<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><!DOCTYPE article  PUBLIC "-//NLM//DTD Journal Publishing DTD v3.0 20080202//EN" "http://dtd.nlm.nih.gov/publishing/3.0/journalpublishing3.dtd"><article xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" dtd-version="3.0" xml:lang="en" article-type="research article"><front><journal-meta><journal-id journal-id-type="publisher-id">OJPM</journal-id><journal-title-group><journal-title>Open Journal of Preventive Medicine</journal-title></journal-title-group><issn pub-type="epub">2162-2477</issn><publisher><publisher-name>Scientific Research Publishing</publisher-name></publisher></journal-meta><article-meta><article-id pub-id-type="doi">10.4236/ojpm.2024.141002</article-id><article-id pub-id-type="publisher-id">OJPM-130813</article-id><article-categories><subj-group subj-group-type="heading"><subject>Articles</subject></subj-group><subj-group subj-group-type="Discipline-v2"><subject>Medicine&amp;Healthcare</subject></subj-group></article-categories><title-group><article-title>
 
 
  Assessing Community Health Interventions in Reducing Infant and Child Mortality in the Southeastern Benin
 
</article-title></title-group><contrib-group><contrib contrib-type="author" xlink:type="simple"><name name-style="western"><surname>Charles</surname><given-names>Sossa Jerome</given-names></name><xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff1"><sup>1</sup></xref><xref ref-type="corresp" rid="cor1"><sup>*</sup></xref></contrib><contrib contrib-type="author" xlink:type="simple"><name name-style="western"><surname>Daouda</surname><given-names>Gbadamassi</given-names></name><xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff2"><sup>2</sup></xref><xref ref-type="corresp" rid="cor1"><sup>*</sup></xref></contrib><contrib contrib-type="author" xlink:type="simple"><name name-style="western"><surname>Lamidhi</surname><given-names>Salami</given-names></name><xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff3"><sup>3</sup></xref><xref ref-type="corresp" rid="cor1"><sup>*</sup></xref></contrib><contrib contrib-type="author" xlink:type="simple"><name name-style="western"><surname>Colette</surname><given-names>Azandjeme</given-names></name><xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff1"><sup>1</sup></xref></contrib><contrib contrib-type="author" xlink:type="simple"><name name-style="western"><surname>Clémence</surname><given-names>Metonnou</given-names></name><xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff1"><sup>1</sup></xref></contrib><contrib contrib-type="author" xlink:type="simple"><name name-style="western"><surname>Moussiliou</surname><given-names>N. Paraiso</given-names></name><xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff1"><sup>1</sup></xref><xref ref-type="corresp" rid="cor1"><sup>*</sup></xref></contrib></contrib-group><aff id="aff3"><addr-line>Health Policy and Systems Department, Regional Institute of Public Health, University of Abomey-Calavi, Ouidah, Benin</addr-line></aff><aff id="aff1"><addr-line>Health Promotion Department, Regional Institute of Public Health, University of Abomey-Calavi, Ouidah, Benin</addr-line></aff><aff id="aff2"><addr-line>National Medical and Sanitary Institute, University of Abomey-Calavi, Cotonou, Benin</addr-line></aff><pub-date pub-type="epub"><day>24</day><month>01</month><year>2024</year></pub-date><volume>14</volume><issue>01</issue><fpage>17</fpage><lpage>28</lpage><history><date date-type="received"><day>20,</day>	<month>November</month>	<year>2023</year></date><date date-type="rev-recd"><day>27,</day>	<month>January</month>	<year>2024</year>	</date><date date-type="accepted"><day>30,</day>	<month>January</month>	<year>2024</year></date></history><permissions><copyright-statement>&#169; Copyright  2014 by authors and Scientific Research Publishing Inc. </copyright-statement><copyright-year>2014</copyright-year><license><license-p>This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution International License (CC BY). http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/</license-p></license></permissions><abstract><p>
 
 
  Background: To reduce infant and child mortality in Benin, a package of high-impact interventions per healthcare level was implemented in 2009. This study aimed to assess the quality of community-based health interventions in reducing infant and child mortality within the municipality of Pob&#232; in southeastern Benin. 
  Methods: This was a cross-sectional evaluative study carried out in November 2021 focused on children aged 0 - 59 months, their mothers, health workers, community facilitators, community health workers and the Town Hall health focal point. Mothers and their children were targeted by cluster sampling, and exhaustive selection was used to recruit all other participants. Predetermined scores based on rating criteria were used to assess the quality of community health interventions using the “input, process and outcome” of Donabedian approach. 
