8 research outputs found

    Measuring adequacy of the midwifery workforce using standards of competency and scope of work: Exploring the density and distribution of midwives in three low- and middle-income countries using cross-sectional and geospatial data.

    No full text
    BackgroundA global midwifery shortage hampers the goal of ending preventable maternal/newborn mortality and stillbirths. Whether current measures of midwifery workforce adequacy are valid is unknown. We compare two measures of density and distribution of midwifery professionals to assess their consistency, and explore how incorporating midwifery scope, competency, and the adjusting reference population impacts this critical metric.Methods and findingsWe collected a census of midwives employed in eligible facilities in our study settings, (422 in Ghana; 909 in India), assessed the number practicing within the scope of work for midwifery professionals defined in the International Labor Organization International Standard Classification of Occupations, and whether they reported possessing the ICM essential competencies for basic midwifery practice. We altered the numerator, iteratively narrowing it from a simple count to include data on scope of practice and competency and reported changes in value. We altered the denominator by calculating the number of midwives per 10,000 total population, women of reproductive age, pregnancies, and births and explored variation in the indicator. Across four districts in Ghana, density of midwives decreased from 8.59/10,000 total population when counting midwives from facility staffing rosters to 1.30/10,000 total population when including only fully competent midwives by the ICM standard. In India, no midwives met the standard, thus the midwifery density of 1.37/10,000 total population from staffing rosters reduced to 0.00 considering competency. Changing the denominator to births vastly altered subnational measures, ranging from ~1700% change in Tolon to ~8700% in Thiruvallur.ConclusionOur study shows that varying underlying parameters significantly affects the value of the estimate. Factoring in competency greatly impacts the effective coverage of midwifery professionals. Disproportionate differences were noted when need was estimated based on total population versus births. Future research should compare various estimates of midwifery density to health system process and outcome measures

    Measuring adequacy of the midwifery workforce using standards of competency and scope of work: Exploring the density and distribution of midwives in three low- and middle-income countries using cross-sectional and geospatial data

    No full text
    Background A global midwifery shortage hampers the goal of ending preventable maternal/newborn mortality and stillbirths. Whether current measures of midwifery workforce adequacy are valid is unknown. We compare two measures of density and distribution of midwifery professionals to assess their consistency, and explore how incorporating midwifery scope, competency, and the adjusting reference population impacts this critical metric. Methods and findings We collected a census of midwives employed in eligible facilities in our study settings, (422 in Ghana; 909 in India), assessed the number practicing within the scope of work for midwifery professionals defined in the International Labor Organization International Standard Classification of Occupations, and whether they reported possessing the ICM essential competencies for basic midwifery practice. We altered the numerator, iteratively narrowing it from a simple count to include data on scope of practice and competency and reported changes in value. We altered the denominator by calculating the number of midwives per 10,000 total population, women of reproductive age, pregnancies, and births and explored variation in the indicator. Across four districts in Ghana, density of midwives decreased from 8.59/10,000 total population when counting midwives from facility staffing rosters to 1.30/10,000 total population when including only fully competent midwives by the ICM standard. In India, no midwives met the standard, thus the midwifery density of 1.37/10,000 total population from staffing rosters reduced to 0.00 considering competency. Changing the denominator to births vastly altered subnational measures, ranging from ~1700% change in Tolon to ~8700% in Thiruvallur. Conclusion Our study shows that varying underlying parameters significantly affects the value of the estimate. Factoring in competency greatly impacts the effective coverage of midwifery professionals. Disproportionate differences were noted when need was estimated based on total population versus births. Future research should compare various estimates of midwifery density to health system process and outcome measures

    Multisite, mixed methods study to validate 10 maternal health system and policy indicators in Argentina, Ghana and India: A research protocol

