COVID-19 pandemic effects on neonatal inpatient admissions and mortality: interrupted time series analysis of facilities implementing NEST360 in Kenya, Malawi, Nigeria, and Tanzania.

BACKGROUND: The emergence of COVID-19 precipitated containment policies (e.g., lockdowns, school closures, etc.). These policies disrupted healthcare, potentially eroding gains for Sustainable Development Goals including for neonatal mortality. Our analysis aimed to evaluate indirect effects of COVID-19 containment policies on neonatal admissions and mortality in 67 neonatal units across Kenya, Malawi, Nigeria, and Tanzania between January 2019 and December 2021. METHODS: The Oxford Stringency Index was applied to quantify COVID-19 policy stringency over time for Kenya, Malawi, Nigeria, and Tanzania. Stringency increased markedly between March and April 2020 for these four countries (although less so in Tanzania), therefore defining the point of interruption. We used March as the primary interruption month, with April for sensitivity analysis. Additional sensitivity analysis excluded data for March and April 2020, modelled the index as a continuous exposure, and examined models for each country. To evaluate changes in neonatal admissions and mortality based on this interruption period, a mixed effects segmented regression was applied. The unit of analysis was the neonatal unit (n = 67), with a total of 266,741 neonatal admissions (January 2019 to December 2021). RESULTS: Admission to neonatal units decreased by 15% overall from February to March 2020, with half of the 67 neonatal units showing a decline in admissions. Of the 34 neonatal units with a decline in admissions, 19 (28%) had a significant decrease of ≥ 20%. The month-to-month decrease in admissions was approximately 2% on average from March 2020 to December 2021. Despite the decline in admissions, we found no significant changes in overall inpatient neonatal mortality. The three sensitivity analyses provided consistent findings. CONCLUSION: COVID-19 containment measures had an impact on neonatal admissions, but no significant change in overall inpatient neonatal mortality was detected. Additional qualitative research in these facilities has explored possible reasons. Strengthening healthcare systems to endure unexpected events, such as pandemics, is critical in continuing progress towards achieving Sustainable Development Goals, including reducing neonatal deaths to less than 12 per 1000 live births by 2030.

Conducting cross-cultural, multi-lingual or multi-country scale development and validation in health care research: A 10-step framework based on a scoping review.

Background: Valid, reliable and cross-cultural equivalent scales and measurement instruments that enable comparisons across diverse populations in different countries are important for global health research and practice. We developed a 10-step framework through a scoping review of the common strategies and techniques used for scale development and validation in a cross-cultural, multi-lingual, or multi-country setting, especially in health care research. Methods: We searched MEDLINE, Embase, and PsycINFO for peer-reviewed studies that collected data from two or more countries or in two or more languages at any stages of scale development or validation and published between 2010-22. We categorised the techniques into three commonly used scale development and validation stages (item generation, scale development, and scale evaluation) as well as during the translation stage. We described the most commonly used techniques at each stage. Results: We identified 141 studies that were included in the analysis. We summarised 14 common techniques and strategies, including focus groups or interviews with diverse target populations, and involvement of measurement experts and linguists for item content validity expert panel at the item generation stage; back-and-forth translation, collaborative team approach for the translation stage; cognitive interviews and different recruitment strategies and incentives in different settings for scale development stage; and three approaches for measurement invariance (multigroup confirmatory factor analysis, differential item functioning and multiple indicator multiple causes) for scale evaluation stage. Conclusions: We provided a 10-step framework for cross-cultural, multi-lingual or multi-country scale development and validation based on these techniques and strategies. More research and synthesis are needed to make scale development more culturally competent and enable scale application to better meet local health and development needs.

Experiences of core outcome set developers on including stakeholders from low- and middle-income countries: An online survey.

