Interventions for hiring, retaining and training district health systems managers in low- and middle-income countries.

BACKGROUND: District managers are playing an increasingly important role in determining the performance of health systems in low- and middle-income countries as a result of decentralization. OBJECTIVES: To assess the effectiveness of interventions to hire, retain and train district health systems managers in low- and middle-income countries. SEARCH METHODS: We searched a wide range of international databases, including the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE and EMBASE. We also searched online resources of international agencies, including the World Bank, to find relevant grey literature. Searches were conducted in December 2011. SELECTION CRITERIA: District health systems managers are those persons who are responsible for overseeing the operations of the health system within a defined, subnational geographical area that is designated as a district. Hiring and retention interventions include those that aim to increase the attractiveness of district management positions, as well as those related to hiring and retention processes, such as private contracting. Training interventions include education programs to develop future managers and on-the-job training programs for current managers. To be included, studies needed to use one of the following study designs: randomized controlled trial, nonrandomized controlled trial, controlled before-and-after study, and interrupted time series analysis. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: We report measures of effect in the same way that the primary study authors have reported them. Due to the varied nature of interventions included in this review we could not pool data across studies. MAIN RESULTS: Two studies met our inclusion criteria. The findings of one study conducted in Cambodia provide low quality evidence that private contracts with international nongovernmental organizations (NGOs) for district health systems management ('contracting-in') may improve health care access and utilization. Contracting-in increased use of antenatal care by 28% and use of public facilities by 14%. However, contracting-in was not found to have an effect on population health outcomes. The findings of the other study provide low quality evidence that intermittent training courses over 18 months may improve district health system managers' performance. In three countries in Latin America, managers who did not receive the intermittent training courses had between 2.4 and 8.3 times more management deficiencies than managers who received the training courses. No studies that aimed to investigate interventions for retaining district health systems managers met our study selection criteria for inclusion in this review. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: There is low quality evidence that contracting-in may improve health care accessibility and utilization and that intermittent training courses may improve district health systems managers' performance. More evidence is required before firm conclusions can be drawn regarding the effectiveness of these interventions in diverse settings. Other interventions that might be promising candidates for hiring and retaining (e.g., government regulations, professional support programs) as well as training district health systems managers (e.g., in-service workshops with on-site support) have not been adequately investigated.

Monitoring and evaluation of contracts for health service delivery in Costa Rica.

The Costa Rican Social Security Fund (CCSS) has been purchasing primary health care services from the Costa Rican Cooperative, COOPESALUD. The CCSS has made significant progress in establishing performance indicators and conducting evaluations of progress against those indicators. After laying out a general framework for developing performance indicators, this paper analyzes the CCSS's evaluation of its 1998 contract with COOPESALUD in terms of objectives, performance indicators, evaluation results, and use of the evaluation results. The objectives of the COOPESALUD contract, as they are stated within the body of the contract, are to increase coverage, improve quality and increase efficiency. Contract performance is measured through three categories of indicators: organization, service delivery and quality. Service delivery targets are set in terms of volume of services based upon geographic population. A 'yes' or a 'no' rating to indicate whether a particular system is in place is used for scoring organization and quality targets. While the CCSS contract is one of the most advanced in the region, many aspects could be improved. By setting indicator targets based upon population estimates, it is difficult for the CCSS to accurately assess COOPESALUD's performance. Although the CCSS conducts periodic evaluations through formal mechanisms, and some data on volume of service delivery are available, the data gathered in all three categories do not provide the purchaser with information directly related to all of the contract objectives nor to contractor performance. The indicators spelled out in the contract, and the evaluation of those indicators, do not seek to measure quantifiable results or impact through numerical data. There are no process or result indicators in place. The evaluation results could therefore tend to be fairly superficial - based upon population coverage and not on effectiveness of treatment, quality of treatment or efficient resource use.