Cargando…

A comparison of intensive vs. light-touch quality improvement interventions for maternal health in Uttar Pradesh, India

BACKGROUND: Poor patient experiences during delivery leads to delayed presentation at facilities and contributes to poor maternal health outcomes. Person-centered maternity care (PCMC) is a key component of quality. Improving PCMC requires changing the process of care which can be complex and necess...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Montagu, Dominic, Giessler, Katie, Nakphong, Michelle Kao, Green, Cathy, Roy, Kali Prosad, Sahu, Ananta Basudev, Sharma, Kovid, Sudhinarset, May
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2020
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7716449/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33276773
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12913-020-05960-6
_version_ 1783619162584645632
author Montagu, Dominic
Giessler, Katie
Nakphong, Michelle Kao
Green, Cathy
Roy, Kali Prosad
Sahu, Ananta Basudev
Sharma, Kovid
Sudhinarset, May
author_facet Montagu, Dominic
Giessler, Katie
Nakphong, Michelle Kao
Green, Cathy
Roy, Kali Prosad
Sahu, Ananta Basudev
Sharma, Kovid
Sudhinarset, May
author_sort Montagu, Dominic
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Poor patient experiences during delivery leads to delayed presentation at facilities and contributes to poor maternal health outcomes. Person-centered maternity care (PCMC) is a key component of quality. Improving PCMC requires changing the process of care which can be complex and necessitate significant external input, making replication and scale difficult. This study compares the effectiveness two Quality Improvement (QI) intervention phases, one Intensive, one Light-Touch. METHODS: We use a matched case-control design to compare two phases of a QI Intervention targeting PCMC, with three facilities in each. The Intensive phase was introduced into three government facilities where teams were supported to identify, design, and test potential improvements over 12 months. The Light-Touch phase was subsequently introduced in three other government facilities and changes were tracked over six months. We compared the two groups using multivariate linear regression and difference-in-difference models to assess changes in PCMC outcome RESULTS: Both Intensive and Light-Touch arms demonstrated large improvements in PCMC. On a scale from 0 to 100, Intensive facilities increased in PCMC scores from 85.02 to 97.13, while Light-Touch facilities increased from 63.42 to 87.47. For both there was a ‘halo’ effect, with a similar improvement recorded for the specific improvement activities focused on, as w ell as aspects of PCMC not directly addressed. CONCLUSIONS: This study demonstrates that a short, inexpensive, light-touch and directive intervention can change staff practices and significantly improve the experiences of women during childbirth. It also shows that improvements in a few areas of provider-patient interaction have a ‘halo’ effect, changing many other aspects of patient-provider interaction at the same time. TRIAL REGISTRATION: QI Phase 1 - NCT04208867. Retrospectively registered. December 19th, 2019. QI Phase 2 – NCT04208841. Retrospectively registered. December 23, 2019.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-7716449
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2020
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-77164492020-12-04 A comparison of intensive vs. light-touch quality improvement interventions for maternal health in Uttar Pradesh, India Montagu, Dominic Giessler, Katie Nakphong, Michelle Kao Green, Cathy Roy, Kali Prosad Sahu, Ananta Basudev Sharma, Kovid Sudhinarset, May BMC Health Serv Res Research Article BACKGROUND: Poor patient experiences during delivery leads to delayed presentation at facilities and contributes to poor maternal health outcomes. Person-centered maternity care (PCMC) is a key component of quality. Improving PCMC requires changing the process of care which can be complex and necessitate significant external input, making replication and scale difficult. This study compares the effectiveness two Quality Improvement (QI) intervention phases, one Intensive, one Light-Touch. METHODS: We use a matched case-control design to compare two phases of a QI Intervention targeting PCMC, with three facilities in each. The Intensive phase was introduced into three government facilities where teams were supported to identify, design, and test potential improvements over 12 months. The Light-Touch phase was subsequently introduced in three other government facilities and changes were tracked over six months. We compared the two groups using multivariate linear regression and difference-in-difference models to assess changes in PCMC outcome RESULTS: Both Intensive and Light-Touch arms demonstrated large improvements in PCMC. On a scale from 0 to 100, Intensive facilities increased in PCMC scores from 85.02 to 97.13, while Light-Touch facilities increased from 63.42 to 87.47. For both there was a ‘halo’ effect, with a similar improvement recorded for the specific improvement activities focused on, as w ell as aspects of PCMC not directly addressed. CONCLUSIONS: This study demonstrates that a short, inexpensive, light-touch and directive intervention can change staff practices and significantly improve the experiences of women during childbirth. It also shows that improvements in a few areas of provider-patient interaction have a ‘halo’ effect, changing many other aspects of patient-provider interaction at the same time. TRIAL REGISTRATION: QI Phase 1 - NCT04208867. Retrospectively registered. December 19th, 2019. QI Phase 2 – NCT04208841. Retrospectively registered. December 23, 2019. BioMed Central 2020-12-04 /pmc/articles/PMC7716449/ /pubmed/33276773 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12913-020-05960-6 Text en © The Author(s) 2020 Open AccessThis article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data.
