| 1. |
- KC, Ashish, 1982, et al.
(författare)
-
Neonatal resuscitation: EN-BIRTH multi-country validation study.
- 2021
-
Ingår i: BMC pregnancy and childbirth. - : Springer Science and Business Media LLC. - 1471-2393. ; 21:Suppl 1
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Annually, 14 million newborns require stimulation to initiate breathing at birth and 6 million require bag-mask-ventilation (BMV). Many countries have invested in facility-based neonatal resuscitation equipment and training. However, there is no consistent tracking for neonatal resuscitation coverage.The EN-BIRTH study, in five hospitals in Bangladesh, Nepal, and Tanzania (2017-2018), collected time-stamped data for care around birth, including neonatal resuscitation. Researchers surveyed women and extracted data from routine labour ward registers. To assess accuracy, we compared gold standard observed coverage to survey-reported and register-recorded coverage, using absolute difference, validity ratios, and individual-level validation metrics (sensitivity, specificity, percent agreement). We analysed two resuscitation numerators (stimulation, BMV) and three denominators (live births and fresh stillbirths, non-crying, non-breathing). We also examined timeliness of BMV. Qualitative data were collected from health workers and data collectors regarding barriers and enablers to routine recording of resuscitation.Among 22,752 observed births, 5330 (23.4%) babies did not cry and 3860 (17.0%) did not breathe in the first minute after birth. 16.2% (n = 3688) of babies were stimulated and 4.4% (n = 998) received BMV. Survey-report underestimated coverage of stimulation and BMV. Four of five labour ward registers captured resuscitation numerators. Stimulation had variable accuracy (sensitivity 7.5-40.8%, specificity 66.8-99.5%), BMV accuracy was higher (sensitivity 12.4-48.4%, specificity > 93%), with small absolute differences between observed and recorded BMV. Accuracy did not vary by denominator option. < 1% of BMV was initiated within 1 min of birth. Enablers to register recording included training and data use while barriers included register design, documentation burden, and time pressure.Population-based surveys are unlikely to be useful for measuring resuscitation coverage given low validity of exit-survey report. Routine labour ward registers have potential to accurately capture BMV as the numerator. Measuring the true denominator for clinical need is complex; newborns may require BMV if breathing ineffectively or experiencing apnoea after initial drying/stimulation or subsequently at any time. Further denominator research is required to evaluate non-crying as a potential alternative in the context of respectful care. Measuring quality gaps, notably timely provision of resuscitation, is crucial for programme improvement and impact, but unlikely to be feasible in routine systems, requiring audits and special studies.
|
|
| 2. |
- Lazzerini, Marzia, et al.
(författare)
-
Rates of instrumental vaginal birth and cesarean and quality of maternal and newborn health care in private versus public facilities: Results of the IMAgiNE EURO study in 16 countries.
- 2022
-
Ingår i: International journal of gynaecology and obstetrics: the official organ of the International Federation of Gynaecology and Obstetrics. - : Wiley. - 1879-3479 .- 0020-7292. ; 159:Suppl 1, s. 22-38
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- To explore the quality of maternal and newborn care (QMNC) during the COVID-19 pandemic by facility type among 16 European countries, comparing rates of instrumental vaginal birth and cesarean.Women who gave birth in the WHO European Region from March 1, 2020, to February 7, 2022, answered a validated online questionnaire. Rates of instrumental birth, instrumental vaginal birth, and cesarean, and a QMNC index were calculated for births in public versus private facilities.Responses from 25 206 participants were analyzed. Women giving birth in private compared with public facilities reported significantly more frequent total cesarean (32.5% vs 19.0%; aOR 1.70; 95% CI 1.52-1.90), elective cesarean (17.3% vs 7.8%; aOR 1.90; 95% CI 1.65-2.19), and emergency cesarean before labor (7.4% vs 3.9%; aOR 1.39; 95% CI 1.14-1.70) (P <0.001 for all comparisons), with analyses by country confirming these results. QMNC index results were heterogeneous across countries and regions in the same country and were largely affected by geographical distribution of regions rather than by type of facility alone.The study confirms that births in private facilities have higher odds of cesarean. It also suggests that QMNC should be closely monitored in all facilities to achieve high-quality care, independent of facility type or geographical distribution.NCT04847336.
|
|
| 3. |
|
|
| 4. |
- Målqvist, Mats, 1971-, et al.
