‘Triangulating’ AMPATH: Demonstration of a multi-perspective strategic programme evaluation method

John E. Sidle, Winstone M. Nyandiko, Violet N. Yebei, Richard M. Frankel, David L. Mossbarger, David Ayuku, Joyce Ballidawa, Rose Ayikukwei, Thomas S. Inui

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

4 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Clinical programmes are typically evaluated on operational performance metrics of cost, quality and outcomes. Measures of patient satisfaction are used to assess the experience of receiving care, but other perspectives, including those of staff and communities, are not often sought or used to assess and improve programmes. For strategic planning, the Kenyan HIV/AIDS programme AMPATH (Academic Model Providing Access to Healthcare) sought to evaluate its performance in 2006. The method used for this evaluation was termed 'triangulation,' because it used information from three different sources - patients, communities, and programme staff. From January to August 2006, Indiana University external evaluators and AMPATH staff gathered information on strengths, weaknesses and suggestions for improvement of AMPATH. Activities included in-depth key-informant semi-structured interviews of 26 AMPATH clinical and support staff, 56 patients at eight clinic sites, and seven village health dialogues (mabaraza) at five sublocations within the AMPATH catchment area. Data sources included field notes and transcripts of translated audio recordings, which were subjected to qualitative content analysis. Eighteen recommendations for programme improvement emerged, including ten from all three respondent perspectives. Three recommendations were cited by patients and in mabaraza, but not by staff. Triangulation uncovered improvement emphases that an internal assessment would miss. AMPATH and Kenyan Ministry of Health leadership have deliberated these recommendations and accelerated strategic change actions, including rural satellite programmes, collaboration with village-based workers, and door-to-door village-based screening and counselling.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)105-114
Number of pages10
JournalSahara J
Volume6
Issue number3
DOIs
StatePublished - Nov 1 2009

Fingerprint

Program Evaluation
Delivery of Health Care
staff
evaluation
village
triangulation
Information Storage and Retrieval
Health
strategic planning
health
Patient Satisfaction
ministry
community
performance
recording
Counseling
counseling
content analysis
Acquired Immunodeficiency Syndrome
AIDS

Keywords

  • AMPATH
  • HIV/AIDS
  • Programme evaluation

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Health(social science)
  • Infectious Diseases
  • Immunology and Allergy
  • Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health

Cite this

‘Triangulating’ AMPATH : Demonstration of a multi-perspective strategic programme evaluation method. / Sidle, John E.; Nyandiko, Winstone M.; Yebei, Violet N.; Frankel, Richard M.; Mossbarger, David L.; Ayuku, David; Ballidawa, Joyce; Ayikukwei, Rose; Inui, Thomas S.

In: Sahara J, Vol. 6, No. 3, 01.11.2009, p. 105-114.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Sidle, John E. ; Nyandiko, Winstone M. ; Yebei, Violet N. ; Frankel, Richard M. ; Mossbarger, David L. ; Ayuku, David ; Ballidawa, Joyce ; Ayikukwei, Rose ; Inui, Thomas S. / ‘Triangulating’ AMPATH : Demonstration of a multi-perspective strategic programme evaluation method. In: Sahara J. 2009 ; Vol. 6, No. 3. pp. 105-114.
@article{81bac8059a224c89a01fa27f94ee8606,
title = "‘Triangulating’ AMPATH: Demonstration of a multi-perspective strategic programme evaluation method",
abstract = "Clinical programmes are typically evaluated on operational performance metrics of cost, quality and outcomes. Measures of patient satisfaction are used to assess the experience of receiving care, but other perspectives, including those of staff and communities, are not often sought or used to assess and improve programmes. For strategic planning, the Kenyan HIV/AIDS programme AMPATH (Academic Model Providing Access to Healthcare) sought to evaluate its performance in 2006. The method used for this evaluation was termed 'triangulation,' because it used information from three different sources - patients, communities, and programme staff. From January to August 2006, Indiana University external evaluators and AMPATH staff gathered information on strengths, weaknesses and suggestions for improvement of AMPATH. Activities included in-depth key-informant semi-structured interviews of 26 AMPATH clinical and support staff, 56 patients at eight clinic sites, and seven village health dialogues (mabaraza) at five sublocations within the AMPATH catchment area. Data sources included field notes and transcripts of translated audio recordings, which were subjected to qualitative content analysis. Eighteen recommendations for programme improvement emerged, including ten from all three respondent perspectives. Three recommendations were cited by patients and in mabaraza, but not by staff. Triangulation uncovered improvement emphases that an internal assessment would miss. AMPATH and Kenyan Ministry of Health leadership have deliberated these recommendations and accelerated strategic change actions, including rural satellite programmes, collaboration with village-based workers, and door-to-door village-based screening and counselling.",
keywords = "AMPATH, HIV/AIDS, Programme evaluation",
author = "Sidle, {John E.} and Nyandiko, {Winstone M.} and Yebei, {Violet N.} and Frankel, {Richard M.} and Mossbarger, {David L.} and David Ayuku and Joyce Ballidawa and Rose Ayikukwei and Inui, {Thomas S.}",
year = "2009",
month = "11",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1080/17290376.2009.9724938",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "6",
pages = "105--114",
journal = "Sahara J",
issn = "1729-0376",
publisher = "Health and Medical Publishing Group",
number = "3",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - ‘Triangulating’ AMPATH