  Results: Over 300 mother-child couples, 46 community health workers, 7 health agents, 1 community facilitator and 1 health focal point from Pob&#232; town hall were surveyed. Intervention quality was judged as “average”, with a score of 73.80%. The “inputs” and “outcomes” components were the weakest links. 
  Conclusion: Improving access to the inputs needed by community health workers can enhance the quality of PIHI interventions.
 
</p></abstract><kwd-group><kwd>Community-Based Interventions</kwd><kwd> Infant and Child Mortality</kwd><kwd> Benin</kwd></kwd-group></article-meta></front><body><sec id="s1"><title>1. Introduction</title><p>Among developing countries, five priority diseases are still responsible for around 70% of deaths among children under 5 [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.130813-ref1">1</xref>] . The achievement of the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), which have mobilized the international community in recent years, devotes particular attention to reducing infant and child mortality, and calls for the establishment of essential services to ensure access for women and children [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.130813-ref2">2</xref>] . High Impact Intervention Package (PIHI) was implemented in developing countries to improve mother and child health. Integrating a preventive nutrition package into facility-based screening for acute malnutrition during well-baby consultation in Burkina Faso increased participation in monthly acute malnutrition screening, thus overcoming a major impediment to community management of acute malnutrition effectiveness [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.130813-ref3">3</xref>] . Community-based package of interventions on child development in Zambia was associated with an increase in weight-for-age, height-for-age and a reduction in stunting [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.130813-ref4">4</xref>] . In South Africa, a pilot randomised controlled trial reported that an Incentive-Based and Community Health Worker Package Intervention had improved early utilization of antenatal care [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.130813-ref5">5</xref>] . A systematic review of community-based intervention packages for improving perinatal health in developing countries reported that such interventions can have a substantial effect on neonatal and perinatal mortality [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.130813-ref6">6</xref>] . Charle-Cu&#233;llar et al. analyzed the impact of different levels of supervision on the recovery of severely malnourished children treated by community health workers in Mali and found that children treated by the community health workers who received some supervision had better outcomes than those treated by unsupervised community health workers [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.130813-ref7">7</xref>] .</p><p>In 2009, Benin’s Health Ministry identified a set of evidence-based interventions with a positive impact on maternal, neonatal and child mortality, known as the High Impact Intervention Package (PIHI). The PIHI comprises a range of varied services and is suitable for implementation at different levels of the healthcare system, from community level to national referral hospitals [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.130813-ref8">8</xref>] .</p><p>In 2017, Pob&#232; Health Zone benefited from the implementation of the community-based PIHI. To this end, several community health workers were selected and trained in recognizing general signs of danger or seriousness, managing common non-severe ailments, preventing them, visiting the homes of children aged 2 - 59 months, referring serious cases and directing pregnant women and the malnourished to the nearest health facility. It was necessary to evaluate the quality of the interventions offered by the community health workers after several years of implementation of the community-based PIHI.</p></sec><sec id="s2"><title>2. Methods</title><sec id="s2_1"><title>2.1. Settings</title><p>The study was carried out within Pob&#232; municipality, located in southeastern Benin. Comprising 58 villages and city districts, the municipality is divided into five boroughs. The commune’s population was estimated at 146,835 [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.130813-ref9">9</xref>] .</p></sec><sec id="s2_2"><title>2.2. Study Design and Population</title><p>This was a cross-sectional evaluative study carried out in 2021. Two types of target population were included. Primary targets were children aged 0 - 59 months, mothers or babysitters and village community health workers. The secondary targets were the head nurses, the Pob&#232; town hall health focal point, the project’s community facilitator and the Pob&#232; chief medical officer.</p></sec><sec id="s2_3"><title>2.3. Sampling</title><sec id="s2_3_1"><title>2.3.1. Sample Size</title><p>The sample size for children aged 0 - 59 months was determined by the SCHWARTZ formula [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.130813-ref9">9</xref>] :</p><p>n = kZα2pq/i2</p><p>with:</p><p>● The error risk α we assumed was 5% for a 95% confidence interval hence Zα = 1.96;</p><p>● p (46.9%) was the percentage of children aged 0 - 5 years with fever for whom advice or treatment was sought according to the results of the 2017-2018 Demographic and health survey report [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.130813-ref10">10</xref>] ;</p><p>● k (1.5) was the cluster effect;</p><p>● I = 0.07 was the desired accuracy for the results (7%).</p><p>A total of 300 children aged 0 - 59 under to be divided into 30 clusters was required. Mother-child pairs were identified using the WHO two-stage cluster sampling technique.</p></sec><sec id="s2_3_2"><title>2.3.2. Inclusion Criteria</title><p>The study included primary and secondary targets whose consent to participate in the study had been obtained.</p></sec><sec id="s2_3_3"><title>2.3.3. Selection of Mothers or Babysitters</title><p>The selection of mothers or babysitters of children aged 0 - 59 months in the study localities (one mother for one child) was based on a probabilistic method using a two-stage cluster sampling technique adapted from World Health Organization.</p></sec><sec id="s2_3_4"><title>2.3.4. Selection of Community Health Workers, Supervisor, Town Hall Health Focal Point, Community Facilitator and Chief Medical Officer</title><p>To select these categories of actors, we used the non-probabilistic method consisting in exhaustive choice.</p></sec></sec><sec id="s2_4"><title>2.4. Variables</title><p>The studied variables were composed of a principal component (quality of community-based health interventions to reduce infant and child mortality) and explanatory components: inputs, processes and outcomes (<xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig1">Figure 1</xref>) [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.130813-ref11">11</xref>] .</p><p>For each component, the assessed variable was evaluated as follows: when the practice met the standards, a rating of “1” was assigned. If not, a score of “0” was assigned. The sum of the ratings gave the score obtained, which was expressed as a percentage of the expected score for each component. To assess the main</p><p>component, the sum of the scores obtained by the explanatory variables was related to the total expected score.