Core outcome set (COS) development and use enhances comparability of research findings. It may also enhance the translation of research into practice and reduce research waste. However, there is limited involvement of stakeholders from low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) in COS development and use. In this study, we explored the experiences of researchers in COS development projects who included stakeholders from LMICs. Online survey conducted in English of 70 COS developers from HICs who had included LMIC stakeholders in the process of developing a COS, published before the end of 2019. Respondents were identified from the COMET database and sent a link to the survey via a personalised email. Quantitative data were analysed using simple descriptive statistics. Qualitative data analysis was based on qualitative content analysis. There were 37 respondents yielding a 53% overall response rate. Analysis was limited to the responses related to 29 COS developed in the years 2015 to 2019, to reduce the potential for recall bias for earlier COS. Most respondents 20/29 (69%) were researchers. Determining 'what to measure' was reported as the most common stage of inclusion of LMIC stakeholders. Respondents cited (24/29, 83%) their ongoing collaborations with LMIC stakeholders such as clinicians or researchers as their main rationale for including LMICs stakeholders and reported that translation of the Delphi into languages other than English may be useful to enhance wider stakeholder participation. Involvement of LMIC stakeholders only in the later stages of COS development, lack of adequate resources to support their involvement, and lack of networks and contacts were thought to limit fuller participation of stakeholders from LMICs. To improve the involvement of LMIC stakeholders in COS development and use, COS developers need to raise awareness on the utility of COS. The need for and feasibility of translation into multiple languages warrants further discussion.

Differences in clinical outcomes of bloodstream infections caused by Klebsiella aerogenes, Klebsiella pneumoniae and Enterobacter cloacae: a multicentre cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Klebsiella aerogenes has been reclassified from Enterobacter to Klebsiella genus due to its phenotypic and genotypic similarities with Klebsiella pneumoniae. It is unclear if clinical outcomes are also more similar. This study aims to assess clinical outcomes of bloodstreams infections (BSI) caused by K. aerogenes, K. pneumoniae and Enterobacter cloacae, through secondary data analysis, nested in PRO-BAC cohort study. METHODS: Hospitalized patients between October 2016 and March 2017 with monomicrobial BSI due to K. aerogenes, K. pneumoniae or E. cloacae were included. Primary outcome was a composite clinical outcome including all-cause mortality or recurrence until 30 days follow-up. Secondary outcomes were fever ≥ 72 h, persistent bacteraemia, and secondary device infection. Multilevel mixed-effect Poisson regression was used to estimate the association between microorganisms and outcome. RESULTS: Overall, 29 K. aerogenes, 77 E. cloacae and 337 K. pneumoniae BSI episodes were included. Mortality or recurrence was less frequent in K. aerogenes (6.9%) than in E. cloacae (20.8%) or K. pneumoniae (19.0%), but statistical difference was not observed (rate ratio (RR) 0.35, 95% CI 0.08 to 1.55; RR 0.42, 95% CI 0.10 to 1.71, respectively). Fever ≥ 72 h and device infection were more common in K. aerogenes group. In the multivariate analysis, adjusted for confounders (age, sex, BSI source, hospital ward, Charlson score and active antibiotic therapy), the estimates and direction of effect were similar to crude results. CONCLUSIONS: Results suggest that BSI caused by K. aerogenes may have a better prognosis than E. cloacae or K. pneumoniae BSI.

Health facility assessment of small and sick newborn care in low- and middle-income countries: systematic tool development and operationalisation with NEST360 and UNICEF.

BACKGROUND: Each year an estimated 2.3 million newborns die in the first 28 days of life. Most of these deaths are preventable, and high-quality neonatal care is fundamental for surviving and thriving. Service readiness is used to assess the capacity of hospitals to provide care, but current health facility assessment (HFA) tools do not fully evaluate inpatient small and sick newborn care (SSNC). METHODS: Health systems ingredients for SSNC were identified from international guidelines, notably World Health Organization (WHO), and other standards for SSNC. Existing global and national service readiness tools were identified and mapped against this ingredients list. A novel HFA tool was co-designed according to a priori considerations determined by policymakers from four African governments, including that the HFA be completed in one day and assess readiness across the health system. The tool was reviewed by > 150 global experts, and refined and operationalised in 64 hospitals in Kenya, Malawi, Nigeria, and Tanzania between September 2019 and March 2021. RESULTS: Eight hundred and sixty-six key health systems ingredients for service readiness for inpatient SSNC were identified and mapped against four global and eight national tools measuring SSNC service readiness. Tools revealed major content gaps particularly for devices and consumables, care guidelines, and facility infrastructure, with a mean of 13.2% (n = 866, range 2.2-34.4%) of ingredients included. Two tools covered 32.7% and 34.4% (n = 866) of ingredients and were used as inputs for the new HFA tool, which included ten modules organised by adapted WHO health system building blocks, including: infrastructure, pharmacy and laboratory, medical devices and supplies, biomedical technician workshop, human resources, information systems, leadership and governance, family-centred care, and infection prevention and control. This HFA tool can be conducted at a hospital by seven assessors in one day and has been used in 64 hospitals in Kenya, Malawi, Nigeria, and Tanzania. CONCLUSION: This HFA tool is available open-access to adapt for use to comprehensively measure service readiness for level-2 SSNC, including respiratory support. The resulting facility-level data enable comparable tracking for Every Newborn Action Plan coverage target four within and between countries, identifying facility and national-level health systems gaps for action.