(författare)
-
Maternal health care utilization in Viet Nam : increasing ethnic inequity
- 2013
-
Ingår i: Bulletin of the World Health Organization. - 0042-9686 .- 1564-0604. ; 91:4, s. 254-261
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- ObjectiveTo investigate changes that took place between 2006 and 2010 in the inequity gap for antenatal care attendance and delivery at health facilities among women in Viet Nam.MethodsDemographic, socioeconomic and obstetric data for women aged 15–49 years were extracted from Viet Nam’s Multiple Indicator Cluster Survey for 2006 (MICS3) and 2010–2011 (MICS4). Multivariate logistic regression was performed to determine if antenatal care attendance and place of delivery were significantly associated with maternal education, maternal ethnicity (Kinh/Hoa versus other), household wealth and place of residence (urban versus rural). These independent variables correspond to the analytical framework of the Commission on Social Determinants of Health.FindingsLarge discrepancies between urban and rural populations were found in both MICS3 and MICS4. Although antenatal care attendance and health facility delivery rates improved substantially between surveys (from 86.3 to 92.1% and from 76.2 to 89.7%, respectively), inequities increased, especially along ethnic lines. The risk of not giving birth in a health facility increased significantly among ethnic minority women living in rural areas. In 2006 this risk was nearly five times higher than among women of Kinh/Hoa (majority) ethnicity (odds ratio, OR: 4.67; 95% confidence interval, CI: 2.94–7.43); in 2010–2011 it had become nearly 20 times higher (OR: 18.8; 95% CI: 8.96–39.2).ConclusionInequity in maternal health care utilization has increased progressively in Viet Nam, primarily along ethnic lines, and vulnerable groups in the country are at risk of being left behind. Health-care decision-makers should target these groups through affirmative action and culturally sensitive interventions.
|
|
| 5. |
- Tahsina, Tazeen, et al.
(författare)
-
EN-BIRTH multi-country validation study : EN-BIRTH multi-country validation study
- 2021
-
Ingår i: BMC Pregnancy and Childbirth. - : BioMed Central (BMC). - 1471-2393 .- 1471-2393. ; 21:SUPPL
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- BackgroundImmediate newborn care (INC) practices, notably early initiation of breastfeeding (EIBF), are fundamental for newborn health. However, coverage tracking currently relies on household survey data in many settings. "Every Newborn Birth Indicators Research Tracking in Hospitals" (EN-BIRTH) was an observational study validating selected maternal and newborn health indicators. This paper reports results for EIBF.MethodsThe EN-BIRTH study was conducted in five public hospitals in Bangladesh, Nepal, and Tanzania, from July 2017 to July 2018. Clinical observers collected tablet-based, time-stamped data on EIBF and INC practices (skin-to-skin within 1h of birth, drying, and delayed cord clamping). To assess validity of EIBF measurement, we compared observation as gold standard to register records and women's exit-interview survey reports. Percent agreement was used to assess agreement between EIBF and INC practices. Kaplan Meier survival curves showed timing. Qualitative interviews were conducted to explore barriers/enablers to register recording.ResultsCoverage of EIBF among 7802 newborns observed for >= 1h was low (10.9, 95% CI 3.8-21.0). Survey-reported (53.2, 95% CI 39.4-66.8) and register-recorded results (85.9, 95% CI 58.1-99.6) overestimated coverage compared to observed levels across all hospitals. Registers did not capture other INC practices apart from breastfeeding. Agreement of EIBF with other INC practices was high for skin-to-skin (69.5-93.9%) at four sites, but fair/poor for delayed cord-clamping (47.3-73.5%) and drying (7.3-29.0%). EIBF and skin-to-skin were the most delayed and EIBF rarely happened after caesarean section (0.5-3.6%). Qualitative findings suggested that focusing on accuracy, as well as completeness, contributes to higher quality with register reporting.ConclusionsOur study highlights the importance of tracking EIBF despite measurement challenges and found low coverage levels, particularly after caesarean births. Both survey-reported and register-recorded data over-estimated coverage. EIBF had a strong agreement with skin-to-skin but is not a simple tracer for other INC indicators. Other INC practices are challenging to measure in surveys, not included in registers, and are likely to require special studies or audits. Continued focus on EIBF is crucial to inform efforts to improve provider practices and increase coverage. Investment and innovation are required to improve measurement.
|
|
| 6. |
- Tahsina, Tazeen, et al.
(författare)
-
Immediate newborn care and breastfeeding: EN-BIRTH multi-country validation study.