</p><p>The percentages obtained for each component were assessed according to a three-level scale: “good, average, insufficient” adapted from Varkevisser’s measurement scale [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.130813-ref12">12</xref>] .</p><p>If the percentage of achieved score was greater than or equal to 80% of the expected rating, the assessment was “good”. If the percentage of achieved score obtained was between 60% (included) and 80% (excluded) of the expected rating, the assessment was considered “average”. If the percentage of achieved score obtained was less than 60% of the expected rating, the assessment was qualified as “insufficient”.</p></sec><sec id="s2_5"><title>2.5. Data Collection Techniques and Tools</title><p>Data was collected by questionnaire survey, interview using an interview guide (semi-structured interview and focus group), observation using an observation grid, and documentary analysis using a data processing sheet. All these tools were designed by the authors.</p></sec><sec id="s2_6"><title>2.6. Validity and Reliability of the Questionnaire</title><p>The challenge, in this research, is that the “gold standard tool” itself has not been identified. We then appreciate the construct validity based on conceptual frame as there is no criterion for comparison. Since the questionnaire was generated from the conceptual diagram (<xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig1">Figure 1</xref>), its construct validity was assumed.</p><p>We used Cronbach’s alpha coefficient to appreciate the internal consistency of a set of questionnaire items. Cronbach’s alpha coefficient was 0.81 indicating an acceptable reliability of the questionnaire.</p></sec><sec id="s2_7"><title>2.7. Data Analysis</title><p>Quantitative data were expressed as mean and standard deviation, whilst qualitative data were expressed as their proportion. Percentages of scores obtained in relation to the expected score were calculated.</p></sec></sec><sec id="s3"><title>3. Results</title><sec id="s3_1"><title>3.1. Characteristics of Surveyed Mothers and Children</title><p>The sample size of participants included 46 community health workers, 300 mothers-child aged 0 - 5 pairs, 3 nurses (men), 3 nurses (women), 1 community facilitator from the non-governmental organization Catholic Relief Service, 1 chief medical officer and 1 health focal point of Pob&#232; town hall.</p><p>The mean age of the mothers was 28 &#177; 5.51 years. Among these mothers, 67.7% had never attended school, 60.66% were either farmers or craftswomen, and 93.67% were married. Half (50%) of the community health workers were aged between 21 and 30, and had a level of secondary school education (56.32%). Men predominated, accounting for 65.21% of them.</p><p>The characteristics of the surveyed mothers and children aged 0 - 59 months are shown in <xref ref-type="table" rid="table1">Table 1</xref>. The mean age of the nine other participants including 6 nurses, 1 community facilitator, 1 chief medical officer and 1 health focal point of town hall was 42 &#177; 4.503 years.</p></sec><sec id="s3_2"><title>3.2. Assessment of Community-Based PIHI Structure, Process and Outcomes</title><p><xref ref-type="table" rid="table2">Table 2</xref>, shows the inadequacy of the structure (53.28%), linked to the insufficiency inputs other than “malaria control inputs” such as of number of households with improved latrines (42%), number of households with a source of drinking water (31%) and number of households with a household solid waste management system (20.33%).</p><p>However, in <xref ref-type="table" rid="table3">Table 3</xref>, the quality of the process was good (81.80%). It should be noted that the population’s participation in educational sessions was low (data not shown).</p><p>Outcomes shown in <xref ref-type="table" rid="table4">Table 4</xref> were average (66.33%) linked to weak performance rate of children vaccination (65.33%), exclusively breastfeeding last child (41.33%) using an improved latrine by households (58.67%), recognizing at least two danger signs in children by mothers (56%).</p><p>Overall, the quality of interventions was average, with a performance rate of</p><table-wrap id="table1" ><label><xref ref-type="table" rid="table1">Table 1</xref></label><caption><title> Socio-demographic characteristics of surveyed mothers and children</title></caption><table><tbody><thead><tr><th align="center" valign="middle" ></th><th align="center" valign="middle" >Headcounts (n = 300)</th><th align="center" valign="middle" >Proportion (%)</th></tr></thead><tr><td align="center" valign="middle"  colspan="3"  >MOTHERS OF CHILDREN AGED 0 TO 59 MONTHS</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Level of instruction</td><td align="center" valign="middle" ></td><td align="center" valign="middle" ></td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >None</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >203</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >67.7</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Primary</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >93</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >31.0</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Secondary</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >4</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >1.3</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Professional activity</td><td align="center" valign="middle" ></td><td align="center" valign="middle" ></td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Farmer/craftsman</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >182</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >60.66</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Employee</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >14</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >4.67</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Retailer</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >104</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >34.67</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Marital status</td><td align="center" valign="middle" ></td><td align="center" valign="middle" ></td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Married/common-law</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >281</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >93.67</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Single</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >11</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >3.67</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Widowed</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >3</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >1</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Divorced</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >5</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >1.66</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Religion</td><td align="center" valign="middle" ></td><td align="center" valign="middle" ></td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Christian</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >205</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >68.33</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Muslim</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >89</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >29.67</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Endogenous</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >6</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >2</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle"  