Skip to main content

Table 8 Mean scores and occurrences for the two stigma sub-scales. For Jamaica, Kenya and Uganda, the following within-country comparisons were calculated: pre-intervention versus pre-control versus post-intervention versus post-control. For South Africa, a pre versus post comparison was calculated

From: The impact of leadership hubs on the uptake of evidence-informed nursing practices and workplace policies for HIV care: a quasi-experimental study in Jamaica, Kenya, Uganda and South Africa

 

Jamaica

Kenya

Uganda

South Africa

Intervention

Control

Int. vs. con p value

Intervention

Control

Int. vs. con p value

Intervention

Control

Int. vs. con p value

Intervention

Pre vs. post p value

Pre

Post

Pre

Post

 

Pre

Post

Pre

Post

 

Pre

Post

Pre

Post

 

Pre

Post

 

Total # of participants

121

93

95

104

 

100

161

117

115

 

135

103

141

117

 

157

120

 

Nurses stigmatising patients

 Mean score (SD)a

0.293

(0.40)

0.180

(0.46)

0.220

(0.43)

0.163

(0.40)

0.570

0.271

(0.35)

0.199

(0.35)

0.399

(0.49)

0.235

(0.34)

0.201

0.242

(0.41)

0.175

(0.36)

0.438 (0.68)

0.224

(0.34)

0.089

0.202

(0.40)

0.145

(0.24)

0.003

 Count of instances n(%)b

Never

41

(33.9)

58

(62.4)

52

(54.7)

67

(64.4)

0.002

35

(35.0)

83

(51.6)

40

(34.2)

55

(47.8)

0.006

64

(47.4)

58

(56.3)

66

(46.8)

59

(50.4)

0.279

91

(58.0)

59

(49.2)

0.182

One or more

60

(49.6)

32

(34.4)

32

(33.7)

28

(26.9)

58

(58.0)

75

(46.6)

69

(59.0)

59

(51.3)

70

(51.9)

44

(42.7)

70

(49.6)

58

(49.6)

62

(39.5)

56

(46.7)

Missing

20

(16.5)

3

(3.2)

11

(1.6)

9

(8.7)

7

(7.0)

3

(1.9)

8

(6.8)

1

(0.9)

1

(0.7)

1

(1.0)

5

(3.5)

0

(0)

4

(2.5)

5

(4.2)

Nurses being stigmatised

 

 Mean score (SD)a

0.195

(0.32)

0.151

(0.36)

0.113

(0.26)

0.138

(0.30)

0.267

0.599

(0.57)

0.567

(0.68)

0.713

(0.65)

0.648

(0.70)

0.737

0.841

(0.65)

0.653

(0.60)

1.331

(0.76)

0.750

(0.642)

0.002

0.673

(0.80)

0.565

(0.76)

0.502

 Count of instances n(%)b

Never

64

(52.9)

61

(65.6)

60

(63.2)

68

(65.4)

0.148

23

(23.0)

60

(37.3)

18

(15.4)

31

(27.0)

0.004

15

(11.1)

18

(17.5)

9

(6.4)

18

(15.4)

0.014

48

(30.6)

45

(37.5)

0.192

One or more

52

(43.0)

28

(30.1)

30

(31.6)

32

(30.8)

73

(73.0)

99

(61.5)

92

(78.6)

84

(73.0)

118

(87.4)

83

(80.6)

127

(90.1)

98

(83.8)

106

(67.5)

71

(59.2)

Missing

5

(4.1)

4

(4.3)

5

(5.3)

4

(3.8)

4

(4.0)

2

(1.2)

7

(6.0)

0

(0)

2

(1.5)

2

(1.9)

5

(3.5)

1

(0.9)

3

(1.9)

4

(3.3)

  1. vs. versus
  2. aData used to calculate mean scores were collected via a Likert scale. Significance figures for mean scores were calculated as intervention significance versus control significance using an unpaired t test. A pre versus post was used for South Africa due to no control group. Missing data were excluded
  3. bData used to calculate the count of instances was collected on a nominal scare. Significance figures for count of instances calculated using a Mantel Haenszel chi-square for Kenya, Jamaica and Uganda; a Pearson chi-square was used for South Africa. Missing data were excluded from calculations
Back to article page

Implementation Science

ISSN: 1748-5908