Quantifying health facility service readiness for small and sick newborn care: comparing standards-based and WHO level-2 + scoring for 64 hospitals implementing with NEST360 in Kenya, Malawi, Nigeria, and Tanzania.

BACKGROUND: Service readiness tools are important for assessing hospital capacity to provide quality small and sick newborn care (SSNC). Lack of summary scoring approaches for SSNC service readiness means we are unable to track national targets such as the Every Newborn Action Plan targets. METHODS: A health facility assessment (HFA) tool was co-designed by Newborn Essential Solutions and Technologies (NEST360) and UNICEF with four African governments. Data were collected in 68 NEST360-implementing neonatal units in Kenya, Malawi, Nigeria, and Tanzania (September 2019-March 2021). Two summary scoring approaches were developed: a) standards-based, including items for SSNC service readiness by health system building block (HSBB), and scored on availability and functionality, and b) level-2 + , scoring items on readiness to provide WHO level-2 + clinical interventions. For each scoring approach, scores were aggregated and summarised as a percentage and equally weighted to obtain an overall score by hospital, HSBB, and clinical intervention. RESULTS: Of 1508 HFA items, 1043 (69%) were included in standards-based and 309 (20%) in level-2 + scoring. Sixty-eight neonatal units across four countries had median standards-based scores of 51% [IQR 48-57%] at baseline, with variation by country: 62% [IQR 59-66%] in Kenya, 49% [IQR 46-51%] in Malawi, 50% [IQR 42-58%] in Nigeria, and 55% [IQR 53-62%] in Tanzania. The lowest scoring was family-centred care [27%, IQR 18-40%] with governance highest scoring [76%, IQR 71-82%]. For level-2 + scores, the overall median score was 41% [IQR 35-51%] with variation by country: 50% [IQR 44-53%] in Kenya, 41% [IQR 35-50%] in Malawi, 33% [IQR 27-37%] in Nigeria, and 41% [IQR 32-52%] in Tanzania. Readiness to provide antibiotics by culture report was the highest-scoring intervention [58%, IQR 50-75%] and neonatal encephalopathy management was the lowest-scoring [21%, IQR 8-42%]. In both methods, overall scores were low (< 50%) for 27 neonatal units in standards-based scoring and 48 neonatal units in level-2 + scoring. No neonatal unit achieved high scores of > 75%. DISCUSSION: Two scoring approaches reveal gaps in SSNC readiness with no neonatal units achieving high scores (> 75%). Government-led quality improvement teams can use these summary scores to identify areas for health systems change. Future analyses could determine which items are most directly linked with quality SSNC and newborn outcomes.

Awareness and experiences on core outcome set development and use amongst stakeholders from low- and middle- income countries: An online survey.

Harmonization of outcomes to be measured in clinical trials can reduce research waste and enhance research translation. One of the ways to standardize measurement is through development and use of core outcome sets (COS). There is limited involvement of low- and middle-income country (LMIC) stakeholders in COS development and use. This study explores the level of awareness and experiences of LMIC stakeholders in the development and use of COS. We conducted an online survey of LMIC stakeholders. Three existing COS (pre-eclampsia, COVID-19, palliative care) were presented as case scenarios, and respondents asked to state (with reason(s)) if they would or would not use the COS if they were working in that area. Quantitative data were analyzed descriptively while qualitative data were analyzed thematically. Of 81 respondents, 26 had COS experience, 9 of whom had been involved in COS development. Personal research interests and prevalence of disease are key drivers for initiation/participation in a given COS project. Most respondents would use the COS for pre-eclampsia (18/26) and COVID-19 (19/26) since the development process included key stakeholders. More than half of the respondents were not sure or would not use the palliative care COS as they felt stakeholder engagement was limited and it was developed for a different resource setting. Respondents reported that use of COS can be limited by (i) feasibility of measuring the outcomes in the COS, (ii) knowledge on the usefulness and availability of COS and (iii) lack of wide stakeholder engagement in the COS development process including having patients and carers in the development process. To ensure the development and use of COS in LMICs, collaborations are essential in awareness raising on COS utility, training, and COS development. The COS also needs to be made accessible in locally understandable languages and feasible to measure in LMICs.

