CONTEXT: Retention of nursing staff is a growing concern in many countries, especially in rural, remote or isolated regions, where it has major consequences on the accessibility of health services.
PURPOSE: This umbrella review aims to synthesize the current evidence on the effectiveness of interventions to promote nurse retention in rural or remote areas, and to present a taxonomy of potential strategies to improve nurse retention in those regions.
METHODS: We conducted an overview of systematic reviews, including the following steps: exploring scientific literature through predetermined criteria and extracting relevant information by two independents reviewers. We used the PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses) criteria in order to assess the quality of the reports.
FINDINGS: Of 517 screened publications, we included five reviews. Two reviews showed that financial-incentive programs have substantial evidence to improve the distribution of human resources for health. The other three reviews highlighted supportive relationships in nursing, information and communication technologies support and rural health career pathways as factors influencing nurse retention in rural and remote areas. Overall, the quality of the reviews was acceptable.
CONCLUSIONS: This overview provides a guide to orient future rural and remote nurse retention interventions. We distinguish four broad types of interventions: education and continuous professional development interventions, regulatory interventions, financial incentives, and personal and professional support. More knowledge is needed regarding the effectiveness of specific strategies to address the factors known to contribute to nurse retention in rural and remote areas. In order to ensure knowledge translation, retention strategies should be rigorously evaluated using appropriate designs.
OBJECTIVE: Results-based financing and pay-for-performance refer to the transfer of money or material goods conditional on taking a measurable action or achieving a predetermined performance target. Results-based financing is widely advocated for achieving health goals, including the Millennium Development Goals.
METHODS: We undertook an overview of systematic reviews of the effectiveness of RBF. We searched the Cochrane Library, EMBASE, and MEDLINE (up to August 2007). We also searched for related articles in PubMed, checked the reference lists of retrieved articles, and contacted key informants. We included reviews with a methods section that addressed the effects of any results-based financing in the health sector targeted at patients, providers, organizations, or governments. We summarized the characteristics and findings of each review using a structured format.
RESULTS: We found 12 systematic reviews that met our inclusion criteria. Based on the findings of these reviews, financial incentives targeting recipients of health care and individual healthcare professionals are effective in the short run for simple and distinct, well-defined behavioral goals. There is less evidence that financial incentives can sustain long-term changes. Conditional cash transfers to poor and disadvantaged groups in Latin America are effective at increasing the uptake of some preventive services. There is otherwise very limited evidence of the effects of results-based financing in low- or middle-income countries. Results-based financing can have undesirable effects, including motivating unintended behaviors, distortions (ignoring important tasks that are not rewarded with incentives), gaming (improving or cheating on reporting rather than improving performance), widening the resource gap between rich and poor, and dependency on financial incentives.
CONCLUSION: There is limited evidence of the effectiveness of results-based financing and almost no evidence of the cost-effectiveness of results-based financing. Based on the available evidence and likely mechanisms through which financial incentives work, they are more likely to influence discrete individual behaviors in the short run and less likely to create sustained changes.
BACKGROUND: Policy makers face challenges to ensure an appropriate supply and distribution of trained health workers and to manage their performance in delivery of services, especially in countries with low and middle incomes. We aimed to identify all available policy options to address human resources for health in such countries, and to assess the effectiveness of these policy options. METHODS: We searched Medline and Embase from 1979 to September, 2006, the Cochrane Library, and the Human Resources for Health Global Resource Center database. We also searched up to 10 years of archives from five relevant journals, and consulted experts. We included systematic reviews in English which assessed the effects of policy options that could affect the training, distribution, regulation, financing, management, organisation, or performance of health workers. Two reviewers independently assessed each review for eligibility and quality, and systematically extracted data about main effects. We also assessed whether the policy options were equitable in their effects; suitable for scaling up; and applicable to countries with low and middle incomes. FINDINGS: 28 of the 759 systematic reviews of effects that we identified were eligible according to our criteria. Of these, only a few included studies from countries with low and middle incomes, and some reviews were of low quality. Most evidence focused on organisational mechanisms for human resources, such as substitution or shifting tasks between different types of health workers, or extension of their roles; performance-enhancing strategies such as quality improvement or continuing education strategies; promotion of teamwork; and changes to workflow. Of all policy options, the use of lay health workers had the greatest proportion of reviews in countries with a range of incomes, from high to low. INTERPRETATION: We have identified a need for more systematic reviews on the effects of policy options to improve human resources for health in countries with low and middle incomes, for assessments of any interventions that policy makers introduce to plan and manage human resources for health, and for other research to aid policy makers in these countries.
BACKGROUND: Norway is the lead promoter of results-based financing (RBF) as one of fi ve actions being taken as part of the Global Campaign for the Health Millennium Development Goals and plans to support the use of RBF through the World Bank and in bilateral agreements with selected countries focusing on achieving the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) of reducing child and maternal mortality (MDG 4 and 5). RBF-schemes can be targeted at different levels: recipients of healthcare, individual providers of healthcare, healthcare facilities, private sector organisations, public sector organisations, sub-national governments, and national governments. METHOD: This report consists of an overview of systematic reviews and a critical appraisal of four evaluations of RBF schemes in the health sector in low and middle-income countries (LMIC). RESULTS: Ten systematic reviews that met the inclusion criteria for this report were summarised. In addition, four evaluations of RBF schemes in LMIC were critically appraised, including financial incentives targeted at patients, individual providers, organisations, and governments. There are few rigorous studies of RBF and overall the evidence of its effects is weak.
• Financial incentives targeting recipients of healthcare and individual healthcare professionals appear to be effective in the short run for simple and distinct, well-defined behavioural goals. There is less evidence that financial incentives can sustain long-term changes.
• The use of RBF in LMIC has commonly been as part of a package that may include increased funding, technical support, training, changes in management, and new information systems. It is not possible to disentangle the effects of RBF and there is very limited quantitative evidence of RBF per se having an effect, other than in the context of conditional cash transfers to poor and disadvantaged groups in Latin America to motivate preventive care.
Retention of nursing staff is a growing concern in many countries, especially in rural, remote or isolated regions, where it has major consequences on the accessibility of health services.
PURPOSE:
This umbrella review aims to synthesize the current evidence on the effectiveness of interventions to promote nurse retention in rural or remote areas, and to present a taxonomy of potential strategies to improve nurse retention in those regions.
METHODS:
We conducted an overview of systematic reviews, including the following steps: exploring scientific literature through predetermined criteria and extracting relevant information by two independents reviewers. We used the PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses) criteria in order to assess the quality of the reports.
FINDINGS:
Of 517 screened publications, we included five reviews. Two reviews showed that financial-incentive programs have substantial evidence to improve the distribution of human resources for health. The other three reviews highlighted supportive relationships in nursing, information and communication technologies support and rural health career pathways as factors influencing nurse retention in rural and remote areas. Overall, the quality of the reviews was acceptable.
CONCLUSIONS:
This overview provides a guide to orient future rural and remote nurse retention interventions. We distinguish four broad types of interventions: education and continuous professional development interventions, regulatory interventions, financial incentives, and personal and professional support. More knowledge is needed regarding the effectiveness of specific strategies to address the factors known to contribute to nurse retention in rural and remote areas. In order to ensure knowledge translation, retention strategies should be rigorously evaluated using appropriate designs.
