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...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , |
---|---|
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 |