Do cash or digital payment modalities affect community health worker performance? - a case study of a remote refugee settlement in Western Uganda.

BACKGROUND: There is inadequate evidence about the influence of digital and cash payment modalities on the performance of Community Health Workers (CHWs) in underserved communities, such as refugee settlements. OBJECTIVE: To compare the performance of CHWs when paid in cash or digitally in Kyaka II refugee settlement, Uganda. METHODS: A comparative cross-sectional mixed methods design was used. Secondary data comprising 247 CHW reports during a six-month period of cash and digital payments were analyzed using Stata v14. Eleven focus group discussions, four in-depth interviews, and ten key informant interviews were conducted among the settlement stakeholders to explore perceptions of the payment methods. Qualitative data were analyzed thematically using Atlas.ti v9. RESULTS: CHWs performed better when paid cash than digital payments (t = 5.28; df = 246; p < 0.001). During the cash payment period, at least secondary education (APR 1.71 CI: 1.14-2.58) and having a side occupation (APR 1.58; CI: 1.13-2.21) were positively associated with performance. For digital payments, being male (APR 0.58; CI: 0.34-0.98), serving longer than 9 years (APR 0.87; CI: 0.82-0.93), and being allocated more than 60 households per month (APR 0.31; CI: 0.19-0.52) were negatively associated with CHW performance. Qualitative data revealed that most stakeholders preferred cash due to inconsistent and delayed digital payments. CONCLUSION: CHWs preferred and performed better with cash payments because digital payments were associated with delays and payment shortfalls that demotivated them. Implementers should invest towards averting digital payment shortfalls in remote settings to enhance CHW motivation and performance.

Main findings: Regarding the influence of payment modalities on Community Health Workers' performance, this study found that community health workers were motivated to perform better when paid with cash compared to digital payments.Added knowledge: Cash payments offer better reliability than digital payments in refugee settlements, which underscores the need to understand further the barriers to digital payments, particularly in hard-to-reach areas.Global health impact for policy and action: Health systems adapting to digital payments should consider a gradual transition through a hybrid approach that includes cash and digital payments while addressing the challenges associated with digital payments, especially in refugee settings and similar resource-constrained contexts.

Adoptability of digital payments for community health workers in peri-urban Uganda: A case study of Wakiso district.

BACKGROUND: Whereas digital payments have been identified as a solution to health payment challenges, evidence on their adoptability among Community Health Workers (CHWs) is limited. Understanding their adoptability is crucial for sustainability. This study assessed the adoptability of digital payments for CHWs in Wakiso district, Uganda. METHODS: A convergent parallel mixed-methods study was conducted between November and December 2022, in Wakiso district, Uganda. We surveyed a random sample of 150 CHWs using a structured questionnaire and conducted key informant interviews among three purposively selected Digital payment coordinators. The study utilized the Technology Acceptance Model (TAM) framework to assess the adoptability of digital payments among CHWs. Factor analysis was performed to extract composite variables from the original constituting variables. Using the median, the outcome was converted to a binary variable and logistic regression was conducted to assess the association between the TAM constructs and adoptability of digital payments by CHWs. Quantitative data was analyzed using STATA 14, while qualitative data was transcribed verbatim and analyzed using ATLAS.ti 22. RESULTS: Nearly all participants (98.0%; n = 49) had previously received payments through mobile money, a digital payment method. (52%; n = 78) of CHWs said they intend to use digital payment modalities. Perceived risk of digital payments was associated with 83% lower odds of adoptability of digital payment modalities (OR = 0.17;95%CI:0.052, 0.54), while perceived trust had nearly three times higher odds of adoptability of digital payment modalities (OR = 2.82;95%CI:1.41, 5.67). Qualitative interviews showed that most CHWs reported positive experiences with digital health payments, including effectiveness and completeness of payments except for delays associated with mobile money payments across payment providers. Mobile money was reported to be easy to use, in addition to fostering financial responsibility compared to cash. CONCLUSION: CHWs in Wakiso district intend to use digital payment modalities, particularly mobile money/e-cash. Perceived risk of the payment method and trust are key determinants of adoptability. Synergized efforts by both payment providers to manage payment delays and mitigate risks associated with digital payments could attenuate perceived risk and build trust in digital payment modalities.

