Quality improvement initiatives for hospitalised small and sick newborns in low- and middle-income countries: a systematic review.

BACKGROUND: An estimated 2.6 million newborns died in 2016; over 98.5% of deaths occurred in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs). Neonates born preterm and small for gestational age are particularly at risk given the high incidence of infectious complications, cardiopulmonary, and neurodevelopmental disorders in this group. Quality improvement (QI) initiatives can reduce the burden of mortality and morbidity for hospitalised newborns in these settings. We undertook a systematic review to synthesise evidence from LMICs on QI approaches used, outcome measures employed to estimate effects, and the nature of implementation challenges. METHODS: We searched Medline, EMBASE, WHO Global Health Library, Cochrane Library, WHO ICTRP, and ClinicalTrials.gov and scanned the references of identified studies and systematic reviews. Searches covered January 2000 until April 2017. Search terms were "quality improvement", "newborns", "hospitalised", and their derivatives. Studies were excluded if they took place in high-income countries, did not include QI interventions, or did not include small and sick hospitalised newborns. Cochrane Risk of Bias tools were used to quality appraise the studies. RESULTS: From 8110 results, 28 studies were included, covering 23 LMICs and 65,642 participants. Most interventions were meso level (district and clinic level); fewer were micro (patient-provider level) or macro (above district level). In-service training was the most common intervention subtype; service organisation and distribution of referencing materials were also frequently identified. The most commonly assessed outcome was mortality, followed by length of admission, sepsis rates, and infection rates. Key barriers to implementation of quality improvement initiatives included overburdened staff and lack of sufficient equipment. CONCLUSIONS: The frequency of meso level, single centre, and educational interventions suggests that these interventions may be easier for programme planners to implement. The success of some interventions in reducing morbidity and mortality rates suggests that QI approaches have a high potential for benefit to newborns. Going forward, there are opportunities to strengthen the focus of QI initiatives and to develop improved, larger-scale, collaborative research into implementation of quality improvement initiatives for this high-risk group. TRIAL REGISTRATION: PROSPERO CRD42017055459

Reproductive and sexual health in the Maldives: analysis of data from two cross-sectional surveys

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>The Maldives faces challenges in the provision of health services to its population scattered across many small islands. The government commissioned two separate reproductive health surveys, in 1999 and 2004, to inform their efforts to improve reproductive and sexual health services.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>A stratified random sample of islands provided the study base for a cluster survey in 1999 and a follow-up of the same clusters in 2004. In 1999 the household survey enquired about relevant knowledge, attitudes and practices and views and experience of available reproductive health services, with a focus on women aged 15-49 years. The 2004 household survey included some of the same questions as in 1999, and also sought views of men aged 15-64 years. A separate survey about sexual and reproductive health covered 1141 unmarried youth aged 15-24 years.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>There were 4087 household respondents in 1999 and 4102 in 2004. The contraceptive prevalence rate (CPR) for modern methods was 33% in 1999 and 34% in 2004. Antenatal care improved: more women in 2004 than in 1999 had at least four antenatal care visits (90.0% v 65.1%) and took iron supplements (86.7% v 49.6%) during their last pregnancy. The response rate for the youth survey was only 42% (varying from 100% in some islands to 12% in sites in the capital). The youth respondents had some knowledge gaps (one third did not know if people with HIV could look healthy and less than half thought condoms could protect against HIV), and some unhelpful attitudes about gender and reproductive health.</p> <p>Conclusions</p> <p>The two household surveys were commissioned as separate entities, with different priorities and data capture methods, rather than being undertaken as a specific research study. The direct comparisons we could make indicated an unchanged CPR and improvements in antenatal care, with the Maldives ahead of the South Asia region for antenatal care. The low response rate in the youth survey limited interpretation of the findings. But the survey highlighted areas requiring attention. Surveys not undertaken primarily for research purposes have important limitations but can provide useful information.</p

Using the missed opportunity tool as an application of the Lives Saved Tool (LiST) for intervention prioritization

