CRADLE-5: a stepped-wedge type 2 hybrid implementation-effectiveness cluster randomised controlled trial to evaluate the real-world scale-up of the CRADLE Vital Signs Alert intervention into routine maternity care in Sierra Leone-study protocol.

BACKGROUND: The CRADLE Vital Signs Alert intervention (an accurate easy-to-use device that measures blood pressure and pulse with inbuilt traffic-light early warning system, and focused training package) was associated with reduced rates of eclampsia and maternal death when trialled in urban areas in Sierra Leone. Subsequently, implementation was successfully piloted as evidenced by measures of fidelity, feasibility and adoption. The CRADLE-5 trial will examine whether national scale-up, including in the most rural areas, will reduce a composite outcome of maternal and fetal mortality and maternal morbidity and will evaluate how the CRADLE package can be embedded sustainably into routine clinical pathways. METHODS: CRADLE-5 is a stepped-wedge cluster-randomised controlled trial of the CRADLE intervention compared to routine maternity care across eight rural districts in Sierra Leone (Bonthe, Falaba, Karene, Kailahun, Koinadugu, Kono, Moyamba, Tonkolili). Each district will cross from control to intervention at six-weekly intervals over the course of 1 year (May 2022 to June 2023). All women identified as pregnant or within six-weeks postpartum presenting for maternity care in the district are included. Primary outcome data (composite rate of maternal death, stillbirth, eclampsia and emergency hysterectomy) will be collected. A mixed-methods process and scale-up evaluation (informed by Medical Research Council guidance for complex interventions and the World Health Organization ExpandNet tools) will explore implementation outcomes of fidelity, adoption, adaptation and scale-up outcomes of reach, maintenance, sustainability and integration. Mechanisms of change and contextual factors (barriers and facilitators) will be assessed. A concurrent cost-effectiveness analysis will be undertaken. DISCUSSION: International guidance recommends that all pregnant and postpartum women have regular blood pressure assessment, and healthcare staff are adequately trained to respond to abnormalities. Clinical effectiveness to improve maternal and perinatal health in more rural areas, and ease of integration and sustainability of the CRADLE intervention at scale has yet to be investigated. This trial will explore whether national scale-up of the CRADLE intervention reduces maternal and fetal mortality and severe maternal adverse outcomes and understand the strategies for adoption, integration and sustainability in low-resource settings. If successful, the aim is to develop an adaptable, evidence-based scale-up roadmap to improve maternal and infant outcomes. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ISRCTN 94429427. Registered on 20 April 2022.

Project20: Maternity care mechanisms that improve (or exacerbate) health inequalities. A realist evaluation.

BACKGROUND: Women with low socioeconomic status and social risk factors are at a disproportionate risk of poor birth outcomes and experiences of maternity care. Specialist models of maternity care that offer continuity are known to improve outcomes but underlying mechanisms are not well understood. AIM: To evaluate two UK specialist models of care that provide continuity to women with social risk factors and identify specific mechanisms that reduce, or exacerbate, health inequalities. METHODS: Realist informed interviews were undertaken throughout pregnancy and the postnatal period with 20 women with social risk factors who experienced a specialist model of care. FINDINGS: Experiences of stigma, discrimination and paternalistic care were reported when women were not in the presence of a known midwife during care episodes. Practical and emotional support, and evidence-based information offered by a known midwife improved disclosure of social risk factors, eased perceptions of surveillance and enabled active participation. Continuity of care offered reduced women's anxiety, enabled the development of a supportive network and improved women's ability to seek timely help. Women described how specialist model midwives knew their medical and social history and how this improved safety. Care set in the community by a team of six known midwives appeared to enhance these benefits. CONCLUSION: The identification of specific maternity care mechanisms supports current policy initiatives to scale up continuity models and will be useful in future evaluation of services for marginalised groups. However, the specialist models of care cannot overcome all inequalities without improvements in the maternity system as a whole.

Project20: interpreter services for pregnant women with social risk factors in England: what works, for whom, in what circumstances, and how?

BACKGROUND: Black and minority ethnic women and those with social risk factors such as deprivation, refugee and asylum seeker status, homelessness, mental health issues and domestic violence are at a disproportionate risk of poor birth outcomes. Language barriers further exacerbate this risk, with women struggling to access, engage with maternity services and communicate concerns to healthcare professionals. To address the language barrier, many UK maternity services offer telephone interpreter services. This study explores whether or not women with social risk factors find these interpreter services acceptable, accessible and safe, and to suggest solutions to address challenges. METHODS: Realist methodology was used to refine previously constructed programme theories about how women with language barriers access and experience interpreter services during their maternity care. Twenty-one longitudinal interviews were undertaken during pregnancy and the postnatal period with eight non-English speaking women and their family members. Interviews were analysed using thematic framework analysis to confirm, refute or refine the programme theories and identify specific contexts, mechanisms and outcomes relating to interpreter services. RESULTS: Women with language barriers described difficulties accessing maternity services, a lack of choice of interpreter, suspicion around the level of confidentiality interpreter services provide, and questioned how well professional interpreters were able to interpret what they were trying to relay to the healthcare professional during appointments. This resulted in many women preferring to use a known and trusted family member or friend to interpret for them where possible. Their insights provide detailed insight into how poor-quality interpreter services impact on their ability to disclose risk factors and communicate concerns effectively with their healthcare providers. A refined programme theory puts forward mechanisms to improve their experiences and safety such as regulated, high-quality interpreter services throughout their maternity care, in which women have choice, trust and confidence. CONCLUSIONS: The findings of this study contribute to concerns highlighted in previous literature around interpreter services in the wider healthcare arena, particularly around the lack of regulation and access to high-quality interpretation. This is thought to have a significant effect on pregnant women who are living socially complex lives as they are not able to communicate their concerns and access support. This not only impacts on their safety and pregnancy outcomes, but also their wider holistic needs. The refined program theory developed in this study offers insights into the mechanisms of equitable access to appropriate interpreter services for pregnant women with language barriers.

Comparative case studies in integrated care implementation from across the globe: a quest for action.

BACKGROUND: Integrated care is the coordination of general and behavioral health and is a highly promising and practical approach to improving healthcare delivery and patient outcomes. While there is growing interest and investment in integrated care implementation internationally, there are no formal guidelines for integrated care implementation applicable to diverse healthcare systems. Furthermore, there is a complex interplay of factors at multiple levels of influence that are necessary for successful implementation of integrated care in health systems. METHODS: Guided by the Exploration, Preparation, Implementation, Sustainment (EPIS) framework (Aarons et al., 2011), a multiple case study design was used to address two research objectives: 1) To highlight current integrated care implementation efforts through seven international case studies that target a range of healthcare systems, patient populations and implementation strategies and outcomes, and 2) To synthesize the shared and unique challenges and successes across studies using the EPIS framework. RESULTS: The seven reported case studies represent integrated care implementation efforts from five countries and continents (United States, United Kingdom, Vietnam, Israel, and Nigeria), target a range of clinical populations and care settings, and span all phases of the EPIS framework. Qualitative synthesis of these case studies illuminated common outer context, inner context, bridging and innovation factors that were key drivers of implementation. CONCLUSIONS: We propose an agenda that outlines priority goals and related strategies to advance integrated care implementation research. These goals relate to: 1) the role of funding at multiple levels of implementation, 2) meaningful collaboration with stakeholders across phases of implementation and 3) clear communication to stakeholders about integrated care implementation. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Not applicable.