| Literature DB >> 30215263 |
Aurélie Brunie1, Sarah Mercer2, Mario Chen3, Tokinirina Andrianantoandro4.
Abstract
With health worker shortages in rural areas, community health workers (CHWs) are instrumental to the sustainability of primary health care and to the ability to meet health needs. Identifying appropriate operational models and incentive structures is an important element of long-term success. This article reports on CHWs' work demands and affective response to their volunteer work within the broader context of their livelihoods in Madagascar. A cross-sectional survey of 874 CHWs, called Agents de Santé Communautaire (ACs), from 14 districts across 5 regions was conducted in June 2015. Only 44% of ACs had cash savings. Subsistence farming was the main livelihood strategy; ninety-two percent of ACs were food insecure and 89% had experienced a shock in the past year. Overall, 77% of ACs financed commodity resupply through sales of health products and 18% from their personal savings; stock-outs at point of supply and financial and time constraints were the main reported challenges in getting health products. The average satisfaction score with AC work was 3 out of 4. This assessment from Madagascar helps unveil a more comprehensive view of the reality of CHWs' lives. Managers need to take into account the potential implications of the demands of CHW work on already precarious livelihoods.Entities:
Keywords: Madagascar; community health workers; food security; motivation; satisfaction; savings; survey; volunteers; work performance
Mesh:
Year: 2018 PMID: 30215263 PMCID: PMC6144492 DOI: 10.1177/0046958018798493
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Inquiry ISSN: 0046-9580 Impact factor: 1.730
Figure 1.Conceptual framework.
Note. AC = Agents de Santé Communautaire.
Personal and Work Background Characteristics of ACs.
| All (N = 874) | |
|---|---|
| Sex, % | |
| Male | 46.0 |
| Female | 54.0 |
| Age, years, mean (SE) | 42.5 (0.6) |
| Highest level of schooling completed, % | |
| None | 0.6 |
| Primary level | 8.4 |
| Primary | 49.4 |
| Secondary 1 | 36.0 |
| Secondary 2/university level | 5.6 |
| Marital status, % | |
| Single | 7.3 |
| Married (civil or in union) | 77.7 |
| Separated or divorced | 10.1 |
| Widowed | 4.9 |
| Female-headed household, % | 19.0 |
| Household size, mean (SE) | 6.7 (0.2) |
| Primary occupation besides AC work, % | |
| None | 0.5 |
| Farmer/breeder | 91.5 |
| Teacher | 2.3 |
| Vendor | 2.8 |
| Other | 3.0 |
| Duration of service as AC in current community, months, mean (SE) | 85.1 (4.6) |
| Delivers health products, % | 82.8 |
Note. ACs = Agents de Santé Communautaire.
Selected Aspects of AC Livelihoods.
| All (N = 874) | |
|---|---|
| Financial health | |
| Has savings, % | 43.8 |
| Borrowed money in past 12 months, % | 27.9 |
| Has outstanding loans, % | 61.9 |
| Net savings balance, US$, mean (95% CI) | 11.7 (6.5-16.4) |
| Income generation | |
| Number of economic streams, mean (95% CI) | 2.8 (2.7-3.0) |
| Cultivate at least one plot owned,[ | 94.5 |
| Total area cultivated,[ | 21,765.0 (15799.1-27730.5) |
| Cash crops in 3 main crops,[ | 21.0 |
| Assets | |
| Own house, % | 92.6 |
| Number of rooms per person, mean (95% CI) | 0.4 (0.3-0.4) |
| Housing index, mean (95% CI) | 0.8 (0.6-1.0) |
| Asset index, mean (95% CI) | 3.9 (3.6-4.2) |
| Number of animals (overall), mean (95% CI) | 24.2 (20.2-28.2) |
| Resilience | |
| HH food insecurity access prevalence, % | |
| Food secure | 3.1 |
| Mildly food insecure | 4.3 |
| Moderately food insecure | 42.2 |
| Severely food insecure | 50.3 |
| Experienced shock in past 12 months, % | 88.7 |
| Used a costly strategy to cope with shock,[ | 28.9 |
Note. ACs = Agents de Santé Communautaire; CI = confidence interval; HH = household.
Among those who reported cultivating (N = 856).
Among those who reported a shock in past 12 months (N = 775).
Figure 2.Proportion of ACs reporting aspects of household food insecurity (N = 874).
Note. ACs = Agents de Santé Communautaire.
Financing of Health Products in Past 3 Months.
| All (N = 874) | |
|---|---|
| Spent money on transport and/or product fee at least once to procure health products, % | 60.1 |
| Total money spent to get products, US$, mean[ | 5.4 (4.5-6.3) |
| Money spent on product fees, US$, mean[ | 4.2 (3.4-5.0) |
| Money spent on transport, US$, mean[ | 1.3 (0.9-1.6) |
| Primary source of money used to finance expenditures to procure products, %[ | |
| Sales of health products to clients | 77.0 |
| Other personal savings | 17.9 |
| Sales of livestock, crops, or assets | 4.2 |
| Other | 1.0 |
Note. CI = confidence interval.
Among those who spent money on transport and/or product fee to procure products (N = 525).