Healthcare provider satisfaction with environmental conditions in rural healthcare facilities of 14 low- and middle-income countries
Introduction
Job satisfaction is “the attitude towards one's work and the related emotions, beliefs, and behavior,” and “results from complex interactions between on-the-job experience, organizational environment, and motivation” (Peters et al., 2010). Healthcare providers (HCPs) who are more satisfied with their job and work environment are more likely to demonstrate higher levels of effort towards quality improvement, provide lower-risk care for patients, and have less turnover (Alhassan et al., 2013; Mbaruku et al., 2014; Stewart et al., 2011).
The job of HCPs in rural areas of low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) can be especially demanding, and they often have little resources and institutional support (O'Neill and Sheffel, 2013). Increased pressure in the work environment affects job satisfaction, worker retention and health service delivery in rural settings (Mbaruku et al., 2014). Understaffing can lead to job dissatisfaction, in turn causing further staff shortages, labor unrest, and absenteeism (Gross et al., 2012; Mubyazi et al., 2012; Rowe et al., 2005). Dissatisfaction on the part of service providers can be passed on to patients in the form of impatient, distracted, or uncourteous behavior (Kruk et al., 2009). Improving the job satisfaction of HCPs in these settings is critical for improved patient and provider outcomes in healthcare facilities (HCFs).
The physical work environment – such as water, sanitation, and hygiene (WaSH) infrastructure, lighting, and infection control supplies – affects HCP job satisfaction. Peters et al. found that more than 90% of HCPs in India reported that “good physical conditions” were important in the “ideal job” and often ranked “good physical conditions” above “income” in importance (Peters et al., 2010). HCP dissatisfaction with staffing, poorer cleanliness and less orderliness of the workplace were associated with a greater risk for needlestick injury and pathogen exposure for HCPs (Lundstrom et al., 2002). Inadequate environmental conditions were linked to employee job frustration in HCFs in South Africa; rural HCPs had worse service delivery outcomes and expressed that transferring to another location with more resources would allow them to do their job more effectively (Tawana et al., 2019). In Ghana, HCPs in public and private facilities expressed that a major source of job dissatisfaction was due to the physical work environment of their clinics, and the low availability of resources and drugs (Alhassan et al., 2013). Insufficient resources were cited as a reason for job dissatisfaction for HCPs in government and public HCFs in Kenya, who were less likely to report adequate resources and safe water in the workplace (Ojakaa et al., 2014).
Understanding how the physical work environment impacts job satisfaction in HCPs can improve healthcare service delivery. Despite some qualitative evidence on job satisfaction in HCPs in rural, LMIC settings, few studies have explored this using survey data. We analyzed data from surveys conducted in 14 LMICs to explore the relationship between environmental conditions and HCP job satisfaction in HCFs, and to understand the factors influencing satisfaction with WaSH infrastructure and cleanliness and infection prevention and control (IPC) practices in rural HCFs in LMICs.
Section snippets
Materials and methods
Between July and December 2017, an evaluation of WaSH conditions in 14 low- and middle-income countries was conducted for the international non-governmental organization World Vision. As part of this evaluation, public clinics (such as health posts and health centers) in rural areas of Ethiopia, Ghana, Honduras, India, Kenya, Malawi, Mali, Mozambique, Niger, Rwanda, Tanzania, Uganda, Zambia, and Zimbabwe were assessed. Survey methods are described in detail by A. Z. Guo and Bartram (2019) but
Results
Across the 14 studied countries, respondents at 2002 HCFs (over 98% of those contacted) consented to survey. The characteristics of facilities in the final sample are discussed in detail elsewhere (A. Z. Guo and Bartram, 2019). Respondents from India and Honduras reported consistently high satisfaction with environmental conditions compared to study countries in sub-Saharan Africa and in particular Malawi, Zambia, and Uganda, where respondents reported consistently low satisfaction with
Discussion
We assessed HCP satisfaction with WaSH infrastructure and IPC practices and cleanliness at 2002 rural HCFs across 14 LMICs. This is one of the first studies to quantitatively assess HCP satisfaction with water, sanitation and hygiene infrastructure and IPC practices in LMICs. HCP satisfaction directly affects patient outcomes (Alhassan et al., 2013; Mbaruku et al., 2014; Stewart et al., 2011) and may be especially important in rural and LMIC settings where a small staff with few financial
Conclusions
Our study suggests that governments and non-governmental organizations (NGOs) should facilitate substantial improvements to HCF WaSH infrastructure in order to improve both HCP satisfaction and patient outcomes in public, rural clinics of LMICs. With regards to water, our findings suggest that governments and NGOs working in this space should prioritize provision of on premises, improved-type water service accessible to people with reduced mobility at HCFs. This single intervention could
Declaration of competing interest
Authors JBT and OO are both employed by World Vision, the sponsor for the original collection of data, but do not declare any influence from World Vision in their role in this manuscript. The other authors declare no conflicts of interest.
