Per cent of district hospitals monitoring surgical quality in Malawi, Tanzania and Zambia
| N (% within country) | Malawi n=22 (%) | Tanzania n=30 (%) | Zambia n=23 (%) | Government n=29 (%) | Faith-based n=24 (%) |
| Surgical Safety Checklists | 3 (14%) | 10 (33%) | 9 (39%) | 5 (17%) | 14 (58%)* |
| Supervision | |||||
| Internal | 20 (91%) | 25 (83%) | 17 (74%) | 24 (83%) | 18 (75%) |
| External | 10 (46%) | 0 (0%) | 2 (9%) | 2 (6%) | 0 (0%) |
| Case reviews | 11 (50%) | 22 (73%) | 10 (44%) | 11 (38%) | 21 (88%)† |
| Morbidity and mortality reports | 4 (18%) | 9 (30%)‡ | 15 (65%) | 9 (31%) | 15 (63%)§ |
| Audits of surgical adverse events | 2 (9%) | 2 (7%) | 7 (30%) | 4 (14%) | 3 (21%) |
*P=0.002 proportions of hospitals using surgical checklist: faith-based versus government.
†P=0.0001 proportions of hospitals undertaking case reviews: faith-based versus government.
‡P=0.003, proportions of hospitals producing regular reports across the three countries.
§P=0.02 proportions of hospitals producing morbidity and mortality reports: faith-based versus government.