Skip to main content
. 2011 Sep 7;2011(9):CD006413. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD006413.pub2

3. Outcomes for the comparison between supervision and less intensive supervision.

Outcomes Outcome measurement Arms N Pre Change P‐values Review Authors' Interpretation Comments
Quality of care
Foreit 1984 ‐ I: monthly supervision. C: quarterly supervision.
New clients per quarter (health‐facility‐based posts) Daily log completed by the supervisor reporting activities of providers I 124 posts in intervention group and 123 in control group. Numbers in health‐facility or community‐based posts not stated. NA +5.6 All differences P > 0.05 (I vs C) No evidence that reducing the frequency of supervision from quarterly to monthly affects the number of new clients or the number of visits No statistically significant differences in recruitment of new clients or number of visits undertaken between the comparison groups (P > 0.05). Study also compares new clients and number of visits for sub‐set of new providers recruited for the study (n = 31) and found no significant differences (P > 0.05).
C NA +3.5
New clients per quarter (community‐based posts) I NA +4.16
C NA +0.76
Average number of revisits per quarter (health‐facility‐based posts) I NA +9.9
C NA +10.6
Average number of revisits per quarter (community‐based  posts I NA +16.3
C NA +1.4
Other
Foreit 1984 ‐ I: monthly supervision. C: quarterly supervision.    
Health worker attrition in health‐facility‐based posts (% drop out at 9 months) (see above) I (see above)   7 Not reported No evidence that reducing the frequency of supervision affects worker attrition.  
C   8
Health worker attrition in community‐based posts (% drop out at 9 months) I   3

C: Control; I: Intervention.