Table 5.
Scoring scheme and scores achieved by each health facility based on the simulated patient visits.
| STI scenario | Family planning scenario | Condom request | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cont‡ | Int† | Cont‡ | Int† | Cont‡ | Int† | |
| Number of SP visits | 2 | 3 | 2 | 3 | 3 | 2 |
| Area (possible score per SP) | Average score (% of total possible score) | |||||
| Welcome (4)a | 2.0 (50%) | 0.7 (18%) | 1.5 (38%) | 1.7 (43%) | 1.7 (43%) | 3.0 (75%) |
| Information (2) b | 0.5 (25%) | 0.0 (0%) | 0.0 (0%) | 1.0 (50%) | 0.7 (35%) | 0.5 (25%) |
| Counseling (4) c | 3.0 (75%) | 0.7 (18%) | 2.0 (50%) | 3.3 (83%) | 1.3 (33%) | 4.0 (100%) |
| General attitudes(10) d | 6.5 (65%) | 2.3 (23%) | 5.0 (50%) | 6.7 (67%) | 3.3 (33%) | 5.5 (55%) |
| Privacy (6) e | 3.0 (50%) | 2.7 (45%) | 3.0 (50%) | 6.0 (100%) | 0.0 (0%) | 6.0 (100%) |
| Total (31) | ||||||
Key of score criteria
‡ Cont = Control health units - no YFS trained health workers
† Int = intervention health unit - with YFS trained health workers
a Welcome: Two points for each of the following, maximum four points: 1. SP was greeted in a friendly manner and 2. SP waited for a short time or was spoken to earlier to inform him/her on the process.
b Information: One point for each of the following maximum two points: 1. SP received the information they needed and 2. The HW conducted a condom demonstration.
c Counselling: Two points for each of the following maximum four points: 1. SP received reassurance and advice about all their concerns, 2. HW listened to the SP as they recounted the scenario and in the subsequent discussions.
d General attitudes: Different points for each of the following maximum ten points: 1. HW was non-judgmental (4), 2. the SP was given enough time to talk (3) 3. The SP felt they could ask questions (3)
e Privacy: Two points for each of the following maximum six points: 1. no-one else was in ear shot, 2. SPs were treated in a private room, 3. no-one else was in the room