Developing and validating an abortion care quality metric for facility and out-of-facility settings: an observational cohort study in Bangladesh, Ethiopia, and Nigeria.

Background: Despite progress in assuring provision of safe abortion, substantial disparities remain in quality of abortion care around the world. However, no consistent, valid, reliable method exists to routinely measure quality in abortion care across facility and out-of-facility settings, impeding learning and improvement. To address this need, the Abortion Service Quality Initiative developed the first global standard for measuring quality of abortion care in low-income and middle-income countries. Methods: This prospective cohort study was conducted in Bangladesh, Ethiopia, and Nigeria in 2020-2022. Participants included sites and providers offering abortion care, including health facilities, pharmacies, proprietary and patent medicine vendors (PPMVs), and hotlines, and clients aged 15-49 receiving abortion care from a selected site. 111 structure and process indicators were tested, which originated from a review of existing abortion quality indicators and from qualitative research to develop additional client-centred quality indicators. The indicators were tested against 12 clinical and client experience outcomes at the site-level (such as abortion-related deaths) and client-level (such as whether the client would recommend the service to a friend) that were expected to result from the abortion quality indicators. Indicators were selected for the final metric based on predictive validity assessed using Bayesian models to test associations between indicators and outcomes, content validity, and performance. Findings: We included 1915 abortion clients recruited from 131 sites offering abortion care across the three countries. Among the 111 indicators tested, 44 were associated with outcomes in Bayesian analyses and an additional 8 were recommended for inclusion by the study's Resource Group for face validity. These 52 indicators were evaluated on content validity, predictive validity, and performance, and 29 validated indicators were included in the final abortion care quality metric. The 29 validated indicators were feasibility tested among 53 clients and 24 providers from 9 facility sites in Ethiopia and 57 clients and 6 PPMVs from 9 PPMV sites in Nigeria. The median time required to complete each survey instrument indicated feasibility: 10 min to complete the client exit survey, 16 min to complete the provider survey, and 11 min to complete the site checklist. Overall, the indicators performed well. However, all providers in the feasibility test failed two indicators of provider knowledge to competently complete the abortion procedure, and these indicators were subsequently revised to improve performance. Interpretation: This study provides 29 validated abortion care quality indicators to assess quality in facility, pharmacy, and hotline settings in low-income and middle-income countries. Future research should validate the Abortion Care Quality (ACQ) Tool in additional abortion care settings, such as telemedicine, online medication abortion (MA) sellers, and traditional abortion providers, and in other geographical and legal settings. Funding: The David and Lucile Packard Foundation and the Children's Investment Fund Foundation.

Toward a Standard Measure of Abortion Service Quality-A Stakeholder First Approach.

Measurement of the quality of abortion services is essential to service improvement. Currently, its measurement is not standardized, and some of the tools which exist are very long, and may deter use. To address this issue, this study describes a process used to create a new, more concise measure of abortion care quality, which was done with the end users in mind. Using a collaborative approach and engaging numerous stakeholders, we developed an approach to defining and selecting a set of indicators, to be tested against abortion outcomes of interest. Indicators were solicited from 12 abortion service provision entities, cataloged, and grouped within a theoretical framework. A resource group of over 40 participants was engaged through surveys, webinars, and one in-person meeting to provide input in prioritizing the indicators. We began with a list of over 1,000 measures, and engaged stakeholders to reduce the list to 72 indicators for testing. These indicators were supplemented with an additional 39 indicators drawn from qualitative research with clients, in order to ensure the client perspective is well represented. The selected indicators can be applied in pharmacies, facilities, or with hotlines, and for clients of surgical or medical abortion services in all countries. To ensure that the final suggested measures are most impactful for service providers, indicators will be tested against outcomes from 2,000 abortion clients in three countries. Those indicators which are well correlated with outcomes will be prioritized.

Exploring and Monitoring Privacy, Confidentiality, and Provider Bias in Sexual and Reproductive Health Service Provision to Young People: A Narrative Review.

PURPOSE: Poor privacy and confidentiality practices and provider bias are believed to compromise adolescent and young adult sexual and reproductive health service quality. The results of focus group discussions with global youth leaders and sexual and reproductive health implementing organizations indicated that poor privacy and confidentiality practices and provider bias serve as key barriers to care access for the youth. METHODS: A narrative review was conducted to describe how poor privacy and confidentiality practices and provider bias impose barriers on young people seeking sexual and reproductive health services and to examine how point of service evaluations have assessed these factors. RESULTS: 4544 peer-reviewed publications were screened, of which 95 met the inclusion criteria. To these articles, another 16 grey literature documents were included, resulting in a total of 111 documents included in the review. CONCLUSION: Poor privacy and confidentiality practices and provider bias represent significant barriers for young people seeking sexual and reproductive health services across diverse geographic and sociocultural contexts. The authors found that present evaluation methods do not appropriately account for the importance of these factors and that new performance improvement indicators are needed.

