Educating Families on Urgent Maternal Warning Signs: Learning From a Pilot to Improve Training and Tools for Maternal and Child Home Visiting Programs.

Early recognition of the warning signs of pregnancy-related complications and provision of timely, quality care could prevent many maternal deaths. We piloted a maternal warning signs education intervention with five Maryland-based maternal, infant, and early childhood home visiting programs serving populations disproportionately affected by adverse maternal outcomes. The intervention included a 1.5-hr online training for home visitors, monthly collaborative calls with program managers, and a client education toolkit with a 3-min video, illustrated handout of 15 urgent maternal warning signs, magnet with the same, and discussion guide for home visitor-client interactions. A mixed-methods formative evaluation assessed the acceptability, feasibility, and utilization of different components of the intervention. Home visiting program staff reported that the materials were highly acceptable and easily understood by diverse client populations. They valued the illustrations, simple language, and translation of materials in multiple languages. Program managers found implementation a relatively simple process, feasible for in-person and remote visits. Despite positive reception, not all components of the toolkit were used consistently. Program managers and staff also identified the need for more guidance and tools to help clients communicate with health care providers and advocate for their health care needs. Feedback from pilot sites was used to adapt the training and tools, including adding content on patient self-advocacy. Home visiting programs have a unique ability to engage families during pregnancy and the postpartum period. This pilot offers lessons learned on strategies and tools that home visiting programs can use to improve early recognition and care-seeking for urgent maternal warning signs.

Understanding variation in person-centered maternity care: Results from a household survey of postpartum women in 6 regions of Ethiopia.

BACKGROUND: Effective communication, respect and dignity, and emotional support are critical for a positive childbirth experience that is responsive to the needs and preferences of women. OBJECTIVE: This study evaluated the performance of a person-centered maternity care scale in a large, representative household sample of postpartum women, and it describes differences in person-centered maternity care across individuals and communities in Ethiopia. STUDY DESIGN: The study used data from 2019 and 2020 from a representative sample of postpartum women in 6 regions of Ethiopia. It measured person-centered maternity care using a scale previously validated in other settings. To assess the scale validity in Ethiopia, we conducted cognitive interviews, measured internal consistency, and evaluated construct validity. Then, we fit univariable and multivariable linear regression models to test for differences in mean person-centered maternity care scores by individual and community characteristics. Lastly, multilevel modeling separated variance in person-centered maternity care scores within and between communities. RESULTS: Effective communication and support of women's autonomy scored lowest among person-centered maternity care domains. Of 1575 respondents, 704 (44.7%) were never asked their permission before examinations and most said that providers rarely (n=369; 23.4%) or never (n=633; 40.2%) explained why procedures were done. Person-centered maternity care was significantly higher for women with greater wealth, more formal education, and those aged >20 years. Variation in person-centered maternity care scores between individuals within the same community (τ2=58.3) was nearly 3 times greater than variation between communities (σ2=21.2). CONCLUSION: Ethiopian women reported widely varying maternity care experiences, with individuals residing within the same community reporting large differences in how they were treated by providers. Poor patient-provider communication and inadequate support of women's autonomy contributed most to poor person-centered maternity care.

Assessing the neonatal health policy landscape in low- and middle-income countries: Findings from the 2018 WHO SRMNCAH policy survey.

Background: We aimed to describe the availability of newborn health policies across the continuum of care in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) and to assess the relationship between the availability of newborn health policies and their achievement of global Sustainable Development Goal and Every Newborn Action Plan (ENAP) neonatal mortality and stillbirth rate targets in 2019. Methods: We used data from World Health Organization's 2018-2019 sexual, reproductive, maternal, newborn, child and adolescent health (SRMNCAH) Policy Survey and extracted key newborn health service delivery and cross-cutting health systems policies that align with the WHO health system building blocks. We constructed composite measures to represent packages of newborn health policies for five components along the continuum of care: antenatal care (ANC), childbirth, postnatal care (PNC), essential newborn care (ENC), and management of small and sick newborns (SSNB). We used descriptive analyses to present the differences in the availability of newborn health service delivery policies by World Bank income group in 113 LMICs. We employed logistic regression analysis to assess the relationship between the availability of each composite newborn health policy package and achievement of global neonatal mortality and stillbirth rate targets by 2019. Results: In 2018, most LMICs had existing policies regarding newborn health across the continuum of care. However, policy specifications varied widely. While the availability of the ANC, childbirth, PNC, and ENC policy packages was not associated with having achieved global NMR targets by 2019, LMICs with existing policy packages on the management of SSNB were 4.4 times more likely to have reached the global NMR target (adjusted odds ratio (aOR) = 4.40; 95% confidence interval (CI) = 1.09-17.79) after controlling for income group and supporting health systems policies. Conclusions: Given the current trajectory of neonatal mortality in LMICs, there is a dire need for supportive health systems and policy environments for newborn health across the continuum of care. Adoption and implementation of evidence-informed newborn health policies will be a crucial step in putting LMICs on track to meet global newborn and stillbirth targets by 2030.

