129 research outputs found

    Effectiveness of respectful care policies for women using routine intrapartum services: a systematic review

    Get PDF
    Several studies have identified how mistreatment during labour and childbirth can act as a barrier to the use of health facilities. Despite general agreement that respectful maternity care (RMC) is a fundamental human right, and an important component of quality intrapartum care that every pregnant woman should receive, the effectiveness of proposed policies remains uncertain. We performed a systematic review to assess the effectiveness of introducing RMC policies into health facilities providing intrapartum services. We included randomized and non-randomized controlled studies evaluating the effectiveness of introducing RMC policies into health facilities. We searched PubMed, CINAHL, LILACS, AJOL, WHO RHL, and Popline, along with ongoing trials registers (ISRCT register, ICTRP register), and the White Ribbon Respectful Maternity Care Repository. Included studies were assessed for risk of bias. Certainty of evidence was assessed using GRADE criteria. Five studies were included. All were undertaken in Africa (Kenya, Tanzania, Sudan, South Africa), and involved a range of components. Two were cluster RCTs, and three were before/after studies. In total, over 8000 women were included at baseline and over 7500 at the endpoints. Moderate certainty evidence suggested that RMC interventions increases women's experiences of respectful care (one cRCT, approx. 3000 participants; adjusted odds ratio (aOR) 3.44, 95% CI 2.45-4.84); two observational studies also reported positive changes. Reports of good quality care increased. Experiences of disrespectful or abusive care, and, specifically, physical abuse, were reduced. Low certainty evidence indicated fewer accounts of non-dignified care, lack of privacy, verbal abuse, neglect and abandonment with RMC interventions, but no difference in satisfaction rates. Other than low certainty evidence of reduced episiotomy rates, there were no data on the pre-specified clinical outcomes. Multi-component RMC policies appear to reduce women's overall experiences of disrespect and abuse, and some components of this experience. However, the sustainability of the demonstrated effect over time is unclear, and the elements of the programmes that have most effect have not been examined. While the tested RMC policies show promising results, there is a need for rigorous research to refine the optimum approach to deliver and achieve RMC in all settings

    Cost-effectiveness of uterine tamponade devices for the treatment of postpartum hemorrhage: A systematic review

    Get PDF
    Background: Uterine tamponade is widely promoted for treating refractory postpartum hemorrhage (PPH); however, its cost‐effectiveness may vary depending on unit costs and setting. Objective: To review available data on cost‐effectiveness of uterine tamponade devices when used for PPH treatment. Search strategy: PubMed and EMBASE were searched (1980 to January 2020), as well as the National Health Services Economic Evaluation database from inception (1995) to March 2015. Selection criteria: Eligible studies were any type of economic evaluation, or effective‐ ness studies that provided cost or economic data. Data collection and analysis: Two reviewers independently screened studies, extracted data, and assessed quality. Main results: Eleven studies using a range of devices (condom catheter, uterine suc‐ tion devices, Bakri, Inpress, Ellavi) were identified. Cost of condom catheter devices or kits ranged from US0.64toUS0.64 to US6, whereas purpose‐designed device costs were up to US$400. Two studies that took a health system perspective assessed the cost‐ effectiveness of using uterine balloon tamponade and suggested that it was highly cost‐ effective because of the low cost per disability‐adjusted life‐year averted, although both used effect estimates from case series. Conclusions: Evidence on the cost‐effectiveness of uterine tamponade devices was limited and not generalizable. Rigorous economic evaluations based on updated effect estimates are needed.Fil: Vogel, Joshua P.. Monash University; AustraliaFil: Wilson, Alyce N.. Burnet Institute; AustraliaFil: Scott, Nick. Monash University; Australia. Burnet Institute; AustraliaFil: Widmer, Mariana. Organizacion Mundial de la Salud; ArgentinaFil: Althabe, Fernando. Organizacion Mundial de la Salud; Argentina. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones CientĂ­ficas y TĂ©cnicas. Oficina de CoordinaciĂłn Administrativa Parque Centenario. Centro de Investigaciones en EpidemiologĂ­a y Salud PĂșblica. Instituto de Efectividad ClĂ­nica y Sanitaria. Centro de Investigaciones en EpidemiologĂ­a y Salud PĂșblica; ArgentinaFil: Oladapo, Olufemi T.. Organizacion Mundial de la Salud; Argentin

    What matters to women and healthcare providers in relation to interventions for the prevention of postpartum haemorrhage: A qualitative systematic review

