Learning by doing in practice: a roundtable discussion about stakeholder engagement in implementation research.

BACKGROUND: Researchers and policy-makers alike increasingly recognise the importance of engaging diverse perspectives in implementation research. This roundtable discussion presents the experiences and perspectives of three decision-makers regarding the benefits and challenges of their engagement in implementation research. DISCUSSION: The first perspective comes from a rural district medical officer from Uganda and touches on the success of using data as evidence in a low-resource setting. The second perspective is from an Afghani Ministry of Health expert who used a community-based approach to improving healthcare services in remote regions. Finally, the third perspective highlights the successes and trials of a policy-maker from India who offers advice on how to grow the relationship between decision-makers and researchers. Overall, the stakeholders in this roundtable discussion saw important benefits to their engagement in research. In order to facilitate greater engagement in the future, they advise on closer dialogue between researchers and policy-makers and supporting the development of capacity to stimulate and facilitate engagement in research and the use of evidence in decision-making.

Participatory monitoring and evaluation approaches that influence decision-making: lessons from a maternal and newborn study in Eastern Uganda.

BACKGROUND: The use of participatory monitoring and evaluation (M&E) approaches is important for guiding local decision-making, promoting the implementation of effective interventions and addressing emerging issues in the course of implementation. In this article, we explore how participatory M&E approaches helped to identify key design and implementation issues and how they influenced stakeholders' decision-making in eastern Uganda. METHOD: The data for this paper is drawn from a retrospective reflection of various M&E approaches used in a maternal and newborn health project that was implemented in three districts in eastern Uganda. The methods included qualitative and quantitative M&E techniques such as  key informant interviews, formal surveys and supportive supervision, as well as participatory approaches, notably participatory impact pathway analysis. RESULTS: At the design stage, the M&E approaches were useful for identifying key local problems and feasible local solutions and informing the activities that were subsequently implemented. During the implementation phase, the M&E approaches provided evidence that informed decision-making and helped identify emerging issues, such as weak implementation by some village health teams, health facility constraints such as poor use of standard guidelines, lack of placenta disposal pits, inadequate fuel for the ambulance at some facilities, and poor care for low birth weight infants. Sharing this information with key stakeholders prompted them to take appropriate actions. For example, the sub-county leadership constructed placenta disposal pits, the district health officer provided fuel for ambulances, and health workers received refresher training and mentorship on how to care for newborns. CONCLUSION: Diverse sources of information and perspectives can help researchers and decision-makers understand and adapt evidence to contexts for more effective interventions. Supporting districts to have crosscutting, routine information generating and sharing platforms that bring together stakeholders from different sectors is therefore crucial for the successful implementation of complex development interventions.

Effect of a participatory multisectoral maternal and newborn intervention on maternal health service utilization and newborn care practices: a quasi-experimental study in three rural Ugandan districts.

BACKGROUND: The MANIFEST study in eastern Uganda employed a participatory multisectoral approach to reduce barriers to access to maternal and newborn care services. OBJECTIVES: This study analyses the effect of the intervention on the utilization of maternal and newborn services and care practices. METHODS: The quasi-experimental pre- and post-comparison design had two main components: community mobilization and empowerment, and health provider capacity building. The primary outcomes were utilization of antenatal care (ANC), delivery and postnatal care, and newborn care practices. Baseline (n = 2237) and endline (n = 1946) data were collected from women of reproductive age. The  data was analysed using difference in differences (DiD) analysis and  logistic regression. RESULTS: The DiD results revealed an 8% difference in early ANC attendance (p < 0.01) and facility delivery (p < 0.01). Facility delivery increased from 66% to 73% in the intervention area, but remained unchanged in the comparison area (64% vs 63%, p < 0.01). The DiD results also demonstrated a 20% difference in clean cord care (p < 0.001) and an 8% difference in delayed bathing (p < 0.001). The intervention elements that predicted facility delivery were attending ANC four times [adjusted odds ratio (aOR) 1.42, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.17-1.74] and saving for maternal health (aOR 2.11, 95% CI 1.39-3.21). Facility delivery and village health team (VHT) home visits were key predictors for clean cord care and skin-to-skin care. CONCLUSIONS: The multisectoral approach had positive effects on early ANC attendance, facility deliveries and newborn care practices. Community resources such as VHTs and savings are crucial to maternal and newborn outcomes and should be supported. VHT-led health education should incorporate practical measures that enable families to save and access transport services to enhance adequate preparation for birth.