8 research outputs found
Policymakers’ and other stakeholders’ perceptions of key considerations for health system decisions and the presentation of evidence to inform those considerations: an international survey
Principles and processes behind promoting awareness of rights for quality maternal care services: a synthesis of stakeholder experiences and implementation factors
BACKGROUND: Promoting awareness of rights is a value-based process that entails a different way of thinking and
acting, which is at times misunderstood or deemed as aspirational.
METHODS: Guided by the SURE framework, we undertook a secondary analysis of 26 documents identified by an earlier
systematic review on promoting awareness of rights to increase use of maternity care services. We thematically analysed
stakeholder experiences and implementation factors across the diverse initiatives to derive common elements to guide
future efforts.
RESULTS: Interventions that promote awareness of rights for maternal health varied in nature, methodological orientation,
depth and quality. Materials included booklets, posters, pamphlets/ briefs and service standards/charters. Target populations
included women, family members, communities, community structures, community-based and non governmental
organizations, health providers and administrators, as well as elected representatives. While one initiative only focused on
raising awareness, most were embedded within larger efforts to improve the accountability and responsiveness of service
delivery through community monitoring and advocacy, with a few aiming to change policies and contest elections.
Underlying these action oriented forms of promoting awareness of rights, was a critical consciousness and attitudinal
change gained through iterative capacity-building for all stakeholders; materials and processes that supported group
discussion and interaction; the formation or strengthening of community groups; situational analysis to ensure adaptation
to local context; facilitation to ensure common ground and language across stakeholders; and strategic networking and
alliance building across health system levels. While many positive experiences are discussed, few challenges or barriers to
implementation are documented. The limited documentation and poor quality of information found indicate that while
various examples of promoting awareness of rights for maternal health exists, research partnerships to systematically
evaluate their processes, learning and effects are lacking.
CONCLUSION: Rather than being aspirational, several examples of promoting awareness of women’s rights for quality
maternity care services exist. More than mainly disseminate information, they aim to change stakeholder mindsets and
relationships across health system levels. Due to their transformatory intent they require sustained investment, with
strategic planning, concrete operationalization and political adeptness to manage dynamic stakeholder expectations and
reactions overtime. More investment is also required in research partnerships that support such initiatives and better
elucidate their context specific variations.ScopusIS
The barriers and facilitators influencing the sustainability of hospital-based interventions: a systematic review
Acknowledgements University of Stirling for providing financial support for open access costs Funding This review was funded by the Chief Scientist Office, grant number GCA/17/26. JC, PC and EAD are employed by the Nursing, Midwifery and Allied Health Professions Research Unit, which is funded by the Chief Scientist Office in Scotland.Peer reviewedPublisher PD
Demand-side financing for maternal and newborn health: what do we know about factors that affect implementation of cash transfers and voucher programmes?
BackgroundDemand-side financing (DSF) interventions, including cash transfers and vouchers, have been introduced to promote maternal and newborn health in a range of low- and middle-income countries. These interventions vary in design but have typically been used to increase health service utilisation by offsetting some financial costs for users, or increasing household income and incentivising 'healthy behaviours'. This article documents experiences and implementation factors associated with use of DSF in maternal and newborn health.MethodsA secondary analysis (using an adapted Supporting the Use of Research Evidence framework - SURE) was performed on studies that had previously been identified in a systematic review of evidence on DSF interventions in maternal and newborn health.ResultsThe article draws on findings from 49 quantitative and 49 qualitative studies. The studies give insights on difficulties with exclusion of migrants, young and multiparous women, with demands for informal fees at facilities, and with challenges maintaining quality of care under increasing demand. Schemes experienced difficulties if communities faced long distances to reach participating facilities and poor access to transport, and where there was inadequate health infrastructure and human resources, shortages of medicines and problems with corruption. Studies that documented improved care-seeking indicated the importance of adequate programme scope (in terms of programme eligibility, size and timing of payments and voucher entitlements) to address the issue of concern, concurrent investments in supply-side capacity to sustain and/or improve quality of care, and awareness generation using community-based workers, leaders and women's groups. ConclusionsEvaluations spanning more than 15 years of implementation of DSF programmes reveal a complex picture of experiences that reflect the importance of financial and other social, geographical and health systems factors as barriers to accessing care. Careful design of DSF programmes as part of broader maternal and newborn health initiatives would need to take into account these barriers, the behaviours of staff and the quality of care in health facilities. Research is still needed on the policy context for DSF schemes in order to understand how they become sustainable and where they fit, or do not fit, with plans to achieve equitable universal health coverage
Intervention Now to Eliminate Repeat Unintended Pregnancy in Teenagers (INTERUPT): a systematic review of intervention effectiveness and cost-effectiveness, and qualitative and realist synthesis of implementation factors and user engagement
Background
The UK has one of the highest rates of teenage pregnancies in Western Europe. One-fifth of these are repeat pregnancies. Unintended conceptions can cause substantial emotional, psychological and educational harm to teenagers, often with enduring implications for life chances. Babies of teenage mothers have increased mortality and are at a significantly increased risk of poverty, educational underachievement and unemployment later in life, with associated costs to society. It is important to identify effective, cost-effective and acceptable interventions.