Maternal health policy environment and the relationship with service utilization in low- and middle-income countries.

Background: The extent to which a favorable policy environment influences health care utilization and outcomes for pregnant and postpartum women is largely unknown. In this study, we aimed to describe the maternal health policy environment and examines its relationship with maternal health service utilization in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs). Methods: We used data from World Health Organization's 2018-2019 sexual, reproductive, maternal, newborn, child, and adolescent health (SRMNCAH) policy survey linked with key contextual variables from global databases, as well as UNICEF data on antenatal care (ANC), institutional delivery, and postnatal care (PNC) utilization in 113 LIMCs. We grouped maternal health policy indicators into four categories - national supportive structures and standards, service access, clinical guidelines, and reporting and review systems. For each category and overall, we calculated summative scores accounting for available policy indicators in each country. We explored variations of policy indicators by World Bank income group using χ2 tests and fitted logistic regression models for ≥85% coverage for each of four or more antenatal care visits (ANC4+), institutional delivery, PNC for the mothers, and for all ANC4+, institutional delivery, and PNC for mothers, adjusting for policy scores and contextual variables. Results: The average scores for the four policy categories were as follows: 3 for national supportive structures and standards (score range = 0-4), 5.5 for service access (score range = 0-7), 6. for clinical guidelines (score range = 0-10), and 5.7 for reporting and review systems (score range = 0-7), for an average total policy score of 21.1 (score range = 0-28) across LMICs. After adjusting for country context variables, for each unit increase in the maternal health policy score, the odds of ANC4+>85% increased by 37% (95% confidence interval (CI) = 1.13-1.64) and the odds of all ANC4+, institutional deliveries and PNC>85% by 31% (95% CI = 1.07-1.60). Conclusions: Despite the availability of supportive structures and free maternity service access policies, there is a dire need for stronger policy support for clinical guidelines and practice regulations, as well as national reporting and review systems for maternal health. A more favorable policy environment for maternal health can improve adoption of evidence-based interventions and increase utilization of maternal health services in LMICs.

Changes in the health systems and policy environment for maternal and newborn health, 2008-2018: An analysis of data from 78 low-income and middle-income countries.

BACKGROUND: Political, social, economic, and health system determinants play an important role in creating an enabling environment for maternal and newborn health. This study assesses changes in health systems and policy indicators for maternal and newborn health across 78 low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) during 2008-2018, and examines contextual factors associated with policy adoption and systems changes. METHODS: We compiled historical data from WHO, ILO, and UNICEF surveys and databases to track changes in ten maternal and newborn health systems and policy indicators prioritized for tracking by global partnerships. Logistic regression was used to examine the odds of systems and policy change based on indicators of economic growth, gender equality, and country governance with available data from 2008 to 2018. RESULTS: From 2008 to 2018, many LMICs (44/76; 57·9%) substantially strengthened systems and policies for maternal and newborn health. The most frequently adopted policies were national guidelines for kangaroo mother care, national guidelines for use of antenatal corticosteroids, national policies for maternal death notification and review, and the introduction of priority medicines in Essential Medicines Lists. The odds of policy adoption and systems investments were significantly greater in countries that experienced economic growth, had strong female labor participation, and had strong country governance (all p < 0·05). CONCLUSIONS: The widespread adoption of priority policies over the past decade is a notable step in creating an environment supportive for maternal and newborn health, but continued leadership and resources are needed to ensure robust implementation that translates into improved health outcomes.

