Back

Development of tool for assessment of performance motivation and job satisfaction among the Community Health Workers of Central India.

G, R.; Joshi, A.; Pakhare, A. P.

2022-01-11 primary care research
10.1101/2022.01.10.22268956 medRxiv
Show abstract

IntroductionAmong the various factors influencing the performance of Community health workers, motivation and job satisfaction serves as a potential drive to perform better. Hence, this study aimed at constructing a motivation and job satisfaction tool in a systematic method that would serve as a potential tool for further research considering the heterogeneity in the study population. ObjectiveTo develop a tool to measure how well the CHWs are motivated and satisfied pertaining to individual, community and health system determinants. MethodsThis cross-sectional study from rural block of Madhya Pradesh in Central India included relatively high performing and low performing CHWs based on their annual performance-based incentives for the year (April 2017-March 2018). The CHWs were administered a self-reported questionnaire that contained a 5-point Likert scale with individual, health system and community determinants of motivation and job satisfaction. ResultsThe performance motivation scale with 18 items and job satisfaction scale with 15 items were administered to the 92 CHWs. Their item content validity index was 0.66 and 0.83 respectively. The finalized tool consisted of 11 items in motivation scale and all the 15 items in job satisfaction scale following the Explanatory factor analysis. All the individual constructs in both the scales showed good internal consistency with Cronbachs alpha ranging from 0.62-0.88. The overall median (IQR) score of both RLP and RHP CHWs were 4(4-5) in both the questionnaires. ConclusionThe CHWs in our study were intrinsically motivated and were satisfied with their performance as voluntary village health workers. Further research would be planned to validate the constructs using confirmatory factor analysis.

Matching journals

The top 1 journal accounts for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

50% of probability mass above

"Similar papers" are the closest papers from that journal in the model's embedding space. They show what the match is built on, but the ranking comes mostly from a classifier over the whole training set, not from these examples alone.