Training And Mentoring                                                        Clinical Health Workers In                  ...
Overview1. Introduction and research questions2.   Methodology3.   Results and discussion4.   Limitations and conclusion
Introduction and research        questions
Introduction Kenya have relied on off-site training model to train and nature its   health workers for HIV response [1], ...
Research Questions What is the total efficiency gained when comparing the off-site   components of the proposed harmonize...
Methodology
Methodology In the new training curriculum, HCWs are divided into clusters:   clinical, pharmacy, laboratory, nutrition a...
Results and discussion
Efficiency of the Harmonizedtraining Curriculum                                                                 The venue...
Comparing of Two OngoingMentoring Models           Figure 4 compares the unit costs of the            DHMT and RCM.      ...
Limitations and conclusion
Limitations Limitations of this analysis include the    Lack of a measure of training or mentoring quality    The use o...
Conclusion The DHMT model provides the best balance of lower cost and less  disruption to the health system for ongoing m...
Thank You!        www.healthpolicyproject.comThe Health Policy Project is a five-year cooperative agreement funded by the ...
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in …5
×

Daniel Mwai - Futures Group, Kenya

445 views

Published on

Training and mentoring clinical health workers in Kenya Efficiency gained from the Proposed Harmonized HIV Curriculum

Published in: Health & Medicine
0 Comments
1 Like
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

No Downloads
Views
Total views
445
On SlideShare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
2
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
1
Comments
0
Likes
1
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

Daniel Mwai - Futures Group, Kenya

  1. 1. Training And Mentoring Clinical Health Workers In Kenya; Efficiency Gained from the Proposed Harmonized HIV Curriculum March 21st , 2013 Daniel Mwai,1 Irene Mukui,2 Arin Dutta,1 Priya Iyer,1 1Futures Group, 2 National AIDS & STI Control Program, Kenya dmwai@futuresgroup.comThe Second HIV Capacity Building Partners’ Summit, Birchwood Hotel and Conference CentreJohannesburg, South Africa
  2. 2. Overview1. Introduction and research questions2. Methodology3. Results and discussion4. Limitations and conclusion
  3. 3. Introduction and research questions
  4. 4. Introduction Kenya have relied on off-site training model to train and nature its health workers for HIV response [1], over time. The need for HIV training and mentoring for healthcare workers is in the rise, although resources for Hiv response are dwindling. This calls for adoption and used most efficient and effective(E2) use of resources in HIV response. Inline with National AIDS & STI Control Programme and partners have proposed a new, harmonized HIV training curriculum. For the curriculum to be adopted, an understanding of potential benefits was needed, to aid in identifying the efficient model.
  5. 5. Research Questions What is the total efficiency gained when comparing the off-site components of the proposed harmonized curriculum and the current program? What is the unit cost per person per day of different models for ongoing mentoring? What is the impact of the different mentoring models on the number of missed patient encounters in the HCW’s home facility? What is the most efficient model of ongoing mentoring ?
  6. 6. Methodology
  7. 7. Methodology In the new training curriculum, HCWs are divided into clusters: clinical, pharmacy, laboratory, nutrition and counseling, and social work. We focused on the clinical cluster (doctors, clinical officers, nurses). Efficiency was defined in terms of the relative costs of the placement stage. We calculated the direct costs of the off-site training component For monitoring, we estimated time spent away from the HCW’s home facility using current program data for two models:  District Health Mentorship Training (DHMT)  Roving Clinicians Model (RCM)
  8. 8. Results and discussion
  9. 9. Efficiency of the Harmonizedtraining Curriculum  The venue for placements hosts group learning and case discussions.  When RTC is a hospital, no venue hire costs are incurred; this reduces the cost per HCW by $11.  When accommodation is not required, the cost is reduced by $75 (see Figure 2).  Off-site training is more efficient under the harmonized curriculum  Evident by reduced number of off-site days  Low cost of offsite training. (see Figure 3)Figure 2: GFATM Round 10 Proposal and Mukui, I., 2012. Estimates include cost of trainers, venue hire, stationery, per diem, and transport.Figure 3:Source: Authors’ calculations.
  10. 10. Comparing of Two OngoingMentoring Models  Figure 4 compares the unit costs of the DHMT and RCM.  The RCM was less expensive than the DHMT,  Requires only one mentor for many trainees  Re-training cost is spread over more days.  Figure 5 compares the indirect costs.  We assumed mentors would provide services when not engaged in mentoring.  The RCM value would rise if clinicians were roving full time.
  11. 11. Limitations and conclusion
  12. 12. Limitations Limitations of this analysis include the  Lack of a measure of training or mentoring quality  The use of data from pilot designs.
  13. 13. Conclusion The DHMT model provides the best balance of lower cost and less disruption to the health system for ongoing mentoring. The new harmonized training curriculum and skills-building strategy represent a cost-efficient choice for the Kenyan HIV program.
  14. 14. Thank You! www.healthpolicyproject.comThe Health Policy Project is a five-year cooperative agreement funded by the U.S. Agency for InternationalDevelopment under Agreement No. AID-OAA-A-10-00067, beginning September 30, 2010. It is implemented byFutures Group, in collaboration with CEDPA (CEDPA is now a part of Plan International USA), Futures Institute,Partners in Population and Development, Africa Regional Office (PPD ARO), Population Reference Bureau (PRB),RTI International, and the White Ribbon Alliance for Safe Motherhood (WRA).

×