Acknowledgements
We thank the doctors and nurses who participated for their time and responses, and the enumerators from research consulting firms that helped to carry out the program evaluation. We would also like to thank those from The Water Institute at UNC who supported this project and evaluation. We thank Wren Tracy, Hayley Schram, and Raymond Tu for their feedback on the early stages of this manuscript.
References (28)
- et al.
Relative benefits of on-plot water supply over other ‘improved’ sources in rural Vietnam
Trop. Med. Int. Health
(2013) - et al.
Organizational and environmental factors that affect worker health and safety and patient outcomes
Am. J. Infect. Contr.
(2002) - et al.
On-plot drinking water supplies and health: a systematic review
Int. J. Hyg Environ. Health
(2016) - et al.
How can we achieve and maintain high-quality performance of health workers in low-resource settings?
Lancet
(2005) - et al.
Association between health worker motivation and healthcare quality efforts in Ghana
Hum. Resour. Health
(2013) - et al.
What motivates open defecation? A qualitative study from a rural setting in Nepal
PloS One
(2019) - et al.
The effects of health worker motivation and job satisfaction on turnover intention in Ghana: a cross-sectional study
Hum. Resour. Health
(2014) - et al.
Environmental conditions in maternity wards: evidence from rural healthcare facilities in 14 low- and middle-income countries
Int. J. Hyg Environ. Health
(2021) - et al.
Behavioral determinants of hand hygiene compliance in intensive care units
Am. J. Crit. Care
(2010) - et al.
Systematic review of studies on compliance with hand hygiene guidelines in hospital care
Infect. Control Hosp. Epidemiol.
(2010)
“Workhood”-a useful concept for the analysis of health workers' resources? An evaluation from Tanzania
BMC Health Serv. Res.
Water, sanitation, and hygiene in rural health-care facilities: a cross-sectional study in Ethiopia, Kenya, Mozambique, Rwanda, Uganda, and Zambia
Am. J. Trop. Med. Hyg.
Women's preferences for place of delivery in rural Tanzania: a population-based discrete choice experiment
Am. J. Publ. Health
Cited by (7)
The critical need for WASH in emergency preparedness in health settings, the case of COVID-19 pandemic in Kisumu Kenya
2022, Health and PlaceCitation Excerpt :This indicates the sparse knowledge of the impacts of other water and sanitation interventions on HCAI. In the context of satisfaction with inadequate WASH services and environmental conditions in healthcare facilities on the part of healthcare providers, Fejfar et al. (2021) in their study in 14 LMICs established that 68% of healthcare providers were unsatisfied with the sanitation facilities, 65% were unsatisfied with the water services, and 54% were unsatisfied with the hygiene services. Even though access to WASH is important in rendering quality and safe health care services, a systematic review conducted by Bouzid et al. (2018) indicated that access to WASH is not a significant determinant for health-seeking behaviours among patients in LMICs.
Influential Factors, Enablers, and Barriers to Adopting Smart Technology in Rural Regions: A Literature Review
2023, Sustainability (Switzerland)ATHLETE TEARING AND REHABILITATION CHARACTERISTICS
2021, Revista Brasileira de Medicina do Esporte