- 2021
-
Ingår i: BMC pregnancy and childbirth. - : Springer Science and Business Media LLC. - 1471-2393. ; 21:Suppl 1
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Immediate newborn care (INC) practices, notably early initiation of breastfeeding (EIBF), are fundamental for newborn health. However, coverage tracking currently relies on household survey data in many settings. "Every Newborn Birth Indicators Research Tracking in Hospitals" (EN-BIRTH) was an observational study validating selected maternal and newborn health indicators. This paper reports results for EIBF.The EN-BIRTH study was conducted in five public hospitals in Bangladesh, Nepal, and Tanzania, from July 2017 to July 2018. Clinical observers collected tablet-based, time-stamped data on EIBF and INC practices (skin-to-skin within 1 h of birth, drying, and delayed cord clamping). To assess validity of EIBF measurement, we compared observation as gold standard to register records and women's exit-interview survey reports. Percent agreement was used to assess agreement between EIBF and INC practices. Kaplan Meier survival curves showed timing. Qualitative interviews were conducted to explore barriers/enablers to register recording.Coverage of EIBF among 7802 newborns observed for ≥1 h was low (10.9, 95% CI 3.8-21.0). Survey-reported (53.2, 95% CI 39.4-66.8) and register-recorded results (85.9, 95% CI 58.1-99.6) overestimated coverage compared to observed levels across all hospitals. Registers did not capture other INC practices apart from breastfeeding. Agreement of EIBF with other INC practices was high for skin-to-skin (69.5-93.9%) at four sites, but fair/poor for delayed cord-clamping (47.3-73.5%) and drying (7.3-29.0%). EIBF and skin-to-skin were the most delayed and EIBF rarely happened after caesarean section (0.5-3.6%). Qualitative findings suggested that focusing on accuracy, as well as completeness, contributes to higher quality with register reporting.Our study highlights the importance of tracking EIBF despite measurement challenges and found low coverage levels, particularly after caesarean births. Both survey-reported and register-recorded data over-estimated coverage. EIBF had a strong agreement with skin-to-skin but is not a simple tracer for other INC indicators. Other INC practices are challenging to measure in surveys, not included in registers, and are likely to require special studies or audits. Continued focus on EIBF is crucial to inform efforts to improve provider practices and increase coverage. Investment and innovation are required to improve measurement.
|
|
| 7. |
- Valente, Emanuelle Pessa, et al.
(författare)
-
WHO Standards-based questionnaire to measure health workers' perspective on the quality of care around the time of childbirth in the WHO European region : development and mixed-methods validation in six countries
- 2022
-
Ingår i: BMJ Open. - : BMJ. - 2044-6055. ; 12:4, s. 1-10
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- OBJECTIVES: Develop and validate a WHO Standards-based online questionnaire to measure the quality of maternal and newborn care (QMNC) around the time of childbirth from the health workers' perspective.DESIGN: Mixed-methods study.SETTING: Six countries of the WHO European Region.PARTICIPANTS AND METHODS: The questionnaire is based on lessons learnt in previous studies, and was developed in three sequential phases: (1) WHO Quality Measures were prioritised and content, construct and face validity were assessed through a Delphi involving a multidisciplinary board of experts from 11 countries of the WHO European Region; (2) translation/back translation of the English version was conducted following The Professional Society for Health Economics and Outcomes Research guidelines; (3) internal consistency, intrarater reliability and acceptability were assessed among 600 health workers in six countries.RESULTS: The questionnaire included 40 items based on WHO Standards Quality Measures, equally divided into four domains: provision of care, experience of care, availability of human and physical resources, organisational changes due to COVID-19; and its organised in six sections. It was translated/back translated in 12 languages: Bosnian, Croatian, French, German, Italian, Norwegian, Portuguese, Romanian, Russian, Slovenian, Spanish and Swedish. The Cronbach's alpha values were ≥0.70 for each questionnaire section where questions were hypothesised to be interrelated, indicating good internal consistence. Cohen K or Gwet's AC1 values were ≥0.60, suggesting good intrarater reliability, except for one question. Acceptability was good with only 1.70% of health workers requesting minimal changes in question wording.CONCLUSIONS: Findings suggest that the questionnaire has good content, construct, face validity, internal consistency, intrarater reliability and acceptability in six countries of the WHO European Region. Future studies may further explore the questionnaire's use in other countries, and how to translate evidence generated by this tool into policies to improve the QMNC.TRAIL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT04847336.
|
|
