Table 2.

Community Midwife Assistant and Nurse Midwife Technician LNG implant insertion statistics

Characteristics (N = 58)	CMA (N = 29)	NMT (N = 29)	Fisher’s Exact Test
#LNG implant placed prior to training
0	16 (55.2)	8 (27.6)	0.024
1–10	8 (27.6)	8 (27.6)
11–20	4 (13.8)	3 (10.3)
21–100	0 (0.0)	6 (20.7)
> 100	1 (3.5)	4 (13.8)
#LNG implant placed during training
0	1 (3.5)	7 (24.1)	0.037
1	13 (44.8)	8 (27.6)
2	6 (20.7)	8 (27.6)
3	6 (20.7)	1 (3.5)
4	3 (10.3)	3 (10.3)
5	0 (0.0)	2 (6.9)
#LNG implant placed since training
0–10	6 (20.7)	7 (24.1)	0.785
11–20	13 (44.8)	15 (51.7)
> 21	10 (34.5)	7 (24.1)
Mean LNG implant insertion score
< 80%	0 (0.0)	2 (6.9)	0.088
81–85%	3 (10.3)	2 (6.9)
86–90%	10 (34.5)	8 (27.6)
91–95%	15 (51.7)	10 (34.5)
96–100%	1 (3.5)	7 (24.1)

There was no significant difference between CMA and NMT mean LNG implant scores during the monitoring visit (p = 0.088). 89.7% of CMAs had an average LNG implant insertion score above the MoH competency score of 85%, while 86.2% of NMTs had an average LNG implant insertion score above the MoH competency score of 85%