Primary healthcare planning, bottleneck analysis and performance improvement: An evaluation of processes and outcomes in a Nigerian context.

Operational planning of interventions defines roadmaps, timelines and resources necessary for translating policies into expected health outcomes along the evidence-policy-implementation continuum. However, bottlenecks often hinder the attainment of objectives and the timely delivery of intervention packages leading to sub-optimal performance of health systems. Bottleneck identification, analysis and removal approaches to planning, which requires key stakeholders' participation, have been recommended to improve health system outcomes in LMICs. This study demonstrates how integration of participatory action research (PAR) within a quality improvement model can help navigate the complexities of health system bottleneck analyses, planning and performance improvement in a Nigerian sub-national context. The study is based on data collected between June 2016 and June 2017, from Chikun LGA in Kaduna State Nigeria. PAR was integrated into a quality improvement model called DIVA (Diagnose-Intervene-Verify-Adjust) applied across selected interventions (eMTCT, Antenatal care, skilled birth attendance, immunization and Integrated Management of Childhood Illnesses). PAR was used to identify and analyse health system bottlenecks, as well as develop, monitor implementation and follow-up on action plans to address them. Evaluations were conducted involving 2 cycles of DIVA. The outputs (bottleneck analysis charts, driver diagrams, operational plans, M/E reports, etc.) from each cycle of the DIVA process were collated and analysed. Bottlenecks identified include availability of human resources for health, availability of health commodities as well as geographical accessibility. These had implications on acceptability and quality of services. Mean Improvements recorded were 20.4%, 14.0% and 10.8% and 11.2%, 7.5%; 5.5% (across eMTCT, maternal health and child health interventions) in the 1 st and 2nd DIVA cycles respectively. This study highlights processes and outcomes of integrating PAR in quality improvement design and operations in health intervention programmes with a focus on health systems strengthening in a Nigerian context. Implementing the DIVA model using a PAR approach may be considered an effective strategy for planning and implementing health interventions in comparable settings.

[1]  P. Margolis,et al.  The Model for Understanding Success in Quality (MUSIQ): building a theory of context in healthcare quality improvement , 2011, BMJ quality & safety.

[2]  S. Sieber,et al.  Cultural background, gender, and institutional status have an effect on the evaluation of multi-disciplinary participatory action research , 2018, PloS one.

[3]  C. Goodman,et al.  Health sector operational planning and budgeting processes in Kenya—“never the twain shall meet” , 2015, The International journal of health planning and management.

[4]  R. Ramaswamy,et al.  Strengthening decentralized primary healthcare planning in Nigeria using a quality improvement model: how contexts and actors affect implementation , 2018, Health policy and planning.

[5]  J. Eyles,et al.  Evaluating the sub-national fidelity of national Initiatives in decentralized health systems: Integrated Primary Health Care Governance in Nigeria , 2017, BMC Health Services Research.

[6]  Chandrakant Lahariya,et al.  Evidence to implementation continuum for universal health coverage. , 2015, The Lancet. Infectious diseases.

[7]  Akin Oyemakinde,et al.  Development of a Master Health Facility List in Nigeria , 2014, Online journal of public health informatics.

[8]  J. Bradley,et al.  Participatory evaluation of reproductive health care quality in developing countries. , 2002, Social science & medicine.

[9]  James J. Rooney,et al.  Root cause analysis for beginners , 2004 .

[10]  A. Costello,et al.  Impact on birth weight and child growth of Participatory Learning and Action women’s groups with and without transfers of food or cash during pregnancy: Findings of the low birth weight South Asia cluster-randomised controlled trial (LBWSAT) in Nepal , 2018, PloS one.

[11]  Mary Dixon-Woods,et al.  Does quality improvement improve quality? , 2016, Future Hospital Journal.

[12]  Julie E. Reed,et al.  The problem with Plan-Do-Study-Act cycles , 2015, BMJ Quality & Safety.

[13]  A. Rudnick,et al.  Nursing Students' Perceptions of Participatory Action Research. , 2018, The Journal of nursing education.

[14]  S. Kiwanuka,et al.  Elements for harnessing participatory action research to strengthen health managers’ capacity: a critical interpretative synthesis , 2018, Health Research Policy and Systems.

[15]  F. Baum,et al.  Participatory action research , 2006, Journal of Epidemiology and Community Health.

[16]  A. George,et al.  A participatory action research approach to strengthening health managers’ capacity at district level in Eastern Uganda , 2017, Health Research Policy and Systems.

[17]  M. Fredriksson,et al.  Bottleneck analysis at district level to illustrate gaps within the district health system in Uganda , 2017, Global health action.

[18]  T. Tanahashi Health service coverage and its evaluation. , 1978, Bulletin of the World Health Organization.

[19]  R. Ramaswamy,et al.  Effectiveness of the Diagnose-Intervene- Verify-Adjust (DIVA) model for integrated primary healthcare planning and performance improvement: an embedded mixed methods evaluation in Kaduna state, Nigeria , 2019, BMJ Open.

[20]  F. M. Mburu Health delivery standards: vested interests in health planning. , 1994, Social science & medicine.

[21]  S. Jan,et al.  Towards people-centred health systems: a multi-level framework for analysing primary health care governance in low- and middle-income countries , 2014, Health policy and planning.