    Get PDF
    Abstract Background Postpartum haemorrhage (PPH) is a leading cause of maternal mortality and morbidity. Reducing deaths from PPH is a global challenge. The voices of women and healthcare providers have been missing from the debate around best practices for PPH prevention. The aim of this review was to identify, appraise and synthesize available evidence about the views and experiences of women and healthcare providers on interventions to prevent PPH. Methods We searched eight electronic databases and reference lists of eligible studies published between 1996 and 2018, reporting qualitative data on views and experiences of PPH in general, and of any specific preventative intervention(s). Authors’ findings were extracted and synthesised using meta-ethnographic techniques. Confidence in the quality, coherence, relevance and adequacy of data underpinning the resulting themes was assessed using GRADE-CERQual. A line of argument synthesis was developed. Results Thirty-five studies from 29 countries met our inclusion criteria. Our results indicate that women and healthcare providers recognise the dangers of severe blood loss in the perinatal and postpartum period, but don’t always share the same beliefs about the causes and consequences of PPH. Skilled birth attendants and traditional birth attendants (TBA’s) want to prevent PPH but may lack the required resources and training. Women generally appreciate PPH prevention strategies, especially where their individual needs, beliefs and values are taken into account. Women and healthcare providers also recognize the value of using uterotonics (medications that contract the uterus) to prevent PPH but highlight safety concerns and potential misuse of the drugs as acceptability and implementation issues. Conclusions Based on stakeholder views and experiences, PPH prevention strategies are more likely to be successful where all stakeholders agree on the causes and consequences of severe postpartum blood loss, especially in the context of sufficient resources and effective implementation by competent, suitably trained providers

    Healthcare providers experiences of using uterine balloon tamponade (UBT) devices for the treatment of post-partum haemorrhage: A meta-synthesis of qualitative studies

    Get PDF
    Background: Postpartum haemorrhage (PPH) is a leading cause of maternal mortality and severe morbidity globally. When PPH cannot be controlled using standard medical treatments, uterine balloon tamponade (UBT) may be used to arrest bleeding. While UBT is used by healthcare providers in hospital settings internationally, their views and experiences have not been systematically explored. The aim of this review is to identify, appraise and synthesize available evidence about the views and experiences of healthcare providers using UBT to treat PPH. Methods: Using a pre-determined search strategy, we searched MEDLINE, CINAHL, PsycINFO, EMBASE, LILACS, AJOL, and reference lists of eligible studies published 1996–2019, reporting qualitative data on the views and experiences of health professionals using UBT to treat PPH. Author findings were extracted and synthesised using techniques derived from thematic synthesis and confidence in the findings was assessed using GRADE-CERQual. Results: Out of 89 studies we identified 5 that met our inclusion criteria. The studies were conducted in five low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) in Africa and reported on the use of simple UBT devices for the treatment of PPH. A variety of cadres (including midwives, medical officers and clinical officers) had experience with using UBTs and found them to be effective, convenient, easy to assemble and relatively inexpensive. Providers also suggested regular, hands-on training was necessary to maintain skills and highlighted the importance of community engagement in successful implementation. Conclusions: Providers felt that administration of a simple UBT device offered a practical and cost-effective approach to the treatment of uncontrolled PPH, especially in contexts where uterotonics were ineffective or unavailable or where access to surgery was not possible. The findings are limited by the relatively small number of studies contributing to the review and further research in other contexts is required to address wider acceptability and feasibility issues

    Women’s experiences of pharmacological and non-pharmacological pain relief methods for labour and childbirth: a qualitative systematic review

    Get PDF
    Background Many women use pharmacological or non-pharmacological pain relief during childbirth. Evidence from Cochrane reviews shows that effective pain relief is not always associated with high maternal satisfaction scores. However, understanding women’s views is important for good quality maternity care provision. We undertook a qualitative evidence synthesis of women’s views and experiences of pharmacological (epidural, opioid analgesia) and non-pharmacological (relaxation, massage techniques) pain relief options, to understand what affects women’s decisions and choices and to inform guidelines, policy, and practice. Methods We searched seven electronic databases (MEDLINE, CINAHL, PsycINFO, AMED, EMBASE, Global Index Medicus, AJOL), tracked citations and checked references. We used thematic and meta-ethnographic techniques for analysis purposes, and GRADE-CERQual tool to assess confidence in review findings. We developed review findings for each method. We then re-analysed the review findings thematically to highlight similarities and differences in women’s accounts of different pain relief methods. Results From 11,782 hits, we screened full 58 papers. Twenty-four studies provided findings for the synthesis: epidural (n = 12), opioids (n = 3), relaxation (n = 8) and massage (n = 4) – all conducted in upper-middle and high-income countries (HMICs). Re-analysis of the review findings produced five key themes. ‘Desires for pain relief’ illuminates different reasons for using pharmacological or non-pharmacological pain relief. ‘Impact on pain’ describes varying levels of effectiveness of the methods used. ‘Influence and experience of support’ highlights women’s positive or negative experiences of support from professionals and/or birth companions. ‘Influence on focus and capabilities’ illustrates that all pain relief methods can facilitate maternal control, but some found non-pharmacological techniques less effective than anticipated, and others reported complications associated with medication use. Finally, ‘impact on wellbeing and health’ reports that whilst some women were satisfied with their pain relief method, medication was associated with negative self-reprisals, whereas women taught relaxation techniques often continued to use these methods with beneficial outcomes. Conclusion Women report mixed experiences of different pain relief methods. Pharmacological methods can reduce pain but have negative side-effects. Non-pharmacological methods may not reduce labour pain but can facilitate bonding with professionals and birth supporters. Women need information on risks and benefits of all available pain relief methods

