IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0254230.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Routine health information utilization and associated factors among health care workers in Ethiopia: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Author

Listed:
  • Birye Dessalegn Mekonnen
  • Senafekesh Biruk Gebeyehu

Abstract

Background: Utilization of routine health information plays a vital role for the effectiveness of routine and programed decisions. A proper utilization of routine health information helps to make decisions based on evidence. Considerable studies have been done on the utilization of routine health information among health workers in Ethiopia, but inconsistent findings were reported. Thus, this study was conducted to determine the pooled utilization of routine health information and to identify associated factors among health workers in Ethiopia. Methods: Search of PubMed, HINARI, Global Health, Scopus, EMBASE, web of science, and Google Scholar was conducted to identify relevant studies from October 24, 2020 to November 18, 2020. The Newcastle-Ottawa scale tool was used to assess the quality of included studies. Two reviewers extracted the data independently using a standardized data extraction format and exported to STATA software version 11 for meta-analysis. Heterogeneity among studies was checked using Cochrane Q and I2 test statistics. The pooled estimate of utilization of routine health information was executed using a random effect model. Results: After reviewing 22924 studies, 10 studies involving 4054 health workers were included for this review and meta-analysis. The pooled estimate of routine health information utilization among health workers in Ethiopia was 57.42% (95% CI: 41.48, 73.36). Supportive supervision (AOR = 2.25; 95% CI: 1.80, 2.82), regular feedback (AOR = 2.86; 95% CI: 1.60, 5.12), availability of standard guideline (AOR = 2.53; 95% CI: 1.80, 3.58), data management knowledge (AOR = 3.04; 95% CI: 1.75, 5.29) and training on health information (AOR = 3.45; 95% CI: 1.96, 6.07) were identified factors associated with utilization of routine health information. Conclusion: This systematic review and meta-analysis found that more than two-fifth of health workers did not use their routine health information. This study suggests the need to conduct regular supportive supervision, provision of training and capacity building, mentoring on competence of routine health information tasks, and strengthening regular feedback at all health facilities. In addition, improving the accessibility and availability of standard set of indicators is important to scale-up information use.

Suggested Citation

  • Birye Dessalegn Mekonnen & Senafekesh Biruk Gebeyehu, 2021. "Routine health information utilization and associated factors among health care workers in Ethiopia: A systematic review and meta-analysis," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 16(7), pages 1-16, July.
    • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0254230
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0254230
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0254230
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0254230&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0254230?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Habtamu Wude & Mirkuzie Woldie & Dejene Melese & Tsegaye Lolaso & Bahailu Balcha, 2020. "Utilization of routine health information and associated factors among health workers in Hadiya Zone, Southern Ethiopia," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 15(5), pages 1-11, May.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.

      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:plo:pone00:0254230. 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.

      If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with 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: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .

      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.