiol. 2019 Oct 1;4(10):978-986
pubmed: 31461123
Arch Public Health. 2019 Apr 17;77:20
pubmed: 31019686
Health Policy Plan. 2009 Mar;24(2):151-8
pubmed: 19112071
J Glob Health. 2021 Mar 10;11:07005
pubmed: 33763219
Pharmacoeconomics. 2017 Jul;35(7):697-716
pubmed: 28374325
Bull World Health Organ. 2019 Sep 01;97(9):597-604
pubmed: 31474772
Food Nutr Bull. 2009 Jun;30(2 Suppl):S207-14
pubmed: 20496613
Health Res Policy Syst. 2021 Oct 12;19(Suppl 3):111
pubmed: 34641891
Bull World Health Organ. 2010 May;88(5):350-6
pubmed: 20461141
BMJ Glob Health. 2019 May 31;4(3):e001509
pubmed: 31263591
Patient. 2015 Oct;8(5):373-84
pubmed: 25726010
Reprod Health Matters. 2006 May;14(27):73-82
pubmed: 16713881
Eval Program Plann. 2018 Feb;66:102-110
pubmed: 29091785
Hum Resour Health. 2015 Jul 14;13:58
pubmed: 26169179
Hum Resour Health. 2019 Jul 19;17(1):59
pubmed: 31324192
Hum Resour Health. 2016 Aug 22;14(1):53
pubmed: 27549208
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2015 Mar 23;(3):CD007754
pubmed: 25803792
Health Policy Plan. 2015 Nov;30(9):1207-27
pubmed: 25500559
Hum Resour Health. 2019 Mar 21;17(1):22
pubmed: 30898136
Soc Sci Med. 2020 Feb;246:112726
pubmed: 31869666
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2010 Mar 17;(3):CD004015
pubmed: 20238326
Am J Public Health. 2013 Jul;103(7):e74-82
pubmed: 23678926
BMC Health Serv Res. 2014 Sep 01;14:367
pubmed: 25179422
Pilot Feasibility Stud. 2021 Jun 23;7(1):132
pubmed: 34162428
Health Policy Plan. 2021 May 17;36(4):435-443
pubmed: 33712844