    No full text
    Introduction: Most efforts to assess maternal health indicator validity focus on measures of service coverage. Fewer measures focus on the upstream enabling environment, and such measures are typically not research validated. Thus, methods for validating system and policy-level indicators are not well described. This protocol describes original multicountry research to be conducted in Argentina, Ghana and India, to validate 10 indicators from the monitoring framework for the \u27Strategies toward Ending Preventable Maternal Mortality\u27 (EPMM). The overall aim is to improve capacity to drive and track progress towards achieving the priority recommendations in the EPMM strategies. This work is expected to contribute new knowledge on validation methodology and reveal important information about the indicators under study and the phenomena they target for monitoring. Validating the indicators in three diverse settings will explore the external validity of results. Methods and Analysis: This observational study explores the validity of 10 indicators from the EPMM monitoring framework via seven discrete validation exercises that will use mixed methods: (1) cross-sectional review of policy data, (2) retrospective review of facility-level patient and administrative data and (3) collection of primary quantitative and qualitative cross-sectional data from health service providers and clients. There is a specific methodological approach and analytic plan for each indicator, directed by unique, relevant validation research questions. Ethics and Dissemination: The protocol was approved by the Office of Human Research Administration at Harvard University in November 2019. Individual study sites received approval via local institutional review boards by January 2020 except La Pampa, Argentina, approved June 2020. Our dissemination plan enables unrestricted access and reuse of all published research, including data sets. We expect to publish at least one peer-reviewed publication per validation exercise. We will disseminate results at conferences and engage local stakeholders in dissemination activities in each study country

    Improving measures of access to legal abortion: A validation study triangulating multiple data sources to assess a global indicator

    No full text
    Background: Global mechanisms have been established to monitor and facilitate state accountability regarding the legal status of abortion. However, there is little evidence describing whether these mechanisms capture accurate data. Moreover, it is uncertain whether the legal status of abortion is a valid proxy measure for access to safe abortion, pursuant to the global goals of reducing preventable maternal mortality and advancing reproductive rights. Therefore, this study sought to assess the accuracy of reported monitoring data, and to determine whether evidence supports the consistent application of domestic law by health care professionals such that legality of abortion functions as a valid indicator of access. Methods and findings: We conducted a validation study using three countries as illustrative case examples: Argentina, Ghana, and India. We compared data reported by two global monitoring mechanisms (Countdown to 2030 and the Global Abortion Policies Database) against domestic source documents collected through in-depth policy review. We then surveyed health care professionals authorized to perform abortions about their knowledge of abortion law in their countries and their personal attitudes and practices regarding provision of legal abortion. We compared professionals\u27 responses to the domestic legal frameworks described in the source documents to establish whether professionals consistently applied the law as written. This analysis revealed weaknesses in the criterion validity and construct validity of the legal status of abortion indicator. We detected discrepancies between data reported by the global monitoring and accountability mechanisms and the domestic policy reviews, even though all referenced the same source documents. Further, provider surveys unearthed important context-specific barriers to legal abortion not captured by the indicator, including conscientious objection and imposition of restrictions at the provider\u27s discretion. Conclusions: Taken together, these findings denote weaknesses in the indicator legal status of abortion as a proxy for access to safe abortion, as well as inaccuracies in data reported to global monitoring mechanisms. This information provides important groundwork for strengthening indicators for monitoring access to abortion and for renewed advocacy to assure abortion rights worldwide

    Authorization of midwives to perform basic emergency obstetric and newborn care signal functions in Argentina, Ghana, and India: A multi-country validation study of a key global maternal and newborn health indicator

