Skip to main content

Table 4 GLS linear regression: clinician fever case management scores

From: Outreach training and supportive supervision for malaria case management in Zambia: the effects of focused capacity building on indicators of diagnostic and clinical performance

 

Unadjusted

Model 2 (adjusted)a

Percentage point change (95% CI)

Percentage point change (95% CI)

Covariates

 Prescriber adherence to negative malaria tests (score)

0.2 [0.1, 0.2]***

0.1 [0.0, 0.2]**

 Has ≥ 1 otoscope

  Yes

5.4 [1.3, 9.6]*

4.4 [0.0, 8.7]*

  No

Reference

Reference

 Has ≥ 1 ophthalmoscope

  Yes

4.7 [0.6, 8.8]*

 

  No

Reference

 

 Has ≥ 1 medical pen light

  Yes

6.7 [2.7, 10.6]**

4.0 [− 0.2, 8.2]

  No

Reference

Reference

 Has properly completed/maintained outpatient register

  Yes

2.1 [− 2.4, 6.6]

 

  No

Reference

 

 Has properly completed/maintained inpatient register

  Yes

4.2 [− 0.7, 9.0]†

− 1.5 [− 6.6, 3.6]

  No

Reference

Reference

 Has properly completed/maintained clinical reports

  Yes

8.4 [2.2, 14.5]**

4.0 [− 2.6, 10.5]

  No

Reference

Reference

 Has properly completed/maintained drug stock cards

  Yes

11.4 [1.9, 20.9]*

1.8 [− 7.3, 10.8]

  No

Reference

Reference

 Has malaria case management and treatment guidelines

  Yes

10.5 [6.2, 14.8]***

8.5 [4.1, 13.0]***

  No

Reference

Reference

 Had an RDT stock-out of ≥ 7 days in the 3 months preceding OTSS visit

  Yes

5.9 [− 0.8, 12.6]†

3.5 [− 3.4, 10.5]

  No

Reference

Reference

 Had a malaria microscopy consumables/reagents stock-out of ≥ 7 days in the 3 months preceding OTSS visit

  Yes

− 5.4 [− 9.5, − 1.3]*

− 1.0 [− 5.4, 3.3]

  No

Reference

Reference

 Periodicity of OTSS assessments

  All assessments occurred within a 1 year period

− 4.4 [− 10.7, 1.9]

 

  All assessments occurred in > 1 year period

Reference

 

 Number of OTSS assessments

  1

Reference

Reference

  2

− 5.9 [− 10.8, − 0.9]*

− 2.4 [− 8.5, 3.7]

  3

− 0.8 [− 5.8, 4.1]

0.0 [− 5.8, 5.8]

  4

6.0 [1.1, 11.0]*

5.1 [− 0.9, 11.0]

  1. Statistically significant results are in italics
  2. CI confidence interval
  3. Model 1: Wald X2 = 68.7 (p < 0.0001); 196 observations
  4. *** p < 0.001; ** p < 0.01; * p < 0.05; † p < 0.1
  5. aAn ex-ante pairwise correlation test was run to detect collinearity; covariates indicating problematic correlation coefficients (≥ 0.55) were not included in the fully adjusted model