To adopt or adapt an existing neonatal core outcome set in Kenya: a study protocol.

BACKGROUND: Development and use of core outcome set(s) (COS) in research can reduce research wastage by ensuring that a minimum set of outcomes are always reported on. Neonatal morbidity and mortality are a big burden in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs). Research is continuously being undertaken to reduce this burden. Currently, there is no COS for neonatal research in LMICs but there exists one for neonatal research in high-income countries (HICs). OBJECTIVES: To determine outcomes that are useful for neonatal care in Kenya to inform whether an existing COS should be adopted or adapted. To assess the feasibility of a routine data collection system to collect data of the agreed-on COS. METHODS: A review of existing literature on neonatal research in LMICs followed by a qualitative study of key stakeholders in neonatal care. To explore whether to adapt or adopt, in two hospitals, two focus group discussions with 6-8 parents/caregivers will be undertaken (one each in two hospitals). Key informant interviews will also be conducted with 6 health care providers in each of the hospitals. At the policy-making level, we will conduct 10 key informant interviews. Qualitative data will be analyzed thematically. A consensus meeting will be undertaken with key stakeholders, who will be presented with an overview of the COS developed for HICs, key findings from the literature, and the qualitative study to determine context-appropriate COS. The agreed-on outcomes will be counterchecked against the case records in the two hospitals. The feasibility of collecting the outcomes on a routine electronic research database, the Clinical Information Network that collects standardized data at admission and discharge, will be explored. The congruence (or not) of the outcomes will be documented and be used to enrich the discussion and provide a snapshot of the feasibility of the health information system to collect routine data on the COS. CONCLUSIONS: A COS for use in neonatal care in Kenya will help enhance outcome measurements and reporting not just in research but also in routine practice. This will enhance the comparability of interventions in trials and routine settings leading to reduced research wastage and likely improved quality of care. Additionally, the methodology used for this work can be adopted in other settings as a means of adopting or adapting an existing COS.

Protecting small and sick newborn care in the COVID-19 pandemic: multi-stakeholder qualitative data from four African countries with NEST360.

BACKGROUND: Health system shocks are increasing. The COVID-19 pandemic resulted in global disruptions to health systems, including maternal and newborn healthcare seeking and provision. Yet evidence on mitigation strategies to protect newborn service delivery is limited. We sought to understand what mitigation strategies were employed to protect small and sick newborn care (SSNC) across 65 facilities Kenya, Malawi, Nigeria and Tanzania, implementing with the NEST360 Alliance, and if any could be maintained post-pandemic. METHODS: We used qualitative methods (in-depth interviews n=132, focus group discussions n=15) with purposively sampled neonatal health systems actors in Kenya, Malawi, Nigeria and Tanzania. Data were collected from September 2021 - August 2022. Topic guides were co-developed with key stakeholders and used to gain a detailed understanding of approaches to protect SSNC during the COVID-19 pandemic. Questions explored policy development, collaboration and investments, organisation of care, human resources, and technology and device innovations. Interviews were conducted by experienced qualitative researchers and data were collected until saturation was reached. Interviews were digitally recorded and transcribed verbatim. A common coding framework was developed, and data were coded via NVivo and analysed using a thematic framework approach. FINDINGS: We identified two pathways via which SSNC was strengthened. The first pathway, COVID-19 specific responses with secondary benefit to SSNC included: rapid policy development and adaptation, new and collaborative funding partnerships, improved oxygen systems, strengthened infection prevention and control practices. The second pathway, health system mitigation strategies during the pandemic, included: enhanced information systems, human resource adaptations, service delivery innovations, e.g., telemedicine, community engagement and more emphasis on planned preventive maintenance of devices. Chronic system weaknesses were also identified that limited the sustainability and institutionalisation of actions to protect SSNC. CONCLUSION: Innovations to protect SSNC in response to the COVID-19 pandemic should be maintained to support resilience and high-quality routine SSNC delivery. In particular, allocation of resources to sustain high quality and resilient care practices and address remaining gaps for SSNC is critical.

