IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/aph/ajpbhl/1991815610-616_3.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Comparison of two growth charts in Lesotho: Health workers' ability to understand and use them for action

Author

Listed:
  • Ruel, M.T.
  • Pelletier, D.L.
  • Habicht, J.-P.
  • Mason, J.B.
  • Chobokoane, C.S.
  • Maruping, A.P.

Abstract

Background: Two growth monitoring charts widely used for growth monitoring in Africa (the Road-to-Health (RTH) and the Growth Surveillance (GS)) were compared in order to assist the Government of Lesotho to decide on an appropriate national growth chart. Methods: Thirty-four health workers were taught and tested on the RTH during a first week of training and on the GS during a second week (the RTH-GS group), while the order was reversed for another 25 trainees (the GS-RTH group). The health workers were trained and tested on their ability not only to use and interpret the two charts, but also to make the right decisions about specific actions to be taken when growth faltering occurs. Results: There was no difference between scores to the RTH and GS charts after one week of training. After the second week of training, the scores to the RTH chart improved and became better than those to the GS chart. The scores to the GS test did not increase with previous knowledge of the RTH chart. Conclusions: For this reason and others discussed in the paper, the RTH chart was recommended for nationwide use in Lesotho. The adoption of this recommendation was facilitated by the close involvement in this research of public and private agencies responsible for growth monitoring in Lesotho.

Suggested Citation

  • Ruel, M.T. & Pelletier, D.L. & Habicht, J.-P. & Mason, J.B. & Chobokoane, C.S. & Maruping, A.P., 1991. "Comparison of two growth charts in Lesotho: Health workers' ability to understand and use them for action," American Journal of Public Health, American Public Health Association, vol. 81(5), pages 610-616.
    • Handle: RePEc:aph:ajpbhl:1991:81:5:610-616_3
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    To our knowledge, this item is not available for download. To find whether it is available, there are three options:
    1. Check below whether another version of this item is available online.
    2. Check on the provider's web page whether it is in fact available.
    3. Perform a search for a similarly titled item that would be available.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:aph:ajpbhl:1991:81:5:610-616_3. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Christopher F Baum (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.apha.org .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.