Skip to main content
. 2018 Apr 5;18:251. doi: 10.1186/s12913-018-3072-3

Table 1.

Study participants in the 4 study districts

Health workers included in the study (by cadre and sex) Total Key informant interviews (by sex) Total Total per district
From the HW incentive study National HWs from treatment or isolation centres National HWs from other health facilities International HWs from in treatment or isolation centres DHMT Local council Health facility manager International partner
Bonthe1 0 0 2 (Nurse F; CHO M) 0 2 1 (M) 1 (M) 2 (M) 1 (F) 5 7
Kenema2 1 (Doctor M) 2 (Nurse M; Nurse aid F) 2 (MCH aid F; Lab technician F) 2 (Doctor M; Midwife F) 7 1 (M) 0 2 (1 M; 1F) 1 (M) 4 11
Koinadugu3 3 (CHO M; 2xNurse F) 3 (SECHN F; MCH Aid F; CHA M) 0 6 1 (M) 1 (F) 2 (M) 1 (M) 5 11
Western Area4 4 {3× Nurse (2F; 1 M) Midwife F} 3 (Nurse F; 2× Doctor, M) 2 (Midwife F; MCH aid F) 1 (Doctor M) 10 1 (F) 1 (M) 2 (1 M; 1F) 1 (F) 5 15
GRAND TOTAL 25 19 44

Key: 1 = Low numbers of EVD patients; hard to reach district; 2 = High numbers of EVD patients; epicentre during outbreak; 3 = Hit by EVD in later stages of outbreak; hard to reach district; 4 = High numbers of EVD patients; epicentre during outbreak

CHO Community Health officer, MCH Aid maternal and child health aid, SECHN State enrolled community health nurse, CHA Community Health Assistant, M male, F female