ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Person-centered quality for family planning has been gaining increased attention, yet few interventions have focused on this, or measured associations between person-centered quality for family planning and family planning outcomes (uptake, continuation, etc.). In India, the first point of contact for family planning is often the community health care worker, in this case, Accredited Social Health Activists (ASHAs). METHODS: In this study, we evaluate a training on person-centered family planning as an add-on to a training on family planning provision for urban ASHAs in Varanasi, India in 2019 using mixed methods. We first validate a scale to measure person-centered family planning in a community health worker population and find it to be valid. Higher person-centered family planning scores are associated with family planning uptake. RESULTS: Comparing women who saw intervention compared to control ASHAs, we find that the intervention had no impact on overall person-centered family planning scores. Women in the intervention arm were more likely to report that their ASHA had a strong preference about what method they choose, suggesting that the training increased provider pressure. However, qualitative interviews with ASHAs suggest that they value person-centered care for their interactions and absorbed the messages from the intervention. CONCLUSIONS: More research is needed on how to intervene to change behaviors related to person-centered family planning. TRIAL REGISTRATION: This study received IRB approval from the University of California, San Francisco (IRB # 15-25,950) and was retrospectively registered at clinicaltrials.gov ( NCT04206527 ).
Subject(s)
Community Health Workers , Family Planning Services , Female , Humans , IndiaABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Poor patient experiences during delivery in Uttar Pradesh, India is a common problem. It delays presentation at facilities after the onset of labor and contributes to poor maternal health outcomes. Patient-centered maternity care (PCMC) is recognized by the World Health Organization as critical to overall quality. Changing PCMC requires changing the process of care, and is therefore especially challenging. METHODS: We used a matched case-control design to evaluate a quality improvement process directed at PCMC and based on widely established team-based methods used in many OECD countries. The intervention was introduced into three government facilities and teams supported to brainstorm and test improvements over 12 months. Progress was measured through pre-post interviews with new mothers, scored using a validated PCMC scale. Analysis included chi-squared and difference-in-difference tests. FINDINGS: On a scale to 100, the PCMC score of the intervention group increased 22.9 points compared to controls. Deliveries attended by midwives, dais, ASHAs or non-skilled providers resulted in significantly higher PCMC scores than those attended to by nurses or doctors. The intervention was associated with one additional visit from a doctor and over two additional visits from nurses per day, compared to the control group. INTERPRETATION: This study has demonstrated the effectiveness of a team-based quality improvement intervention to ameliorate women's childbirth experiences. These improvements were locally designed and led, and offer a model for potential replication.