    The development of the WHO Labour Care Guide: an international survey of maternity care providers

    Get PDF
    Background: The partograph is the most commonly used labour monitoring tool in the world. However, it has been used incorrectly or inconsistently in many settings. In 2018, a WHO expert group reviewed and revised the design of the partograph in light of emerging evidence, and they developed the first version of the Labour Care Guide (LCG). The objective of this study was to explore opinions of skilled health personnel on the first version of the WHO Labour Care Guide. Methods: Skilled health personnel (including obstetricians, midwives and general practitioners) of any gender from Africa, Asia, Europe and Latin America were identified through a large global research network. Country coordinators from the network invited 5 to 10 mid-level and senior skilled health personnel who had worked in labour wards anytime in the last 5 years. A self-administered, anonymous, structured, online questionnaire including closed and open-ended questions was designed to assess the clarity, relevance, appropriateness of the frequency of recording, and the completeness of the sections and variables on the LCG. Results: A total of 110 participants from 23 countries completed the survey between December 2018 and January 2019. Variables included in the LCG were generally considered clear, relevant and to have been recorded at the appropriate frequency. Most sections of the LCG were considered complete. Participants agreed or strongly agreed with the overall design, structure of the LCG, and the usefulness of reference thresholds to trigger further assessment and actions. They also agreed that LCG could potentially have a positive impact on clinical decision-making and respectful maternity care. Participants disagreed with the value of some variables, including coping, urine, and neonatal status. Conclusions: Future end-users of WHO Labour Care Guide considered the variables to be clear, relevant and appropriate, and, with minor improvements, to have the potential to positively impact clinical decision-making and respectful maternity care.Fil: Pingray, MarĂ­a VerĂłnica. Instituto de Efectividad ClĂ­nica y Sanitaria; ArgentinaFil: Bonetto, Mercedes. Organizacion Mundial de la Salud; ArgentinaFil: Berrueta, Amanda Mabel. Instituto de Efectividad ClĂ­nica y Sanitaria; ArgentinaFil: Mazzoni, Agustina. Instituto de Efectividad ClĂ­nica y Sanitaria; ArgentinaFil: BelizĂĄn, MarĂ­a. Instituto de Efectividad ClĂ­nica y Sanitaria; ArgentinaFil: Keil, Netanya. Nyu Abu Dhabi; Emiratos Arabes UnidosFil: Vogel, Joshua. Burnet Institute; AustraliaFil: Althabe, Fernando. Organizacion Mundial de la Salud; Argentina. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones CientĂ­ficas y TĂ©cnicas. Oficina de CoordinaciĂłn Administrativa Parque Centenario. Centro de Investigaciones en EpidemiologĂ­a y Salud PĂșblica. Instituto de Efectividad ClĂ­nica y Sanitaria. Centro de Investigaciones en EpidemiologĂ­a y Salud PĂșblica; ArgentinaFil: Oladapo, Olufemi T.. Organizacion Mundial de la Salud; Argentin

    The feasibility of community level interventions for pre-eclampsia in South Asia and sub-saharan Africa: A mixed-methods design

    Get PDF
    Background: Globally, pre-eclampsia and eclampsia are major contributors to maternal and perinatal mortality; of which the vast majority of deaths occur in less developed countries. In addition, a disproportionate number of morbidities and mortalities occur due to delayed access to health services. The Community Level Interventions for Pre-eclampsia (CLIP) Trial aims to task-shift to community health workers the identification and emergency management of pre-eclampsia and eclampsia to improve access and timely care. Literature revealed paucity of published feasibility assessments prior to initiating large-scale community-based interventions. Arguably, well-conducted feasibility studies can provide valuable information about the potential success of clinical trials prior to implementation. Failure to fully understand the study context risks the effective implementation of the intervention and limits the likelihood of post-trial scale-up. Therefore, it was imperative to conduct community-level feasibility assessments for a trial of this magnitude.Methods: A mixed methods design guided by normalization process theory was used for this study in Nigeria, Mozambique, Pakistan, and India to explore enabling and impeding factors for the CLIP Trial implementation. Qualitative data were collected through participant observation, document review, focus group discussion and in-depth interviews with diverse groups of community members, key informants at community level, healthcare providers, and policy makers. Quantitative data were collected through health facility assessments, self-administered community health worker surveys, and household demographic and health surveillance.Results: Refer to CLIP Trial feasibility publications in the current and/or forthcoming supplement.Conclusions: Feasibility assessments for community level interventions, particularly those involving task-shifting across diverse regions, require an appropriate theoretical framework and careful selection of research methods. The use of qualitative and quantitative methods increased the data richness to better understand the community contexts
    • 

    corecore