Objectives
To identify who is at the greatest risk of repeat unintended pregnancies; which interventions are effective and cost-effective; and what the barriers to and facilitators of the uptake of these interventions are.
Data sources
We conducted a multistreamed, mixed-methods systematic review informed by service user and provider consultation to examine worldwide peer-reviewed evidence and UK-generated grey literature to find and evaluate interventions to reduce repeat unintended teenage pregnancies. We searched the following electronic databases: MEDLINE and MEDLINE In-Process & Other Non-Indexed Citations, PsycINFO, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature, The Cochrane Library (Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, Database of Abstracts of Reviews of Effects and the Health Technology Assessment Database), EMBASE (Excerpta Medica database), British Nursing Index, Educational Resources Information Center, Sociological Abstracts, Applied Social Sciences Index and Abstracts, BiblioMap (the Evidence for Policy and Practice Information and Co-ordinating Centre register of health promotion and public health research), Social Sciences Citation Index (supported by Web of Knowledge), Research Papers in Economics, EconLit (American Economic Association’s electronic bibliography), OpenGrey, Scopus, Scirus, Social Care Online, National Research Register, National Institute for Health Research Clinical Research Network Portfolio and Index to THESES. Searches were conducted in May 2013 and updated in June 2014. In addition, we conducted a systematic search of Google (Google Inc., Mountain View, CA, USA) in January 2014. Database searches were guided by an advisory group of stakeholders.
Review methods
To address the topic’s complexities, we used a structured, innovative and iterative approach combining methods tailored to each evidence stream. Quantitative data (effectiveness, cost-effectiveness, risk factors and effect modifiers) were synthesised with reference to Cochrane guidelines for evaluating evidence on public health interventions. Qualitative evidence addressing facilitators of and barriers to the uptake of interventions, experience and acceptability of interventions was synthesised thematically. We applied the principles of realist synthesis to uncover theories and mechanisms underpinning interventions (what works, for whom and in what context). Finally, we conducted an overarching narrative of synthesis of evidence and gathered service user feedback.
Results
We identified 8664 documents initially, and 816 in repeat searches. We filtered these to 12 randomised controlled trials (RCTs), four quasi-RCTs, 10 qualitative studies and 53 other quantitative studies published between 1996 and 2012. None of the RCTs was based in the UK. The RCTs evaluated an emergency contraception programme and psychosocial interventions. We found no evidence for effectiveness with regard to condom use, contraceptive use or rates of unprotected sex or use of birth control. Our primary outcome was repeat conception rate: the event rate was 132 of 308 (43%) in the intervention group versus 140 of 289 (48%) for the control goup, with a non-significant risk ratio (RR) of 0.92 [95% confidence interval (CI) 0.78 to 1.08]. Four studies reported subsequent birth rates: 29 of 237 (12%) events for the intervention arm versus 46 out of 224 (21%) for the control arm, with a RR of 0.60 (95% CI 0.39 to 0.93). Many repeat conceptions occurred in the context of poverty, low expectations and aspirations, and negligible opportunities. Service user feedback suggested that there were specific motivations for many repeat conceptions, for example to replace loss or to please a partner. Realist synthesis highlighted that context, motivation, planning for the future and letting young women take control with connectedness and tailoring provide a conceptual framework for future research.
Limitations
Included studies rarely characterised adolescent pregnancy as intended or unintended, that is interventions to reduce repeat conceptions rarely addressed whether or not pregnancies were intended. Furthermore, interventions were often not clearly defined, had multiple aims and did not indicate which elements were intended to address which aims. Nearly all of the studies were conducted in the USA and focused largely on African American or Hispanic and Latina American populations.
Conclusions
We found no evidence to indicate that existing interventions to reduce repeat teenage pregnancy were effective; however, subsequent births were reduced by home-based interventions. Qualitative and realist evidence helped to explain gaps in intervention design that should be addressed. More theory-based, rigorously evaluated programmes need to be developed to reduce repeat teenage pregnancy in the UK.
Study registration
This study is registered as PROSPERO CRD42012003168. Cochrane registration number: i=fertility/0068.
Funding
The National Institute for Health Research Health Technology Assessment programme