colspan="3"  >CHILDRENS AGED 0 TO 59 MONTHS</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Sex of children</td><td align="center" valign="middle" ></td><td align="center" valign="middle" ></td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Male</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >179</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >59.66</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Female</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >121</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >40.33</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Children’s age range (months)</td><td align="center" valign="middle" ></td><td align="center" valign="middle" ></td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >0 - 5</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >21</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >7</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >6 - 35</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >88</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >29.33</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >36 - 59</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >191</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >63.66</td></tr></tbody></table></table-wrap><table-wrap id="table2" ><label><xref ref-type="table" rid="table2">Table 2</xref></label><caption><title> Assessment of the structure of community-based PIHI interventions in Pob&#232; municipality</title></caption><table><tbody><thead><tr><th align="center" valign="middle" >Components of structure</th><th align="center" valign="middle" >Expected score</th><th align="center" valign="middle" >Achieved score</th><th align="center" valign="middle" >Performance (%)</th><th align="center" valign="middle" >Appreciation</th></tr></thead><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Number of community health workers recruited during a village general meeting.</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >46</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >45</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >97.83</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >Good</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Number of community health workers with all management and reporting tools.</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >46</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >46</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >100</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >Good</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Number of community health workers supplied with medicines.</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >46</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >46</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >100</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >Good</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Number of households with LLITNs in good condition.</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >300</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >296</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >98.7</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >Good</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Number of households with improved latrines.</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >300</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >126</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >42</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >Insufficient</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Number of households with a source of drinking water.</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >300</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >93</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >31</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >Insufficient</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Number of households with a household solid waste management system.</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >300</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >61</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >20.33</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >Insufficient</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Total</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >1338</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >713</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >53.28</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >Insufficient</td></tr></tbody></table></table-wrap><p>LLITNs: Long-Lasting Insecticide-Treated Mosquito Nets.</p><table-wrap id="table3" ><label><xref ref-type="table" rid="table3">Table 3</xref></label><caption><title> Assessment of the community-based PIHI process within Pob&#232; municipality</title></caption><table><tbody><thead><tr><th align="center" valign="middle" >Components of process</th><th align="center" valign="middle" >Expected score</th><th align="center" valign="middle" >Achieved score</th><th align="center" valign="middle" >Performance (%)</th><th align="center" valign="middle" >Appreciation</th></tr></thead><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Number of community workers who have received initial training on PIHI.</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >46</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >46</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >100</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >Good</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Number of community health workers who have not experienced a shortage of ACT + RDT.</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >46</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >46</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >100</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >Good</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Number of community health workers who have not experienced a break in other management drugs.</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >46</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >1</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >2.17</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >Insufficient</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Number of community health workers taking part in group monitoring meetings over the last three months.</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >46</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >46</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >100</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >Good</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Number of malaria cases receiving first-line antimalarial treatment in the community after RDT.</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >210</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >179</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >85.23</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >Good</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Number of community health workers supervised at least once during the last quarter.</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >46</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >46</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >100</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >Good</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Number of households having received at least one home visit.