T2 - Demonstration of a multi-perspective strategic programme evaluation method

AU - Sidle, John E.

AU - Nyandiko, Winstone M.

AU - Yebei, Violet N.

AU - Frankel, Richard M.

AU - Mossbarger, David L.

AU - Ayuku, David

AU - Ballidawa, Joyce

AU - Ayikukwei, Rose

AU - Inui, Thomas S.

PY - 2009/11/1

Y1 - 2009/11/1

N2 - Clinical programmes are typically evaluated on operational performance metrics of cost, quality and outcomes. Measures of patient satisfaction are used to assess the experience of receiving care, but other perspectives, including those of staff and communities, are not often sought or used to assess and improve programmes. For strategic planning, the Kenyan HIV/AIDS programme AMPATH (Academic Model Providing Access to Healthcare) sought to evaluate its performance in 2006. The method used for this evaluation was termed 'triangulation,' because it used information from three different sources - patients, communities, and programme staff. From January to August 2006, Indiana University external evaluators and AMPATH staff gathered information on strengths, weaknesses and suggestions for improvement of AMPATH. Activities included in-depth key-informant semi-structured interviews of 26 AMPATH clinical and support staff, 56 patients at eight clinic sites, and seven village health dialogues (mabaraza) at five sublocations within the AMPATH catchment area. Data sources included field notes and transcripts of translated audio recordings, which were subjected to qualitative content analysis. Eighteen recommendations for programme improvement emerged, including ten from all three respondent perspectives. Three recommendations were cited by patients and in mabaraza, but not by staff. Triangulation uncovered improvement emphases that an internal assessment would miss. AMPATH and Kenyan Ministry of Health leadership have deliberated these recommendations and accelerated strategic change actions, including rural satellite programmes, collaboration with village-based workers, and door-to-door village-based screening and counselling.

AB - Clinical programmes are typically evaluated on operational performance metrics of cost, quality and outcomes. Measures of patient satisfaction are used to assess the experience of receiving care, but other perspectives, including those of staff and communities, are not often sought or used to assess and improve programmes. For strategic planning, the Kenyan HIV/AIDS programme AMPATH (Academic Model Providing Access to Healthcare) sought to evaluate its performance in 2006. The method used for this evaluation was termed 'triangulation,' because it used information from three different sources - patients, communities, and programme staff. From January to August 2006, Indiana University external evaluators and AMPATH staff gathered information on strengths, weaknesses and suggestions for improvement of AMPATH. Activities included in-depth key-informant semi-structured interviews of 26 AMPATH clinical and support staff, 56 patients at eight clinic sites, and seven village health dialogues (mabaraza) at five sublocations within the AMPATH catchment area. Data sources included field notes and transcripts of translated audio recordings, which were subjected to qualitative content analysis. Eighteen recommendations for programme improvement emerged, including ten from all three respondent perspectives. Three recommendations were cited by patients and in mabaraza, but not by staff. Triangulation uncovered improvement emphases that an internal assessment would miss. AMPATH and Kenyan Ministry of Health leadership have deliberated these recommendations and accelerated strategic change actions, including rural satellite programmes, collaboration with village-based workers, and door-to-door village-based screening and counselling.

KW - AMPATH

KW - HIV/AIDS

KW - Programme evaluation

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=77649158887&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=77649158887&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1080/17290376.2009.9724938

DO - 10.1080/17290376.2009.9724938

M3 - Article

C2 - 20485850

AN - SCOPUS:77649158887

VL - 6

SP - 105

EP - 114

JO - Sahara J

JF - Sahara J

SN - 1729-0376

IS - 3

ER -