Coverage and Drivers to Reaching the Last Child With Vaccination in Urban Settings: A Mixed-Methods Study in Kampala, Uganda.

BACKGROUND: Limited evidence exists regarding the drivers of vaccination coverage and equity in Kampala city, despite frequent measles outbreaks, inequities in vaccination coverage, and the decline in vaccination coverage rates. This study was designed to determine vaccine coverage among children aged 12-36 months and to understand its demand-side drivers. METHODS: We utilized a mixed-methods parallel convergent study design. A household survey was conducted to quantify the drivers of vaccine coverage among households with children aged 12-36 months. We employed a multistage sampling approach to select households, using a primary sampling unit of an enumeration area. We conducted 30 key informant interviews, 7 focus group discussions, and 6 in-depth interviews with representatives from the immunization program, health workers, and parents residing in areas with low vaccine coverage. RESULTS: Of the 590 enrolled children, 340 (57.6%) were partially vaccinated, 244 (41.4%) were fully vaccinated and had received all the recommended vaccinations, and 6 (1.0%) had never received any vaccine. Of the 244 with all recommended vaccinations, only 65 (26.6%) received their vaccines on time. Access to vaccination services was high (first dose of diphtheria, pertussis, and tetanus [DPT1] coverage of 96%), but utilization decreased over time, as shown by a dropout rate of 17.3% from the first to third dose of DPT. The main driver of complete vaccination was the parents' appreciation of the benefits of vaccination. Among partially vaccinated children, the barriers to vaccination were inadequate information about vaccination (its benefits and schedule), vaccine stock-outs, long waiting times to receive vaccination services, and hidden vaccination costs. CONCLUSION: Vaccination needs to be targeted to all children irrespective of whether they reside in slum areas or nonslum areas, as most are under-vaccinated. Social mobilization and communication efforts should be tailored to the complexities of urban settings characterized by transient and diverse populations with different cultures.

Uganda's increasing dependence on development partner's support for immunization - a five year resource tracking study (2012 - 2016).

BACKGROUND: In Uganda, there are persistent weaknesses in obtaining accurate, reliable and complete data on local and external investments in immunization to guide planning, financing, and resource mobilization. This study aimed to measure and describe the financial envelope for immunization from 2012 to 2016 and analyze expenditures at sub-national level. METHODS: The Systems of Health Accounts (SHA) 2011 methodology was used to quantify and map the resource envelope for immunization. Data was collected at national and sub-national levels from public and external sources of immunization. Data were coded, categorized and disaggregated by expenditure on immunization activities using the SHA 2011. RESULTS: Over the five-year period, funding for immunization increased fourfold from US$20.4 million in 2012 to US$ 85.6 million in 2016. The Ugandan government was the main contributor (55%) to immunization resources from 2012 to 2014 however, Gavi, the Vaccine Alliance contributed the majority (59%) of the resources to immunization in 2015 and 2016. Majority (66%) of the funds were managed by the National Medical Stores. Over the five-year period, 80% of the funds allocated to immunization activities were spent on facility based routine immunization (expenditure on human resources and outreaches). At sub-national level, districts allocated 15% of their total annual resources to immunization to support supervision of lower health facilities and distribution of vaccines. Health facilities spent 5.5% of their total annual resources on immunization to support outreaches. CONCLUSION: Development partner support has aided the improvement of vaccine coverage and increased access to vaccines however, there is an increasing dependence on this support for a critical national program raising sustainability concerns alongside other challenges like being off-budget and unpredictable. To ensure financial sustainability, there is need to operationalize the immunization fund, advocate and mobilize additional resources for immunization from the Government of Uganda and the private sector, increase the reliability of resources for immunization as well as leverage on health financing reforms like the National Health Insurance.