Towards improved health service quality in Tanzania: appropriateness of an electronic tool to assess quality of primary healthcare

Table 1 Differences in average overall and quality dimension (QD) scores, expressed as percentages of maximum achievable scores, according to year, health facility level and owner category, while the variable council was set as a random effect

Variable	Overall score	QD 1	QD 2	QD 3	QD 4	QD 5	QD 6
Year (Reference category = 2011)
2012	3.1 **	−2.7 *	1.2	−1.2	6.1 ***	10.5 ***	2.0
2013	6.5 ***	−0.4	5.8 **	2.7	7.0 ***	15.9 ***	5.4 ***
2014	8.4 ***	4.3 **	4.2 *	6.5 ***	10.2 ***	14.8 ***	7.4 ***
Health facility level (Reference category = Health center)
Hospital	1.8	1.1	3.7	3.3	3.7	−0.4	−0.5
Dispensary	−7.7 ***	−14.8 ***	−13.2 ***	−6.2 ***	−9.3 ***	−0.5	−2.2
Health facility owner (Reference category = Private-not-for-profit)
Private-for-profit	−5.5 ***	−3.1*	−11.8 ***	−6.3 ***	−1.2	−9.8 ***	− 1.3
Public	1.8 *	−7.5 ***	15.4 ***	1.2	−2.8 **	6.6 ***	−2.1
Parastatal	−0.9	−5.7 **	0.5	−0.4	−4.3 **	2.0	2.5
Constant	67.3 ***	90.3 ***	54.1 ***	77.0 ***	76.1 ***	28.4 ***	80.5 ***

Asterisks refer to p-values indicating the significance of a coefficient * < 0.05, ** < 0.01, *** < 0.001
For all models a large fraction of unexplained variance was attributed to the random effect (data not shown), meaning that scores were strongly correlated within councils
QD 1 = Physical environment and equipment; QD 2 = Job expectations; QD 3 = Professional knowledge, skills and ethics; QD 4 = Management and administration; QD 5 = Staff motivation; QD 6 = Client satisfaction

ISSN: 1472-6963