Neonatal inpatient dataset for small and sick newborn care in low- and middle-income countries: systematic development and multi-country operationalisation with NEST360.

BACKGROUND: Every Newborn Action Plan (ENAP) coverage target 4 necessitates national scale-up of Level-2 Small and Sick Newborn Care (SSNC) (with Continuous Positive Airway Pressure (CPAP)) in 80% of districts by 2025. Routine neonatal inpatient data is important for improving quality of care, targeting equity gaps, and enabling data-driven decision-making at individual, district, and national-levels. Existing neonatal inpatient datasets vary in purpose, size, definitions, and collection processes. We describe the co-design and operationalisation of a core inpatient dataset for use to track outcomes and improve quality of care for small and sick newborns in high-mortality settings. METHODS: A three-step systematic framework was used to review, co-design, and operationalise this novel neonatal inpatient dataset in four countries (Malawi, Kenya, Tanzania, and Nigeria) implementing with the Newborn Essential Solutions and Technologies (NEST360) Alliance. Existing global and national datasets were identified, and variables were mapped according to categories. A priori considerations for variable inclusion were determined by clinicians and policymakers from the four African governments by facilitated group discussions. These included prioritising clinical care and newborn outcomes data, a parsimonious variable list, and electronic data entry. The tool was designed and refined by > 40 implementers and policymakers during a multi-stakeholder workshop and online interactions. RESULTS: Identified national and international datasets (n = 6) contained a median of 89 (IQR:61-154) variables, with many relating to research-specific initiatives. Maternal antenatal/intrapartum history was the largest variable category (21, 23.3%). The Neonatal Inpatient Dataset (NID) includes 60 core variables organised in six categories: (1) birth details/maternal history; (2) admission details/identifiers; (3) clinical complications/observations; (4) interventions/investigations; (5) discharge outcomes; and (6) diagnosis/cause-of-death. Categories were informed through the mapping process. The NID has been implemented at 69 neonatal units in four African countries and links to a facility-level quality improvement (QI) dashboard used in real-time by facility staff. CONCLUSION: The NEST360 NID is a novel, parsimonious tool for use in routine information systems to inform inpatient SSNC quality. Available on the NEST360/United Nations Children's Fund (UNICEF) Implementation Toolkit for SSNC, this adaptable tool enables facility and country-level comparisons to accelerate progress toward ENAP targets. Additional linked modules could include neonatal at-risk follow-up, retinopathy of prematurity, and Level-3 intensive care.

The influence of internship training experience on Kenyan and Ugandan doctors' career intentions and decisions: a qualitative study.

BACKGROUND: Medical internship is a key period for doctors' individual career planning and also a transition period for the broader labour market. OBJECTIVES: We aimed to understand the complex set of factors influencing the career intentions and decisions of junior doctors, post-internship in Kenya and Uganda. METHODS: We conducted semi-structured interviews with 54 junior medical officers and 14 consultants to understand doctors' internship experiences and subsequent employment experiences. We analysed the data using a mix of a direct content approach, informed by an internship experience and career intentions framework developed primarily from high-income country literature, alongside a more inductive thematic analysis. RESULTS: Echoing the internship experience and career intentions framework, we found that clinical exposure during internship, work-life balance, aspects of workplace culture such as relationships with consultants and other team members, and concerns over future job security and professional development all influenced Kenyan and Ugandan doctors' career preferences. Additionally, we added a new category to the framework to reflect our finding that interns might want to 'fill a health system gap' when they choose their future careers, based on what they witness as interns. However, often career intentions did not match career and employment decisions due to specific contextual factors, most importantly a shortage of job opportunities. CONCLUSION: We have shown how internship experiences shape medical doctors' career intentions in Kenya and Uganda and highlighted the importance of job availability and context in influencing doctors' career choices.

'We were treated like we are nobody': a mixed-methods study of medical doctors' internship experiences in Kenya and Uganda.