</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >300</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >184</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >61.33</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >Average</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Number of educational sessions held in the last three months.</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >276</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >276</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >100</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >Good</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Indicators</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >Expected score</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >Achieved score</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >Performance (%)</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >Appreciation</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Number of mothers having contacted the relay at least once in the last three months for a health problem affecting their child.</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >300</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >238</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >79.33</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >Average</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Number of mothers who know the community health workers in their locality.</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >300</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >255</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >85</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >Good</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Number of community health workers complying with standards care and procedures.</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >46</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >46</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >100</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >Good</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Number of community health workers producing monthly activity reports.</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >46</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >46</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >100</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >Good</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Number of follow-up visits made to children’s households.</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >300</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >226</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >75.3</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >Average</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Number of community health workers correctly filling in tools.</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >46</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >37</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >80</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >Good</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Number of community health workers correctly storing management tools and medicines.</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >46</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >46</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >100</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >Good</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Total</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >2100</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >1718</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >81.80</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >Good</td></tr></tbody></table></table-wrap><p>ACT: Artemisinin-based Combination Therapy; RDT: Rapid Screening Test.</p><p>73.80%. The weakest aspects of implementation were the “structure of community-based PIHI” and its “results”, which were rated “insufficient” and “average” respectively (<xref ref-type="table" rid="table5">Table 5</xref>).</p></sec><sec id="s3_3"><title>3.3. Overall Assessment of Community-Based PIHI Quality</title><p><xref ref-type="table" rid="table5">Table 5</xref> shows that the quality of community-based health interventions within Pob&#232; municipality was average.</p></sec></sec><sec id="s4"><title>4. Discussion</title><p>Avedis Donab&#233;dian’s approach [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.130813-ref11">11</xref>] was used to assess the quality of PIHI’s</p><table-wrap id="table4" ><label><xref ref-type="table" rid="table4">Table 4</xref></label><caption><title> Assessment of the outcomes of community interventions within the municipality of Pob&#232;</title></caption><table><tbody><thead><tr><th align="center" valign="middle" >Components of outcomes</th><th align="center" valign="middle" >Expected score</th><th align="center" valign="middle" >Achieved score</th><th align="center" valign="middle" >Performance (%)</th><th align="center" valign="middle" >Appreciation</th></tr></thead><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Number of mothers recognizing at least two danger signs.</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >300</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >168</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >56</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >Insufficient</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Number of mothers knowing the causes of malaria.</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >300</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >298</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >99.33</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >Good</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Number of mothers knowing the causes of diarrheal diseases and respiratory infections.</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >300</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >225</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >75</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >Average</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Number of mothers familiar with the child’s vaccination schedule.</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >300</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >211</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >70.33</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >Average</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Number of children having received all age-appropriate vaccines.</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >300</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >196</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >65.33</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >Average</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Number of mothers who had at least one prenatal consultation during their last pregnancy.</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >300</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >272</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >90.66</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >Good</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Number of mothers who gave birth with tetanus immunity during the last pregnancy.