Perspectives of stakeholders regarding the value of maternal and newborn health interventions and practices supported by UNICEF and other partners in the West Nile region of Uganda: a qualitative study.

INTRODUCTION: Uganda has high maternal, neonatal, and under-five mortality rates. This study documents stakeholder perspectives on best practices in a maternal and newborn health (MNH) quality-improvement programme implemented in the West Nile region of Uganda to improve delivery and utilisation of MNH services. METHODS: This exploratory cross-sectional qualitative study, conducted at the end of 2021, captured the perspectives of stakeholders representing the different levels of the healthcare system. Data were collected in four districts through: interviews with key informants working at all levels of the health system; focus group discussions with parents and caretakers and with community health workers; and interviews with individual community members whose lives had been impacted by the MNH programme. The initial content analysis was followed by a deductive synthesis pitched according to the different levels of the health system and the health-systems building blocks. RESULTS: The findings are summarised according to the health-systems building blocks and an account is given of three of the interventions most valued by participants: (1) data use for evidence-based decision making (with regard to human resources, essential reproductive health commodities, and financing); (2) establishment of special newborn care units and high-dependency maternity units at district hospitals and training of the health workforce (also with reference to other infrastructural improvements such as the provision of water, sanitation and hygiene facilities at health facilities); and (3) community referral of pregnant women through a commercial motorcycle voucher referral system. CONCLUSION: The MNH programme in the West Nile region adopted a holistic and system-wide approach to addressing the key bottlenecks in the planning, delivery, and monitoring of quality MNH services. There was general stakeholder appreciation across the board that the interventions had the potential to improve quality of care and newborn and maternal health outcomes. However, as the funding was largely donor-driven, questions about government ownership and sustainability in the context of limited resources remain.

Implementing the WHO integrated tool to assess quality of care for mothers, newborns and children: results and lessons learnt from five districts in Malawi.

BACKGROUND: In 2014 the World Health Organization (WHO) developed a new tool to be used to assess the quality of care for mothers, newborns and children provided at healthcare facility level. This paper reports on the feasibility of using the tool, its limitations and strengths. METHODS: Across 5 districts in Malawi, 35 healthcare facilities were assessed. The WHO tool includes checklists, interviews and observation of case management by which care is assessed against agreed standards using a Likert scale (1 lowest: not meeting standard, 5 highest: compliant with standard). Descriptive statistics were used to provide summary scores for each standard. A 'dashboard' system was developed to display the results. RESULTS: For maternal care three areas met standards; 1) supportive care for admitted patients (71% of healthcare facilities scored 4 or 5); 2) prevention and management of infections during pregnancy (71% scored 4 or 5); and 3) management of unsatisfactory progress of labour (84% scored 4 or 5). Availability of essential equipment and supplies was noted to be a critical barrier to achieving satisfactory standards of paediatric care (mean score; standard deviation: 2.9; SD 0.95) and child care (2.7; SD 1.1). Infection control is inadequate across all districts for maternal, newborn and paediatric care. Quality of care varies across districts with a mean (SD) score for all standards combined of 3 (SD 0.19) for the worst performing district and 4 (SD 0.27) for the best. The best performing district has an average score of 4 (SD 0.27). Hospitals had good scores for overall infrastructure, essential drugs, organisation of care and management of preterm labour. However, health centres were better at case management of HIV/AIDS patients and follow-up of sick children. CONCLUSIONS: There is a need to develop an expanded framework of standards which is inclusive of all areas of care. In addition, it is important to ensure structure, process and outcomes of health care are reflected.