OBJECTIVE: Medical interns are an important workforce providing first-line healthcare services in hospitals. The internship year is important for doctors as they transition from theoretical learning with minimal hands-on work under supervision to clinical practice roles with considerable responsibility. However, this transition is considered stressful and commonly leads to burn-out due to challenging working conditions and an ongoing need for learning and assessment, which is worse in countries with resource constraints. In this study, we provide an overview of medical doctors' internship experiences in Kenya and Uganda. METHODS: Using a convergent mixed-methods approach, we collected data from a survey of 854 medical interns and junior doctors and semistructured interviews with 54 junior doctors and 14 consultants. Data collection and analysis were guided by major themes identified from a previous global scoping review (well-being, educational environment and working environment and condition), using descriptive analysis and thematic analysis respectively for quantitative and qualitative data. FINDINGS: Most medical interns are satisfied with their job but many reported suffering from stress, depression and burn-out, and working unreasonable hours due to staff shortages. They are also being affected by the challenging working environment characterised by a lack of adequate resources and a poor safety climate. Although the survey data suggested that most interns were satisfied with the supervision received, interviews revealed nuances where many interns faced challenging scenarios, for example, poor supervision, insufficient support due to consultants not being available or being 'treated like we are nobody'. CONCLUSION: We highlight challenges experienced by Kenyan and Ugandan medical interns spanning from burn-out, stress, challenging working environment, inadequate support and poor quality of supervision. We recommend that regulators, educators and hospital administrators should improve the resource availability and capacity of internship hospitals, prioritise individual doctors' well-being and provide standardised supervision, support systems and conducive learning environments.

Development and validation of a new measurement instrument to assess internship experience of medical doctors in low-income and middle-income countries.

Routine surveys are used to understand the training quality and experiences of junior doctors but there are lack of tools designed to evaluate the training experiences of interns in low-income and middle-income countries (LMICs) where working conditions and resource constraints are challenging. We describe our process developing and validating a 'medical internship experience scale' to address this gap, work involving nine LMICs that varied in geographical locations, income-level and internship training models. We used a scoping review of existing tools, content validity discussions with target populations and an expert panel, back-and-forth translations into four language versions and cognitive interviews to develop and test the tool. Using data collected from 1646 interns and junior medical doctors, we assessed factor structure and assessed its reliability and validity. Fifty items about experiences of medical internship were retained from an initial pool of 102 items. These 50 items represent 6 major factors (constructs): (1) clinical learning and supervision, (2) patient safety, (3) job satisfaction, (4) stress and burnout, (5) mental well-being, and (6) fairness and discrimination. We reflect on the process of multicountry scale development and highlight some considerations for others who may use our scale, using preliminary analyses of the 1646 responses to illustrate that the tool may produce useful data to identify priorities for action. We suggest this tool could enable LMICs to assess key metrics regarding intern straining and initial work experiences and possibly allow comparison across countries and over time, to inform better internship planning and management.

Characterising support and care assistants in formal hospital settings: a scoping review.

BACKGROUND: A 15 million health workforce shortage is still experienced globally leading to a sub-optimal healthcare worker-to-population ratio in most countries. The use of low-skilled care assistants has been suggested as a cost-saving human resource for health strategy that can significantly reduce the risks of rationed, delayed, or missed care. However, the characterisation, role assignment, regulation, and clinical governance mechanisms for unlicensed assistive workforce remain unclear or inconsistent. The purpose of this study was to map and collate evidence of how care assistants are labelled, utilised, regulated, and managed in formal hospital settings as well as their impact on patient care. METHODS: We conducted a scoping review of literature from PUBMED, CINAHL, PsychINFO, EMBASE, Web of Science, Scopus, and Google Scholar. Searches and eligibility screening were conducted using the Participants-Context-Concepts framework. Thematic content analysis guided the synthesis of the findings. RESULTS: 73 records from a total of 15 countries were included in the final full-text review and synthesis. A majority (78%) of these sources were from high-income countries. Many titles are used to describe care assistants, and these vary within and across countries. On ascribed roles, care assistants perform direct patient care, housekeeping, clerical and documentation, portering, patient flow management, ordering of laboratory tests, emergency response and first aid duties. Additional extended roles that require higher competency levels exist in the United States, Australia, and Canada. There is a mixture of both positive and negative sentiments on their impact on patient care or nurses' perception and experiences. Clinical and organisational governance mechanisms vary substantially across the 15 countries. Licensure, regulatory mechanisms, and task-shifting policies are largely absent or not reported in these countries. CONCLUSIONS: The nomenclature used to describe care assistants and the tasks they perform vary substantially within countries and across healthcare systems. There is, therefore, a need to review and update the international and national classification of occupations for clarity and more meaningful nomenclature for care assistants. In addition, the association between care assistants and care outcomes or nurses' experience remains unclear. Furthermore, there is a dearth of empirical evidence on this topic from low- and middle-income countries.