</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >300</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >246</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >82</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >Good</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Number of mothers exclusively breastfeeding their last child.</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >300</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >124</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >41.33</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >Insufficient</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Accessibility to community health worker’s interventions.</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >300</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >300</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >100</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >Good</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Number of children who slept under LLITN the day before the survey.</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >300</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >251</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >83.75</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >Good</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Number of households consuming drinking water.</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >300</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >246</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >82</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >Good</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Number of households using an improved latrine.</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >300</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >176</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >58.67</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >insufficient</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Number of mothers satisfied with community health worker’s interventions.</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >300</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >245</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >81.67</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >Good</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Number of other stakeholders satisfied with CR work.</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >9</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >9</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >100</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >Good</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Number of community health workers satisfied with their services.</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >46</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >46</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >100</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >Good</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Number of community health worker benefiting from community support for the implementation of interventions.</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >46</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >46</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >100</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >Good</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Number of deaths of children under five recorded in the community during the quarter in the households surveyed.</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >1</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >1</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >100</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >Good</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Total</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >4002</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >3060</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >76.45</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >Average</td></tr></tbody></table></table-wrap><p>LLITNs: Long-Lasting Insecticide-Treated Mosquito Nets.</p><table-wrap id="table5" ><label><xref ref-type="table" rid="table5">Table 5</xref></label><caption><title> Assessment of the overall quality of community health interventions within the municipality of Pob&#232;</title></caption><table><tbody><thead><tr><th align="center" valign="middle" >Components</th><th align="center" valign="middle" >Expected score</th><th align="center" valign="middle" >Achieved score</th><th align="center" valign="middle" >Performance (%)</th><th align="center" valign="middle" >Appreciation</th></tr></thead><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Inputs</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >1338</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >713</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >53.28</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >Insufficient</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Process</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >2100</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >1718</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >81.80</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >Good</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Outcomes</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >4001</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >3059</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >76.45</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >Average</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Quality of PIHI-com</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >7439</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >5490</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >73.80</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >Average</td></tr></tbody></table></table-wrap><p>implementation of community-based health interventions. The study revealed that the structure was considered insufficient. However, the quality of the process was good and the outcomes were average. Ultimately, the overall quality of community-based health interventions in Pob&#232; municipality was average. This assessment approach based on structure, process and outcomes had already been used by several authors to evaluate the quality of community interventions [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.130813-ref13">13</xref>] [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.130813-ref14">14</xref>] [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.130813-ref15">15</xref>] [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.130813-ref16">16</xref>] .</p><sec id="s4_1"><title>4.1. Quality of the Community-Based PIHI Interventions</title><p>Several evaluative studies of community-based health interventions have been undertaken around the world, though it should be noted that the aspects assessed varied from one study to another. Most published studies have assessed the quality of community health workers’ services by direct observation of clinical encounters and by comparison with an evaluation of reference standards. Thus, at the end of the present study, the quality of interventions was average, with a score of 73.80%. The weakest links in implementation were “non-ILP inputs” and “outcomes”, which scored “insufficient” and “average” respectively. This result is below that of Gahou, who found the quality of care to be good at So-Ava in 2018, with a score of 84.09% [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.130813-ref13">13</xref>] . Despite this average performance, the gains made must be maintained and new efforts made to improve children’s health throughout the municipality.