Determinants of knowledge of critical danger signs, safe childbirth and immediate newborn care practices among auxiliary midwives: a cross sectional survey in Myanmar

OBJECTIVES: The re-emergence of community-based health workers such as the auxiliary midwives (AMWs) in Myanmar, who are local female volunteers, has been an important strategy to address global health workforce shortages. The Myanmar government recommends one AMW for every village. The aim of this study is to investigate the current knowledge of critical danger signs and practices for safe childbirth and immediate newborn care of AMWs to inform potential task shifting of additional healthcare responsibilities. METHODS: A cross-sectional survey was conducted from July 2015 to June 2016 in three hard-to-reach areas in Myanmar. Face-to-face interviews were conducted using a pretested questionnaire. RESULTS: Among 262 AMWs participating in the study, only 8% of AMWs were able to identify at least 80% of 20 critical danger signs. Factors associated with greater knowledge of critical danger signs included older age over 35 years (adjusted OR (AOR) 2.19, 95% CI 0.99 to 4.83), having received refresher training within the last year (AOR 2.20, 95% CI 1.21 to 4.01) and receiving adequate supervision (AOR 5.04, 95% CI 2.74 to 9.29). Those who employed all six safe childbirth and immediate newborn care practices were more likely to report greater knowledge of danger signs (AOR 2.81, 95% CI 1.50 to 5.26), adequate work supervision (AOR 3.18 95% CI 1.62 to 6.24) and less education (AOR 0.44, 95% CI 0.23 to 0.88). CONCLUSION: The low level of knowledge of critical danger signs and reported practices for safe childbirth identified suggest that an evaluation of the current AMW training and supervision programme needs to be revisited to ensure that existing practices, including recognition of danger signs, meet quality care standards before new interventions are introduced or new responsibilities given to AMWs

Barriers, Facilitators and Priorities for Implementation of WHO Maternal and Perinatal Health Guidelines in Four Lower-Income Countries: A GREAT Network Research Activity

BACKGROUND: Health systems often fail to use evidence in clinical practice. In maternal and perinatal health, the majority of maternal, fetal and newborn mortality is preventable through implementing effective interventions. To meet this challenge, WHO's Department of Reproductive Health and Research partnered with the Knowledge Translation Program at St. Michael's Hospital (SMH), University of Toronto, Canada to establish a collaboration on knowledge translation (KT) in maternal and perinatal health, called the GREAT Network (Guideline-driven, Research priorities, Evidence synthesis, Application of evidence, and Transfer of knowledge). We applied a systematic approach incorporating evidence and theory to identifying barriers and facilitators to implementation of WHO maternal heath recommendations in four lower-income countries and to identifying implementation strategies to address these. METHODS: We conducted a mixed-methods study in Myanmar, Uganda, Tanzania and Ethiopia. In each country, stakeholder surveys, focus group discussions and prioritization exercises were used, involving multiple groups of health system stakeholders (including administrators, policymakers, NGOs, professional associations, frontline healthcare providers and researchers). RESULTS: Despite differences in guideline priorities and contexts, barriers identified across countries were often similar. Health system level factors, including health workforce shortages, and need for strengthened drug and equipment procurement, distribution and management systems, were consistently highlighted as limiting the capacity of providers to deliver high-quality care. Evidence-based health policies to support implementation, and improve the knowledge and skills of healthcare providers were also identified. Stakeholders identified a range of tailored strategies to address local barriers and leverage facilitators. CONCLUSION: This approach to identifying barriers, facilitators and potential strategies for improving implementation proved feasible in these four lower-income country settings. Further evaluation of the impact of implementing these strategies is needed