Examining the absorption of post-internship medical officers into the public sector at county-level in devolved Kenya: a qualitative case study.

BACKGROUND: After Kenya's decentralization and constitutional changes in 2013, 47 devolved county governments are responsible for workforce planning and recruitment including for doctors/medical officers (MO). Data from the Ministry of Health suggested that less than half of these MOs are being absorbed by the public sector between 2015 and 2018. We aimed to examine how post-internship MOs are absorbed into the public sector at the county-level, as part of a broader project focusing on Kenya's human resources for health. METHODS: We employed a qualitative case study design informed by a simplified health labour market framework. Data included interviews with 30 MOs who finished their internship after 2018, 10 consultants who have supervised MOs, and 51 county/sub-county-level managers who are involved in MOs' planning and recruitment. A thematic analysis approach was used to examine recruitment processes, outcomes as well as perceived demand and supply. RESULTS: We found that Kenya has a large mismatch between supply and demand for MOs. An increasing number of medical schools are offering training in medicine while the demand for MOs in the county-level public sector has not been increasing at the same pace due to fiscal resource constraints and preference for other workforce cadres. The local Department of Health put in requests and participate in interviews but do not lead the recruitment process and respondents suggested that it can be subject to political interference and corruption. The imbalance of supply and demand is leading to unemployment, underemployment and migration of post-internship MOs with further impacts on MOs' wages and contract conditions, especially in the private sector. CONCLUSION: The mismatched supply and demand of MO accompanied by problematic recruitment processes led to many MOs not being absorbed by the public sector and subsequent unemployment and underemployment. Although Kenya has ambitious workforce norms, it may need to take a more pragmatic approach and initiate constructive policy dialogue with stakeholders spanning the education, public and private health sectors to better align MO training, recruitment and management.

Exploring the complex realities of nursing work in Kenya and how this shapes role enactment and practice-A qualitative study.

AIM: We explore how nurses navigate competing work demands in resource-constrained settings and how this shapes the enactment of nursing roles. DESIGN: An exploratory-descriptive qualitative study. METHODS: Using individual in-depth interviews and small group interviews, we interviewed 47 purposively selected nurses and nurse managers. We also conducted 57 hours of non-participant structured observations of nursing work in three public hospitals. RESULTS: Three major themes arose: (i) Rationalization of prioritization decisions, where nurses described prioritizing technical nursing tasks over routine bedside care, coming up with their own 'working standards' of care and nurses informally delegating tasks to cope with work demands. (ii) Bundling of tasks describes how nurses were sometimes engaged in tasks seen to be out of their scope of work or sometimes being used to fill for other professional shortages. (iii) Pursuit of professional ideals describes how the reality of how nursing was practised was seen to be in contrast with nurses' quest for professionalism.

Missed nursing care in acute care hospital settings in low-income and middle-income countries: a systematic review.