Recognizing and mediating bureaucratic barriers: increasing access to care through small and medium-sized private providers in Kenya.

Background: Equitable access to health services can be constrained in countries where private practitioners make up a large portion of primary care providers, making affordability a challenge. Expanding purchasing arrangements in many countries has helped integrate private providers into government-supported payment schemes and reduced financial barriers to care. However, private providers often must go through an onerous accreditation process to enroll in government-supported financing arrangements. The difficulties of this process can be exacerbated where health policy is changed often and low-level bureaucrats must navigate these shifts at their own discretion, effectively re-interpreting or re-making policy in practice. This paper analyzes one initiative to increase private provider accreditation with social health insurance (SHI) in Kenya by creating an intermediary between providers and SHI officials. Methods: This paper draws on 126 semi-structured interviews about SHI accreditation experience with private providers who were members of a franchise network in Kenya. It also draws on four focus group discussions conducted with franchise representatives who provided accreditation support to the providers and served as liaisons between the franchised providers and local SHI offices. There was a total of 20 participants across all four focus groups. Results: In a regulatory environment where regulations are weak and impermanent, officials created an accreditation process that was inconsistent and opaque: applying rules unevenly, requesting bribes, and minimizing communication with providers. The support provided by the implementing organizations clarified rules, reduced the power of local bureaucrats to apply regulations at their own discretion, gave providers greater confidence in the system, and helped to standardize the accreditation process. Conclusions: We conclude that intermediary organizations can mitigate institutional weaknesses, reduce barriers to effective care expansion caused by street-level bureaucrats, and facilitate the adoption of systems which reduce rent-seeking practices that might otherwise delay or derail initiatives to reach universal health coverage.

Providers preferences towards greater patient health benefit is associated with higher quality of care.

Standard theories of health provider behavior suggest that providers are motivated by both profit and an altruistic interest in patient health benefit. Detailed empirical data are seldom available to measure relative preferences between profit and patient health outcomes. Furthermore, it is difficult to empirically assess how these relative preferences affect quality of care. This study uses a unique dataset from rural Myanmar to assess heterogeneous preferences toward treatment efficacy relative to provider profit and the impact of these preferences on the quality of provider diagnosis and treatment. Using conjoint survey data from 187 providers, we estimated the marginal utilities of higher treatment efficacy and of higher profit, and the marginal rate of substitution between these outcomes. We also measured the quality of diagnosis and treatment for malaria among these providers using a previously validated observed patient simulation. There is substantial heterogeneity in providers' utility from treatment efficacy versus utility from higher profits. Higher marginal utility from treatment efficacy is positively associated with the quality of treatment among providers, and higher marginal utility from profit are negatively associated with quality of diagnosis. We found no consistent effect of the ratio of marginal utility of efficacy vs marginal utility of profit on quality of care. Our findings suggest that providers vary in their preferences towards profit and treatment efficacy, with those providers that place greater weight on treatment efficacy providing higher quality of care.

Standard Survey Data: Insights Into Private Sector Utilization.

Universal Health Coverage in Low- and Middle-Income Countries is increasingly expanding through incorporation of private clinics, pharmacies, and hospitals into an overall health system funded in whole or part through government-managed health insurance. This underscores the importance of policies on health provision which apply across the whole delivery system regardless of ownership status. To advance understanding of private-sector policies, and to facilitate sharing of lessons across countries with similar public-private distributions, we have analyzed data on the source of inpatient and outpatient care from 65 countries. While past studies have conducted similar analysis, ours advances the field in two ways. First, we limit our analysis to data sets from 2010 through 2019, making our study more up-to-date than past studies, while changing health seeking patterns for maternal health since 2010 means that our data set is more representative of overall inpatient care. Second, while past multi-country analysis of public-private ownership have been based on the Demographic Health Surveys, we have added to this data from the Multiple Indicator Cluster Surveys, significantly increasing the countries in our analysis. We have aggregated our analysis by WHO's regions. Outside of the EURO region, where the private sector delivers just 4% of all healthcare services, the private sector remains significant, and in many countries represents more than half of all care. The private sector provides nearly 40% of all healthcare in PAHO, AFRO, and WPRO regions, 57% in SEARO, and 62% in EMRO. While specific countries with two recent surveys show variation in the scale of both inpatient and outpatient private provision, we did not find regional or global trends toward or away from private care within LMICs. Private inpatient care is most important for the wealthy in many countries; public vs. private care varies less, by wealth, for outpatient services.