    No full text
    Background: Midwives’ authorization to deliver the seven basic emergency obstetric and newborn care (BEmONC) functions is a core policy indicator in global monitoring frameworks, yet little evidence supports whether such data are captured accurately, or whether authorization demonstrates convergence with midwives’ skills and actual provision of services. In this study, we aimed to validate the data reported in global monitoring frameworks (criterion validity) and to determine whether a measure of authorization is a valid indicator for BEmONC availability (construct validity). Methods: We conducted a validation study in Argentina, Ghana, and India. To assess accuracy of the reported data on midwives’ authorization to provide BEmONC services, we reviewed national regulatory documents and compared with reported country-specific data in Countdown to 2030 and the World Health Organization Maternal, Newborn, Child and Adolescent Health Policy Survey. To assess whether authorization demonstrates convergent validity with midwives’ skills, training, and performance of BEmONC signal functions, we surveyed 1257 midwives/midwifery professionals and assessed variance. Results: We detected discrepancies between data reported in the global monitoring frameworks and the national regulatory framework in all three countries. We found wide variations between midwives’ authorization to perform signal functions and their self-reported skills and actual performance within the past 90 days. The percentage of midwives who reported performing all signal functions for which they were authorized per country-specific regulations was 17% in Argentina, 23% in Ghana, and 31% in India. Additionally, midwives in all three countries reported performing some signal functions that the national regulations did not authorize. Conclusion: Our findings suggest limitations in criterion and construct validity for this indicator in Argentina, Ghana, and India. Some signal functions such as assisted vaginal delivery may be obsolete based on current practice patterns. Findings suggest the need to re-examine the emergency interventions that should be included as BEmONC signal functions

    Validation of a measure to assess decision-making autonomy in family planning services in three low- and middle-income countries: The Family Planning Autonomous Decision-Making scale (FP-ADM)

    No full text
    Background: Integrating measures of respectful care is an important priority in family planning programs, aligned with maternal health efforts. Ensuring women can make autonomous reproductive health decisions is an important indicator of respectful care. While scales have been developed and validated in family planning for dimensions of person-centered care, none focus specifically on decision-making autonomy. The Mothers Autonomy in Decision-Making (MADM) scale measures autonomy in decision-making during maternity care. We adapted the MADM scale to measure autonomy surrounding a woman’s decision to use a contraceptive method within the context of contraceptive counselling. This study presents a psychometric validation of the Family Planning Autonomous Decision-Making (FP-ADM) scale using data from Argentina, Ghana, and India. Methods and findings: We used cross-sectional data from women in four subnational areas in Argentina (n = 890), Ghana (n = 1,114), and India (n = 1,130). In each area, 20 primary sampling units (PSUs) were randomly selected based on probability proportional to size. Households were randomly selected in Ghana and India. In Argentina, all facilities providing reproductive and maternal health services within selected PSUs were included and women were randomly selected upon exiting the facility. Interviews were conducted with a sample of 360 women per district. In total, 890 women completed the FP-ADM in Argentina, 1,114 in Ghana and 1,130 in India. To measure autonomous decision-making within FP service delivery, we adapted the items of the MADM scale to focus on family planning. To assess the scale’s psychometric properties, we first examined the eigenvalues and conducted a parallel analysis to determine the number of factors. We then conducted exploratory factor analysis to determine which items to retain. The resulting factors were then identified based on the corresponding items. Internal consistency reliability was assessed with Cronbach’s alpha. We assessed both convergent and divergent construct validity by examining associations with expected outcomes related to the underlying construct. The Eigenvalues and parallel analysis suggested a two-factor solution. The two underlying dimensions of the construct were identified as “Bidirectional Exchange of Information” (Factor 1) and “Empowered Choice” (Factor 2). Cronbach’s alpha was calculated for the full scale and each subscale. Results suggested good internal consistency of the scale. There was a strong, significant positive association between whether a woman expressed satisfaction with quality of care received from the healthcare provider and her FP-ADM score in all three countries and a significant negative association between a woman’s FP-ADM score and her stated desire to switch contraceptive methods in the future. Conclusions: Our results suggest the FP-ADM is a valid instrument to assess decision-making autonomy in contraceptive counseling and service delivery in diverse low- and middle-income countries. The scale evidenced strong construct, convergent, and divergent validity and high internal consistency reliability. Use of the FP-ADM scale could contribute to improved measurement of person-centered family planning services
    corecore