| Title |
Improving quality of home-based postnatal care by microteaching of multipurpose workers in rural and urban slum areas of Chandigarh, India: a pilot study
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Advances in Medical Education and Practice, December 2016
|
| DOI | 10.2147/amep.s111697 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Madhu Gupta, Jaya Prasad Tripathy, Limalemla Jamir, Ashutosh Sarwa, Smita Sinha, Chering Bhag |
| Abstract |
Microteaching is an efficient teaching tool to improve skills. Until now, its use is very limited in the health sector. A pilot study was carried out to improve the quality of home-based postnatal care by microteaching of health workers (HWs) and ascertain its feasibility for supportive supervision. All (n=12) the HWs catering to a population of ~0.1 million were video recorded while performing home-based postnatal check up in Chandigarh from August 2013 to December 2014. After each round, HWs were shown their videos and trained in the facility and at home. Video recordings, assessments followed by training, continued until HWs acquired the intended skills. A pretested structured checklist based on the national home-based postnatal care guidelines was used for recording and assessing of postnatal skills. A score "0" given for no task, "1" for incorrectly done or partially done task, and "2" for correct task. The average score of each round was calculated and compared. The overall skill assessment score improved from 0.64 to 1.76, newborn examination skill from 0.52 to 1.63, maternal examination from 0.54 to 1.62, and counseling from 1.01 to 1.85 after three rounds of video recording. The proportion of HWs carrying a thermometer increased from 21% to 100%. Second and third rounds of video recording and microteaching were successfully carried out by the program supervisors. This was the first study to report on the effective use of microteaching in improving home-based postnatal care skills of the health care workers and its feasibility for supportive supervision. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 47 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 47 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Postgraduate | 9 | 19% |
| Researcher | 6 | 13% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 4 | 9% |
| Student > Master | 3 | 6% |
| Lecturer | 2 | 4% |
| Other | 6 | 13% |
| Unknown | 17 | 36% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 15 | 32% |
| Social Sciences | 2 | 4% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 2 | 4% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 1 | 2% |
| Computer Science | 1 | 2% |
| Other | 5 | 11% |
| Unknown | 21 | 45% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 29 December 2016.
All research outputs
#17,562,823
of 25,748,735 outputs
Outputs from Advances in Medical Education and Practice
#1
of 1 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#264,180
of 418,752 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Advances in Medical Education and Practice
#1
of 1 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,748,735 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 21st percentile – i.e., 21% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 1.0. This one scored the same or higher as 0 of them.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 418,752 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 28th percentile – i.e., 28% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 1 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than all of them