BACKGROUND: Missed nursing care undermines nursing standards of care and minimising this phenomenon is crucial to maintaining adequate patient safety and the quality of patient care. The concept is a neglected aspect of human resource for health thinking, and it remains understudied in low-income and middle-income country (LMIC) settings which have 90% of the global nursing workforce shortages. Our objective in this review was to document the prevalence of missed nursing care in LMIC, identify the categories of nursing care that are most missed and summarise the reasons for this. METHODS: We conducted a systematic review searching Medline, Embase, Global Health, WHO Global index medicus and CINAHL from their inception up until August 2021. Publications were included if they were conducted in an LMIC and reported on any combination of categories, reasons and factors associated with missed nursing care within in-patient settings. We assessed the quality of studies using the Newcastle Ottawa Scale. RESULTS: Thirty-one studies met our inclusion criteria. These studies were mainly cross-sectional, from upper middle-income settings and mostly relied on nurses' self-report of missed nursing care. The measurement tools used, and their reporting were inconsistent across the literature. Nursing care most frequently missed were non-clinical nursing activities including those of comfort and communication. Inadequate personnel numbers were the most important reasons given for missed care. CONCLUSIONS: Missed nursing care is reported for all key nursing task areas threatening care quality and safety. Data suggest nurses prioritise technical activities with more non-clinical activities missed, this undermines holistic nursing care. Improving staffing levels seems a key intervention potentially including sharing of less skilled activities. More research on missed nursing care and interventions to tackle it to improve quality and safety is needed in LMIC. PROSPERO registration number: CRD42021286897.

How do foundation year and internship experience shape doctors' career intentions and decisions? A meta-ethnography.

PURPOSE: Foundation years or internships are an important period for junior doctors to apply their knowledge and gain clinical competency. Experiences gained during the foundation years or internships are likely to inform newly qualified doctors' opinions about how they want to continue their career. We aimed to understand how medical doctors' internship experiences influence their career intention/decision. METHODS: We conducted qualitative evidence synthesis using meta-ethnography. We searched six electronic bibliographic databases for papers published between 2000-2020 and included papers exploring how foundation years or internship experiences shape doctors' career intention/decisions, including in relation to migration, public/private/dual practice preference, rural/urban preference, and specialty choice. We used the GRADE-CERQual framework to rate confidence in review findings. RESULTS: We examined 23 papers out of 6085 citations screened. We abstracted three high-level inter-related themes across 14 conceptual categories: (1) Deciding the personal best fit both clinically and in general (which option is 'more me'?) through hands-on and real-life experiences (2) Exploring, experiencing and witnessing workplace norms; and (3) Worrying about the future in terms of job market policies, future training and professional development opportunities. Confidence in findings varied but was rated high in 8 conceptual categories. CONCLUSIONS: Our meta-ethnographic review revealed a range of ways in which internship experience shapes medical doctors' career intentions/decisions allowing us to produce a broad conceptual model of this phenomenon. The results highlight the importance of ensuring sufficient, positive and inspiring clinical exposure, improving workplace environment, relationship and culture, refraining from undermining specific specialities and communicating contractual and job market policies early on to young doctors, in order to attract doctors to less popular specialties or work locations where they are most needed. We propose our conceptual model should be further tested in new research across a range of contexts.

Identifying gaps in global evidence for nurse staffing and patient care outcomes research in low/middle-income countries: an umbrella review.

OBJECTIVE: To identify nurse staffing and patient care outcome literature in published systematic reviews and map out the evidence gaps for low/middle-income countries (LMICs). METHODS: We included quantitative systematic reviews on nurse staffing levels and patient care outcomes in regular ward settings published in English. We excluded qualitative reviews or reviews on nursing skill mix. We searched the Cochrane Register of Systematic Reviews, the Joanna Briggs Institute Database of Systematic Reviews and Implementation Reports, Medline, Embase and Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature from inception until July 2021. We used the A Measurement Tool to Assess Systematic Reviews -2 (AMSTAR-2) criteria for risk of bias assessment and conducted a narrative synthesis. RESULTS: From 843 papers, we included 14 in our final synthesis. There were overlaps in primary studies summarised across reviews, but overall, the reviews summarised 136 unique primary articles. Only 4 out of 14 reviews had data on LMIC publications and only 9 (6.6%) of 136 unique primary articles were conducted in LMICs. Only 8 of 23 patient care outcomes were reported from LMICs. Less research was conducted in contexts with staffing levels that are typical of many LMIC contexts. DISCUSSION: Our umbrella review identified very limited data for nurse staffing and patient care outcomes in LMICs. We also identified data from high-income countries might not be good proxies for LMICs as staffing levels where this research was conducted had comparatively better staffing levels than the few LMIC studies. This highlights a critical need for the conduct of nurse staffing research in LMIC contexts. LIMITATIONS: We included data on systematic reviews that scored low on our risk of bias assessment because we sought to provide a broad description of the research area. We only considered systematic reviews published in English and did not include any qualitative reviews in our synthesis. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42021286908.