</p><sec id="s4_1_1"><title>4.1.1. Knowledge General Danger Signs by Mothers</title><p>Recognition of danger signs is of vital importance in reducing infant mortality. In the study, less than 25% of mothers clearly mastered the 4 main danger signs, while 56% cited only two. This lack of knowledge is due to the fact that the majority of women do not attend the various monthly sessions organized by the RCs in their localities. This result is lower than that of Malou Adom et al., where 99% of households in Benin and 92% in Togo are familiar with the clinical signs of these diseases [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.130813-ref17">17</xref>] .</p></sec><sec id="s4_1_2"><title>4.1.2. Exclusive Breastfeeding</title><p>The majority of women breastfeed their children from birth, but the study showed that only 41.33% were exclusively breastfeeding until the age of 6 months. This result, although lower than the one reported in the national 2017-2018 demographic and health survey, is better than 50% in Burkina Faso, 33% in Mali and 37.5% in Senegal [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.130813-ref18">18</xref>] observed in the study funded by the NGO “Action contre la Faim”.</p></sec><sec id="s4_1_3"><title>4.1.3. Use of Latrines</title><p>The survey results showed that only 42% of households surveyed had their own latrine. Despite this low rate of availability, 58.67% of households used latrines for defecation. This improvement can be explained by the introduction in certain localities by NGOs of public latrines for a fee, but also by the active solidarity that means that neighbors’ latrines can be used by those who don’t yet have one. Roy reported in his 2016 study that improved toilets have a significant protective effect against diarrhoea at all ages by reducing the spread of pathogens in excreta [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.130813-ref19">19</xref>] . So, following the example of project set up in the Savanes and Kara regions of Togo, which resulted in 92 of the 167 villages in the Savanes region being awarded the status of “end of open-air defecation” [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.130813-ref12">12</xref>] , the commune of Pob&#232; has also set in motion the same process, which is currently being implemented with the contribution of the NGO OMIDELTA.</p></sec><sec id="s4_1_4"><title>4.1.4. Use of Drinking Water for Drinking</title><p>In his study in Togo, Le Fur reported that 76% of households had access to drinking water [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.130813-ref12">12</xref>] . This performance is close to that found in this study, where 82% of households used drinking water. This performance is below that found in SO-Ava in Benin by L&#233;onie, where 99.11% of households had access to drinking water [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.130813-ref20">20</xref>] . This discrepancy between SO-AVA and this study may be linked to the fact that many efforts had been focused in this region by NGOs and the central government to reduce the recurrent occurrence of fatal diarrhoeal diseases in the region.</p></sec></sec><sec id="s4_2"><title>4.2. Strengths and Weaknesses in Implementing Community-Based PIHI Interventions</title><p>Every intervention’s success depends on the quality of the resources mobilized and the managerial style established. The average performance obtained in the evaluation of interventions in the municipality was mainly due to the acceptance of the community health workers in their locality, to the availability of malaria control inputs and above all to the supervision, ongoing training and motivation of the community health workers.</p><p>Gray et al. in his technical folder for the forum on community management of acute malnutrition entitled “community engagement” recognized the need to motivate community health workers but mentioned that it was important to stress that remuneration was not the only solution and that, on its own, it would not be able to maintain staff motivation or the quality of care [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.130813-ref21">21</xref>] .</p><p>To improve performance, it will be necessary to maintain the gains made by mobilizing additional financial resources through the communal council to ensure the sustainability of activities, but also and above all to encourage greater community involvement. According to Gray et al., it is through a good knowledge of their health needs and their active participation in the provision and management of health services that communities strengthen their ownership of health interventions. Most communities have some form of local organization or structure capable of expressing the needs of the community. Despite this, the process was good, demonstrating the ability of community health workers to work in a context of limited resources. In Malawi, for example, a key factor in the successful scaling-up of community-based care was the creation of village health committees: these were linked to each village health center, and community leaders were put in charge of their management [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.130813-ref21">21</xref>] .</p><p>In short, all stakeholders will need to work together to find solutions to the shortcomings noted above all in the non-availability of inputs other than “malaria control inputs”, and the low level of participation by the population in educational sessions designed to enable them to adopt behaviors conducive to reducing mortality and morbidity in children under 5.</p><p>The limitations of the present study lie in its limited scope. The results can only be generalized to the population of the commune of Pob&#232;. Furthermore, desirability bias is possible since mothers know the best practices to be observed to improve their children’s health. Answers could be modified accordingly. However, the results reported in this community-based study are very useful for the implementation of PIHI.</p></sec></sec><sec id="s5"><title>5. Conclusion</title><p>The assessment enabled us to evaluate the quality of PIHI’s community-based interventions carried out by the community health workers, and their impact on the beneficiaries, namely women and children aged 0 - 59 months in the municipality of Pob&#232;. On completion of the evaluation, the quality of the interventions was judged to be average. The weakest links in the implementation of community interventions were the “structure” and “outcomes” components that need to be improved.</p></sec><sec id="s6"><title>Conflicts of Interest</title><p>The authors declare no conflicts of interest regarding the publication of this paper.</p></sec><sec id="s7"><title>Cite this paper</title><p>Sossa Jerome, C., Gbadamassi, D., Salami, L., Azandjeme, C., Metonnou, C. and Paraiso, M.N. (2024) Assessing Community Health Interventions in Reducing Infant and Child Mortality in the Southeastern Benin. Open Journal of Preventive Medicine, 14, 17-28. https://doi.org/10.4236/ojpm.2024.141002</p></sec></body><back><ref-list><title>References</title><ref id="scirp.130813-ref1"><label>1</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Gahou, L. (2018) Evaluation de la qualité des interventions à base communautaire en santé dans la commune de So-Ava. 89 p.