METHODS: This is a quasi-experimental study conducted in 20 intervention and 20 matched control clinics. We surveyed all HCPs who were directly involved in patient management. A self-administered questionnaire which included six questions on job satisfaction were assessed on a scale of 1-4 at baseline (April and May 2017) and post-intervention phase (March and April 2019). Unadjusted intervention effect was calculated based on absolute differences in mean scores between intervention and control groups after implementation. Difference-in-differences analysis was used in the multivariable linear regression model and adjusted for providers and clinics characteristics to detect changes in job satisfaction following EnPHC interventions. A negative estimate indicates relative decrease in job satisfaction in the intervention group compared with control group.

RESULTS: A total of 1042 and 1215 HCPs responded at baseline and post-intervention respectively. At post-intervention, the intervention group reported higher level of stress with adjusted differences of - 0.139 (95% CI -0.266,-0.012; p = 0.032). Nurses, being the largest workforce in public clinics were the only group experiencing dissatisfaction at post-intervention. In subgroup analysis, nurses from intervention group experienced increase in work stress following EnPHC interventions with adjusted differences of - 0.223 (95% CI -0.419,-0.026; p = 0.026). Additionally, the same group were less likely to perceive their profession as well-respected at post-intervention (β = - 0.175; 95% CI -0.331,-0.019; p = 0.027).

METHODS: A multiple case study underpinning the Tailored Implementation for Chronic Diseases framework was carried out in three public hospitals with differing rates of IVT using a multiple method design. Twenty-five in-depth interviews and 12 focus groups discussions were conducted among 89 healthcare providers, along with a survey on hospital resources and a medical records review to identify reasons for not receiving IVT. Qualitative data were analysed using reflective thematic method, before triangulated with quantitative findings.

RESULTS: Of five factors identified, three factors that distinctively influenced the variation of IVT across the hospitals were: 1) leadership through quality stroke champions, 2) team cohesiveness which entailed team dynamics and its degree of alignment and, 3) facilitative work process which included workflow simplification and familiarity with IVT. Two other factors that were consistently identified as barriers in these hospitals included patient factors which largely encompassed delayed presentation, and resource constraints. About 50.0 - 67.6% of ischemic stroke patients missed the opportunity to receive IVT due to delayed presentation.