Statewide Perinatal Quality Improvement, Teamwork, and Communication Activities in Oklahoma and Texas.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to describe statewide perinatal quality improvement (QI) activities, specifically implementation of Alliance for Innovation on Maternal Health (AIM) patient safety bundles and use of teamwork and communication tools in obstetric units in Oklahoma and Texas. METHODS: In January-February 2020, we conducted a survey of AIM-enrolled hospitals in Oklahoma (n = 35) and Texas (n = 120) to gather data on obstetric unit organization and QI processes. Data were linked to hospital characteristics information from the 2019 American Hospital Association survey and hospitals' maternity levels of care from state agencies. We generated descriptive statistics for each state and created an index to summarize adoption of QI processes. We fitted linear regression models to examine how this index varied by hospital characteristics and self-reported ratings for patient safety and AIM bundle implementation. RESULTS: Most obstetric units had standardized clinical processes for obstetric hemorrhage (94% Oklahoma; 97% Texas), massive transfusion (94% Oklahoma; 97% Texas), and severe hypertension in pregnancy (97% Oklahoma; 80% Texas); regularly conducted simulation drills for obstetric emergencies (89% Oklahoma; 92% Texas); had multidisciplinary QI committees (61% Oklahoma; 83% Texas); and conducted debriefs after major obstetric complications (45% Oklahoma; 86% Texas). Few obstetric units offered recent staff training on teamwork and communication to their staff (6% Oklahoma; 22% Texas); those who did were more likely to employ specific strategies to facilitate communication, escalate concerns, and manage staff conflicts. Overall, adoption of QI processes was significantly higher in hospitals in urban than rural areas, teaching than nonteaching, offering higher levels of maternity care, with more staff per shift, and greater delivery volume (all P < .05). The QI adoption index scores were strongly associated with respondents' ratings for patient safety and implementation of maternal safety bundles (both P < .001). CONCLUSIONS: Adoption of QI processes varies across obstetric units in Oklahoma and Texas, with implications for implementing future perinatal QI initiatives. Notably, findings highlight the need to reinforce support for rural obstetric units, which often face greater barriers to implementing patient safety and QI processes than urban units.

Measuring facility readiness to provide childbirth care: a comparison of indices using data from a health facility survey in Ethiopia.

BACKGROUND: Actionable information about the readiness of health facilities is needed to inform quality improvement efforts in maternity care, but there is no consensus on the best approach to measure readiness. Many countries use the WHO's Service Availability and Readiness Assessment (SARA) or the Demographic and Health Survey (DHS) Programme's Service Provision Assessment to measure facility readiness. This study compares measures of childbirth service readiness based on SARA and DHS guidance to an index based on WHO's quality of maternal and newborn care standards. METHODS: We used cross-sectional data from Performance Monitoring for Action Ethiopia's 2019 survey of 406 health facilities providing childbirth services. We calculated childbirth service readiness scores using items based on SARA, DHS and WHO standards. For each, we used three aggregation methods for generating indices: simple addition, domain-weighted addition and principal components analysis. We compared central tendency, spread and item variation between the readiness indices; concordance between health facility scores and rankings; and correlations between readiness scores and delivery volume. RESULTS: Indices showed moderate agreement with one another, and all had a small but significant positive correlation with monthly delivery volume. Ties were more frequent for indices with fewer items. More than two-thirds of items in the relatively shorter SARA and DHS indices were widely (>90%) available in hospitals, and half of the SARA items were widely (>90%) available in health centres/clinics. Items based on the WHO standards showed greater variation and captured unique aspects of readiness (eg, quality improvement processes, actionable information systems) not included in either the SARA or DHS indices. CONCLUSION: SARA and DHS indices rely on a small set of widely available items to assess facility readiness to provide childbirth care. Expanded selection of items based on the WHO standards can better differentiate between levels of service readiness.

Assessing Barriers to Effective Coverage of Health Services for Adolescents in Low- and Middle-Income Countries: A Scoping Review.

PURPOSE: Understanding barriers to health services, as experienced by adolescents, is important to expand effective and equitable coverage; however, there is limited discussion on methods for conducting barrier assessments and translating findings into action. METHODS: We conducted a scoping review of literature published between 2005 and 2019 on barriers to health services for adolescents in low- and middle-income countries. The review was guided by a framework that conceptualized barriers across multiple dimensions of access (availability, geographic accessibility, affordability, and acceptability), utilization, and effective coverage. RESULTS: We identified 339 studies that assessed barriers related to at least one dimension of the operational framework. Acceptability (93%) and availability (88%) of health services were the most frequently studied access dimensions; affordability (45%) and geographic access (32%) were studied less frequently. Less than half (40%) of the studies evaluated utilization, and none of the 339 studies assessed effective coverage. Attention to equity stratifiers (e.g., income, disability) was limited. Topics studied reflected only a subset of the major causes of adolescent death and disability. CONCLUSIONS: Holistic, equity-oriented approaches are needed to better understand barriers across multiple dimensions that together determine whether health services are accessible, used, and effectively meet the needs of different adolescent groups.