Abstract Background The Missed Opportunity tool was developed as an application in the Lives Saved Tool (LiST) to allow users to quickly compare the relative impact of interventions. Global Financing Facility (GFF) investment cases have been identified as a potential application of the Missed Opportunity analyses in Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC), Ethiopia, Kenya, and Tanzania, to use ‘lives saved’ as a normative factor to set priorities. Methods The Missed Opportunity analysis draws on data and methods in LiST to project maternal, stillbirth, and child deaths averted based on changes in interventions’ coverage. Coverage of each individual intervention in LiST was automated to be scaled up from current coverage to 90% in the next year, to simulate a scenario where almost every mother and child receive proven interventions that they need. The main outcome of the Missed Opportunity analysis is deaths averted due to each intervention. Results When reducing unmet need for contraception is included in the analysis, it ranks as the top missed opportunity across the four countries. When it is not included in the analysis, top interventions with the most total deaths averted are hospital-based interventions such as labor and delivery management in the CEmOC and BEmOC level, and full treatment and supportive care for premature babies, and for sepsis/pneumonia. Conclusions The Missed Opportunity tool can be used to provide a quick, first look at missed opportunities in a country or geographic region, and help identify interventions for prioritization. While it is a useful advocate for evidence-based priority setting, decision makers need to consider other factors that influence decision making, and also discuss how to implement, deliver, and sustain programs to achieve high coverage

Additional file 3: of Using the missed opportunity tool as an application of the Lives Saved Tool (LiST) for intervention prioritization

List of interventions and their definitions. This file contains the definitions of interventions that correspond to the top 5 missed opportunities in DRC, Ethiopia, Kenya, and Tanzania. Also included are definitions of delivery levels for labor and delivery management. (DOCX 17 kb

Maternal death review in Africa : averting maternal death and disability

Although use of Maternal Death Review (MDR) is increasing in African countries, effective coverage is still low. MDR does more than count maternal deaths; it looks beyond the numbers to study the causes and avoidable factors behind each death, leading to actions to improve quality of care based on the findings. The institutionalization of MDR requires political commitment, legal and administrative back-up, financial support, capacity development, simplified reporting forms and procedures, coordinated support of development partners, involvement of professional bodies, and regular supportive follow-up. Only 7 countries reported that the government had allocated a budget for MDR

Assessing the Quality of Sick Child Care Provided by Community Health Workers.

As community case management of childhood illness expands in low-income countries, there is a need to assess the quality of care provided by community health workers. This study had the following objectives: 1) examine methods of recruitment of sick children for assessment of quality of care, 2) assess the validity of register review (RR) and direct observation only (DO) compared to direct observation with re-examination (DO+RE), and 3) assess the effect of observation on community health worker performance.We conducted a survey to assess the quality of care provided by Ethiopian Health Extension Workers (HEWs). The sample of children was obtained through spontaneous consultation, HEW mobilization, or recruitment by the survey team. We assessed patient characteristics by recruitment method. Estimates of indicators of quality of care obtained using RR and DO were compared to gold standard estimates obtained through DO+RE. Sensitivity, specificity, and the area under receiver operator characteristic curve (AUC) were calculated to assess the validity of RR and DO. To assess the Hawthorne effect, we compared estimates from RR for children who were observed by the survey team to estimates from RR for children who were not observed by the survey team.Participants included 137 HEWs and 257 sick children in 103 health posts, plus 544 children from patient registers. Children mobilized by HEWs had the highest proportion of severe illness (27%). Indicators of quality of care from RR and DO had high sensitivity for most indicators, but specificity was low. The AUC for different indicators from RR ranged from 0.47 to 0.76, with only one indicator above 0.75. The AUC of indicators from DO ranged from 0.54 to 1.0, with three indicators above 0.75. The differences between estimates of correct care for observed versus not observed children were small.Mobilization by HEWs and recruitment by the survey teams were feasible, but potentially biased, methods of obtaining sick children. Register review and DO underestimated performance errors. Our data suggest that being observed had only a small positive effect on the performance of HEWs

Point estimates, sensitivity, specificity, and area under receiver operator characteristic curve for indicators of quality of care from register review and direct observation only compared to direct observation with re-examination.

<p>¹ Direct observation with re-examination.</p><p>² Register review.</p><p>³ Direct observation.</p><p>⁴ Indicators of quality of care from DO+RE were previously published in Miller et al.[<a href="http://www.plosone.org/article/info:doi/10.1371/journal.pone.0142010#pone.0142010.ref012" target="_blank">12</a>].</p><p>⁵ Area under receiver operator characteristic curve.</p><p>⁶ Children under 12 months of age.</p><p>Point estimates, sensitivity, specificity, and area under receiver operator characteristic curve for indicators of quality of care from register review and direct observation only compared to direct observation with re-examination.</p

Differences in estimates of indicators of quality of care from register review for children observed by the survey team and children not observed.

<p>¹ Children under 12 months of age.</p><p>Differences in estimates of indicators of quality of care from register review for children observed by the survey team and children not observed.</p

Characteristics of the sample of sick children by recruitment method.

<p>Characteristics of the sample of sick children by recruitment method.</p