Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2023 Jan 6;23(1):12.
doi: 10.1186/s12879-022-07956-5.

Impact of multimodal strategies including a pay for performance strategy in the improvement of infection prevention and control practices in healthcare facilities during an Ebola virus disease outbreak

Affiliations

Impact of multimodal strategies including a pay for performance strategy in the improvement of infection prevention and control practices in healthcare facilities during an Ebola virus disease outbreak

Landry Kabego et al. BMC Infect Dis. .

Abstract

Background: Strategy to mitigate various Ebola virus disease (EVD) outbreaks are focusing on Infection Prevention and Control (IPC) capacity building, supportive supervision and IPC supply donation. This study was conducted to assess the impact of a Pay for Performance Strategy (PPS) in improving IPC performance in healthcare facilities (HF) in context of the 2018-2019 Nord Kivu/ Democratic Republic of the Congo EVD outbreak.

Methods: A quasi-experimental study was conducted analysing the impact of a PPS on the IPC performance. HF were selected following the inclusion criteria upon informed consent from the facility manager and the National Department of Health. Initial and process assessment of IPC performance was conducted by integrating response teams using a validated IPC assessment tool for HF. A bundle of interventions was then implemented in the different HF including training of health workers, donation of IPC kits, supportive supervision during the implementation of IPC activities, and monetary reward. IPC practices in HF were assessment every two weeks during the intervention period to measure the impact. The IPC assessment tool had 34 questions aggregated in 8 different thematic areas: triage and isolation capacity, IPC committee in HF, hand hygiene, PPE, decontamination and sterilization, linen management, hospital environment and Waste management. Data were analysed using descriptive statistics and analytical approaches according to assumptions. R software (version 4.0.3) was used for all the analyses and a p-value of 0.05 was considered as the threshold for statistically significant results.

Results: Among 69 HF involved in this study, 48 were private facilities and 21 state facilities. The median baseline IPC score was 44% (IQR: 21-65%); this IPC median score reached respectively after 2, 4, 6 and 8 weeks 68% (IQR: 59-76%), 79% (71-84%), 76% (68-85%) and 79% (74-85%). The improvement of IPC score was statistically significative. Spearman's rank-order correlation revealed the associated between proportion of trained HW and IPC score performance after 8 weeks of interventions (rs = .280, p-value = 0.02).

Conclusion: Pay for Performance Strategy was proved effective in improving healthcare facilities capacity in infection prevention and control practice in context of 2018 EVD outbreak in Nord Kivu. However, the strategy for long-term sustainability of IPC needs further provision. More studies are warranted on the HW and patients' perceptions toward IPC program implementation in context of Nord Kivu Province.

Keywords: Healthcare worker infections; Infection prevention and control; Pay per performance.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

No competing interest to declare.

Figures

Fig. 1
Fig. 1
IPC performance by improvement from the baseline to the final assessment. Baseline: baseline IPC score, Week_2: IPC score after 2 weeks of intervention, Week_4: IPC score after 4 weeks of intervention, Week_6: IPC score after 6 weeks of intervention, Week_8: IPC score after 8 weeks of intervention

Similar articles

Cited by

References

    1. World Health Organization. Regional Office for Africa. (2019). Ebola Virus Disease Democratic Republic of the Congo: External Situation Report 30. World Health Organization. Regional Office for Africa. https://apps.who.int/iris/handle/10665/310996.
    1. World Health Organization. Regional Office for Africa. (2020). Ebola in the Democratic Republic of the Congo, North Kivu, Ituri 2018–2020. World Health Organization. Regional Office for Africa. https://www.who.int/emergencies/situations/Ebola-2019-drc.
    1. Kilmarx PH, Clarke KR, Dietz PM, Hamel MJ, Husain F, McFadden JD, et al. Ebola virus disease in health care workers—Sierra Leone, 2014. Morb Mortal Wkly Rep. 2014;63(49):1167–1171. - PMC - PubMed
    1. European Centre for Disease Prevention and Control. Ebola virus disease outbreak in North Kivu and Ituri Provinces, Democratic Republic of the Congo-second update Main conclusions. 2018. Available from: https://www.ecdc.europa.eu/sites/default/files/documents/RRA-Ebola-DRC%2....
    1. Nyenswah T, Fallah M, Sieh S, Kollie K, Badio M, Gray A, et al. Controlling the last known cluster of Ebola virus disease—Liberia. 2015. - PMC - PubMed

MeSH terms