The Provision of Private Healthcare Services in European Countries: Recent Data and Lessons for Universal Health Coverage in Other Settings.

Universal Health Coverage (UHC) exists in all of the countries of Europe, despite variation on the ownership structure of health delivery systems. As countries around the world seek to advance UHC and manage the private sector within their health systems, the European experiences can offer useful insights. We found four different models for the provision of healthcare, with the private sector predominant in some countries, and of minimal importance in others. The European experiences indicate that UHC can be effectively provided with, or without, large-scale private sector provision in hospital, specialty, and primary care services, and that moreover it can be provided with high levels of patient satisfaction. These findings offer regulatory models for countries in other regions to review as they advance UHC.

Can changes to improve person-centred maternity care be spread across public health facilities in Uttar Pradesh, India?

Poor quality person-centred maternity care (PCMC) leads to delays in care and adverse maternal and newborn outcomes. This study describes the impact of spreading a Change Package, or interventions that other health facilities had previously piloted and identified as successful, to improve PCMC in public health facilities in Uttar Pradesh, India. A quasi-experimental design was used including matched control-intervention facilities and pre-post data collection. This study took place in Uttar Pradesh, India in 2018-2019. Six large public health facilities participated in the evaluation of the spread study, including three intervention and three control facilities. Intervention facilities were introduced to a quality improvement (QI) Change Package to improve PCMC. In total, 1200 women participated in the study, including 600 women at baseline and 600 women at endline. Difference-in-difference estimators are used to examine the impact of spreading a QI Change Package across spread sites vs. control sites and at baseline and endline using a validated PCMC scale. Out of a 100-point scale, a 24.93 point improvement was observed in overall PCMC scores among spread facilities compared to control facilities from baseline to endline (95% CI: 22.29, 27.56). For the eight PCMC indicators that the Change Package targeted, spread facilities increased 33.86 points (95% CI: 30.91, 36.81) relative to control facilities across survey rounds. Findings suggest that spread of a PCMC Change Package results in improved experiences of care for women as well as secondary outcomes, including clinical quality, nurse and doctor visits, and decreases in delivery problems.Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT04208841..

A comparison of intensive vs. light-touch quality improvement interventions for maternal health in Uttar Pradesh, India.

BACKGROUND: Poor patient experiences during delivery leads to delayed presentation at facilities and contributes to poor maternal health outcomes. Person-centered maternity care (PCMC) is a key component of quality. Improving PCMC requires changing the process of care which can be complex and necessitate significant external input, making replication and scale difficult. This study compares the effectiveness two Quality Improvement (QI) intervention phases, one Intensive, one Light-Touch. METHODS: We use a matched case-control design to compare two phases of a QI Intervention targeting PCMC, with three facilities in each. The Intensive phase was introduced into three government facilities where teams were supported to identify, design, and test potential improvements over 12 months. The Light-Touch phase was subsequently introduced in three other government facilities and changes were tracked over six months. We compared the two groups using multivariate linear regression and difference-in-difference models to assess changes in PCMC outcome RESULTS: Both Intensive and Light-Touch arms demonstrated large improvements in PCMC. On a scale from 0 to 100, Intensive facilities increased in PCMC scores from 85.02 to 97.13, while Light-Touch facilities increased from 63.42 to 87.47. For both there was a 'halo' effect, with a similar improvement recorded for the specific improvement activities focused on, as w ell as aspects of PCMC not directly addressed. CONCLUSIONS: This study demonstrates that a short, inexpensive, light-touch and directive intervention can change staff practices and significantly improve the experiences of women during childbirth. It also shows that improvements in a few areas of provider-patient interaction have a 'halo' effect, changing many other aspects of patient-provider interaction at the same time. TRIAL REGISTRATION: QI Phase 1 - NCT04208867 . Retrospectively registered. December 19th, 2019. QI Phase 2 - NCT04208841 . Retrospectively registered. December 23, 2019.

Results of a person-centered maternal health quality improvement intervention in Uttar Pradesh, India.

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.