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.130813-ref2"><label>2</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Commune de Pobè (2019) Plan de Développement Communal 3é génération. 46 p.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.130813-ref3"><label>3</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Varkevisser, C.M., Pathmanathan, I. and Brownlee, A. (1993) Elaboration et mise en &amp;oelig;uvre des programmes de recherche sur le système de santé Vol. 2, première partie aspects des variables. Canada CRDI.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.130813-ref4"><label>4</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Nadine, A. (2018) Etude sur l’évaluation de la performance de la mise en &amp;oelig;uvre de la surveillance épidémiologique à base communautaire dans la zone sanitaire Abomey-Calavi So-Ava en. 128 p.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.130813-ref5"><label>5</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Malou Adom, V. (2016) Etudes des interactions entre les différents acteurs des interventions sous directives communautaires et changements obtenus au BENIN et au TOGO. Thèse de Doc-torat en Santé Publique, Université d’Abomey-Calavi, Abomey-Calavi, 419 p.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.130813-ref6"><label>6</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Action Contre la Faim: Etude de cas sur le fonctionnement des relais communautaires dans le cadre de la prévention de la sous-nutrition. Burkina Faso-Mali-Sénégal. https://www.medbox.org/dl/5e308cce4806206841416bb5</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.130813-ref7"><label>7</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Roy, E. (2016) Facteurs associés à la diarrhée chez les enfants de moins de 5 ans en Ha&amp;icirc;ti. Canada: Emoire de Master en Sciences de Démographie. Mémoire de Master en Sciences de Démographie, Université de Montréal, Montréal, 67 p.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.130813-ref8"><label>8</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Léonie, G. (2018) Evaluation de la qualité des interventions à base communautaire en santé dans la commune de So-Ava. Mémoire de Master en Santé Publique, Université d’Abomey-Calavi, Abomey-Calavi, 89 p.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.130813-ref9"><label>9</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Gray, N., Bedford, J., Deconinck, H. and Brown, R. (2014) Engagement communautaire: Le “C” au coeur de la PCMA, Dossier technique du Forum PCMA. 39 p. https://www.ennonline.net/attachments/2182/Engagement-communautaire-PCMA-Aout-2014.pdf</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.130813-ref10"><label>10</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Le Fur, M. (2013) évaluation des Interventions à Base Communautaire (Nutrition &amp; ATPC) dans les Régions des Savanes et de la Kara; Togo: Novembre. 135 p.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.130813-ref11"><label>11</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Donabedian, A. (2005) Evaluating the Quality of Medical Care. The Milbank Quarterly, 83, 691-729. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-0009.2005.00397.x</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.130813-ref12"><label>12</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Institut National de la Statistique et de lAnalyse économique (INSAE) et ICF (2019) Enquête Démographique et de Santé au Bénin, 2017-2018. INSAE et ICF, Cotonou.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.130813-ref13"><label>13</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">United States Agency for International Development (2010) La prise en charge des cas dans la communauté: éléments essentiels de traitement des maladies courantes de l’enfant. https://coregroup.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/02/CCM-french-print-only.pdf</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.130813-ref14"><label>14</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Programme des Nations Unies pour le Développement (2016) Rapport d’évaluation des OMD 2000-2015 Bénin. https://www.undp.org/sites/g/files/zskgke326/files/migration/bj/MDG_Report_Benin.pdf</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.130813-ref15"><label>15</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Charle-Cuéllar, P., López-Ejeda, N., Traore, M., Coulibaly, A.B., Landouré, A., Diawara, F., Bunkembo, M., Vargas, A., Gil, R. and Briend, A. (2021) Impact of Different Levels of Supervision on the Recovery of Severely Malnourished Children Treated by Community Health Workers in Mali. Nutrients, 13, Article 367. https://doi.org/10.3390/nu13020367</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.130813-ref16"><label>16</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Schiffman, J., Darmstadt, G.L., Agarwal, S. and Baqui, A.H. (2010) Community-Based Intervention Packages for Improving Perinatal Health in Developing Countries: A Review of the Evidence. Seminars in Perinatology, 34, 462-476. https://doi.org/10.1053/j.semperi.2010.09.008</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.130813-ref17"><label>17</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Rossouw, L., Burger, R.P. and Burger, R. (2019) An Incentive-Based and Community Health Worker Package Intervention to Improve Early Utilization of Antenatal Care: Evidence from a Pilot Randomised Controlled Trial. Maternal and Child Health Journal, 23, 633-640. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10995-018-2677-9</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.130813-ref18"><label>18</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Rockers, P.C., Fink, G., Zanolini, A., Banda, B., Biemba, G., Sullivan, C., Mutembo, S., Silavwe, V. and Hamer, D.H. (2016) Impact of a Community-Based Package of Interventions on Child Development in Zambia: A Cluster-Randomised Controlled Trial. BMJ Global Health, 1, e000104. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjgh-2016-000104</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.130813-ref19"><label>19</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Becquey, E., Huybregts, L., Zongrone, A., Le Port, A., Leroy, J.L., Rawat, R., Touré, M. and Ruel, M.T. (2019) Impact on Child Acute Malnutrition of Integrating a Preventive Nutrition Package into Facility-Based Screening for Acute Malnutrition during Well-Baby Consultation: A Cluster-Randomized Controlled Trial in Burkina Faso. PLOS Medicine, 16, e1002877. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pmed.1002877</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.130813-ref20"><label>20</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">United States Agency for International Development (2012) Prise en Charge communautaire intégrée des maladies de l’enfant: Documentation des meilleures pratiques et des goulots d’étranglement à la mise en &amp;oelig;uvre du programme en République Démocratique du Congo. https://mchip.net/sites/default/files/mchipfiles/DRCLongFrench_FINAL.pdf</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.130813-ref21"><label>21</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Idrissa, A. (2013) Evaluation de la mise en &amp;oelig;uvre du paquet d’intervention à haut impact pour la réduction de la mortalité maternelle et infanto juvénile dans la Zone sanitaire de Djida—Abomey-Agbangnizoun au Bénin en 2013. Mémoire de Santé Publique, Institut Régional de Santé Publique, Ouidah.</mixed-citation></ref></ref-list></back></article>