spellingShingle Research Article
Montagu, Dominic
Giessler, Katie
Nakphong, Michelle Kao
Green, Cathy
Roy, Kali Prosad
Sahu, Ananta Basudev
Sharma, Kovid
Sudhinarset, May
A comparison of intensive vs. light-touch quality improvement interventions for maternal health in Uttar Pradesh, India
title A comparison of intensive vs. light-touch quality improvement interventions for maternal health in Uttar Pradesh, India
title_full A comparison of intensive vs. light-touch quality improvement interventions for maternal health in Uttar Pradesh, India
title_fullStr A comparison of intensive vs. light-touch quality improvement interventions for maternal health in Uttar Pradesh, India
title_full_unstemmed A comparison of intensive vs. light-touch quality improvement interventions for maternal health in Uttar Pradesh, India
title_short A comparison of intensive vs. light-touch quality improvement interventions for maternal health in Uttar Pradesh, India
title_sort comparison of intensive vs. light-touch quality improvement interventions for maternal health in uttar pradesh, india
topic Research Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7716449/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33276773
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12913-020-05960-6
work_keys_str_mv AT montagudominic acomparisonofintensivevslighttouchqualityimprovementinterventionsformaternalhealthinuttarpradeshindia
AT giesslerkatie acomparisonofintensivevslighttouchqualityimprovementinterventionsformaternalhealthinuttarpradeshindia
AT nakphongmichellekao acomparisonofintensivevslighttouchqualityimprovementinterventionsformaternalhealthinuttarpradeshindia
AT greencathy acomparisonofintensivevslighttouchqualityimprovementinterventionsformaternalhealthinuttarpradeshindia
AT roykaliprosad acomparisonofintensivevslighttouchqualityimprovementinterventionsformaternalhealthinuttarpradeshindia
AT sahuanantabasudev acomparisonofintensivevslighttouchqualityimprovementinterventionsformaternalhealthinuttarpradeshindia
AT sharmakovid acomparisonofintensivevslighttouchqualityimprovementinterventionsformaternalhealthinuttarpradeshindia
AT sudhinarsetmay acomparisonofintensivevslighttouchqualityimprovementinterventionsformaternalhealthinuttarpradeshindia
AT montagudominic comparisonofintensivevslighttouchqualityimprovementinterventionsformaternalhealthinuttarpradeshindia
AT giesslerkatie comparisonofintensivevslighttouchqualityimprovementinterventionsformaternalhealthinuttarpradeshindia
AT nakphongmichellekao comparisonofintensivevslighttouchqualityimprovementinterventionsformaternalhealthinuttarpradeshindia
AT greencathy comparisonofintensivevslighttouchqualityimprovementinterventionsformaternalhealthinuttarpradeshindia
AT roykaliprosad comparisonofintensivevslighttouchqualityimprovementinterventionsformaternalhealthinuttarpradeshindia
AT sahuanantabasudev comparisonofintensivevslighttouchqualityimprovementinterventionsformaternalhealthinuttarpradeshindia
AT sharmakovid comparisonofintensivevslighttouchqualityimprovementinterventionsformaternalhealthinuttarpradeshindia
AT sudhinarsetmay comparisonofintensivevslighttouchqualityimprovementinterventionsformaternalhealthinuttarpradeshindia