Cargando…
Usability, acceptability, and feasibility of the World Health Organization Labour Care Guide: A mixed‐methods, multicountry evaluation
INTRODUCTION: The World Health Organization’s (WHO) Labour Care Guide (LCG) is a “next‐generation” partograph based on WHO’s latest intrapartum care recommendations. It aims to optimize clinical care provided to women and their experience of care. We evaluated the LCG’s usability, feasibility, and a...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
John Wiley and Sons Inc.
2020
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8246537/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33225484 http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/birt.12511 |
_version_ | 1783716333879296000 |
---|---|
author | Vogel, Joshua P. Comrie‐Thomson, Liz Pingray, Veronica Gadama, Luis Galadanci, Hadiza Goudar, Shivaprasad Laisser, Rose Lavender, Tina Lissauer, David Misra, Sujata Pujar, Yeshita Qureshi, Zahida P. Amole, Taiwo Berrueta, Mabel Dankishiya, Faisal Gwako, George Homer, Caroline S. E. Jobanputra, Jonathan Meja, Sam Nigri, Carolina Mohaptra, Vandana Osoti, Alfred Roberti, Javier Solomon, Dennis Suleiman, Maryam Robbers, Gianna Sutherland, Shireen Vernekar, Sunil Althabe, Fernando Bonet, Mercedes Oladapo, Olufemi T. |
author_facet | Vogel, Joshua P. Comrie‐Thomson, Liz Pingray, Veronica Gadama, Luis Galadanci, Hadiza Goudar, Shivaprasad Laisser, Rose Lavender, Tina Lissauer, David Misra, Sujata Pujar, Yeshita Qureshi, Zahida P. Amole, Taiwo Berrueta, Mabel Dankishiya, Faisal Gwako, George Homer, Caroline S. E. Jobanputra, Jonathan Meja, Sam Nigri, Carolina Mohaptra, Vandana Osoti, Alfred Roberti, Javier Solomon, Dennis Suleiman, Maryam Robbers, Gianna Sutherland, Shireen Vernekar, Sunil Althabe, Fernando Bonet, Mercedes Oladapo, Olufemi T. |
author_sort | Vogel, Joshua P. |
collection | PubMed |
description | INTRODUCTION: The World Health Organization’s (WHO) Labour Care Guide (LCG) is a “next‐generation” partograph based on WHO’s latest intrapartum care recommendations. It aims to optimize clinical care provided to women and their experience of care. We evaluated the LCG’s usability, feasibility, and acceptability among maternity care practitioners in clinical settings. METHODS: Mixed‐methods evaluation with doctors, midwives, and nurses in 12 health facilities across Argentina, India, Kenya, Malawi, Nigeria, and Tanzania. Purposively sampled and trained practitioners applied the LCG in low‐risk women during labor and rated experiences, satisfaction, and usability. Practitioners were invited to focus group discussions (FGDs) to share experiences and perceptions of the LCG, which were subjected to framework analysis. RESULTS: One hundred and thirty‐six practitioners applied the LCG in managing labor and birth of 1,226 low‐risk women. The majority of women had a spontaneous vaginal birth (91.6%); two cases of intrapartum stillbirths (1.63 per 1000 births) occurred. Practitioner satisfaction with the LCG was high, and median usability score was 67.5%. Practitioners described the LCG as supporting precise and meticulous monitoring during labor, encouraging critical thinking in labor management, and improving the provision of woman‐centered care. CONCLUSIONS: The LCG is feasible and acceptable to use across different clinical settings and can promote woman‐centered care, though some design improvements would benefit usability. Implementing the LCG needs to be accompanied by training and supportive supervision, and strategies to promote an enabling environment (including updated policies on supportive care interventions, and ensuring essential equipment is available). |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-8246537 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2020 |
publisher | John Wiley and Sons Inc. |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-82465372021-07-02 Usability, acceptability, and feasibility of the World Health Organization Labour Care Guide: A mixed‐methods, multicountry evaluation Vogel, Joshua P. Comrie‐Thomson, Liz Pingray, Veronica Gadama, Luis Galadanci, Hadiza Goudar, Shivaprasad Laisser, Rose Lavender, Tina Lissauer, David Misra, Sujata Pujar, Yeshita Qureshi, Zahida P. Amole, Taiwo Berrueta, Mabel Dankishiya, Faisal Gwako, George Homer, Caroline S. E. Jobanputra, Jonathan Meja, Sam Nigri, Carolina Mohaptra, Vandana Osoti, Alfred Roberti, Javier Solomon, Dennis Suleiman, Maryam Robbers, Gianna Sutherland, Shireen Vernekar, Sunil Althabe, Fernando Bonet, Mercedes Oladapo, Olufemi T. Birth Original Articles INTRODUCTION: The World Health Organization’s (WHO) Labour Care Guide (LCG) is a “next‐generation” partograph based on WHO’s latest intrapartum care recommendations. It aims to optimize clinical care provided to women and their experience of care. We evaluated the LCG’s usability, feasibility, and acceptability among maternity care practitioners in clinical settings. METHODS: Mixed‐methods evaluation with doctors, midwives, and nurses in 12 health facilities across Argentina, India, Kenya, Malawi, Nigeria, and Tanzania. Purposively sampled and trained practitioners applied the LCG in low‐risk women during labor and rated experiences, satisfaction, and usability. Practitioners were invited to focus group discussions (FGDs) to share experiences and perceptions of the LCG, which were subjected to framework analysis. RESULTS: One hundred and thirty‐six practitioners applied the LCG in managing labor and birth of 1,226 low‐risk women. The majority of women had a spontaneous vaginal birth (91.6%); two cases of intrapartum stillbirths (1.63 per 1000 births) occurred. Practitioner satisfaction with the LCG was high, and median usability score was 67.5%. Practitioners described the LCG as supporting precise and meticulous monitoring during labor, encouraging critical thinking in labor management, and improving the provision of woman‐centered care. CONCLUSIONS: The LCG is feasible and acceptable to use across different clinical settings and can promote woman‐centered care, though some design improvements would benefit usability. Implementing the LCG needs to be accompanied by training and supportive supervision, and strategies to promote an enabling environment (including updated policies on supportive care interventions, and ensuring essential equipment is available). John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2020-11-22 2021-03 /pmc/articles/PMC8246537/ /pubmed/33225484 http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/birt.12511 Text en © 2020 World Health Organization, licensed by Wiley Periodicals LLC. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/igo/This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/igo/legalcode (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/igo/) which permits unrestricted use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided that the original work is properly cited. In any reproduction of this article there should not be any suggestion that IARC/WHO or the article endorse any specific organization or products. The use of the IARC/WHO logo is not permitted. This notice should be preserved along with the article’s URL. |
spellingShingle | Original Articles Vogel, Joshua P. Comrie‐Thomson, Liz Pingray, Veronica Gadama, Luis Galadanci, Hadiza Goudar, Shivaprasad Laisser, Rose Lavender, Tina Lissauer, David Misra, Sujata Pujar, Yeshita Qureshi, Zahida P. Amole, Taiwo Berrueta, Mabel Dankishiya, Faisal Gwako, George Homer, Caroline S. E. Jobanputra, Jonathan Meja, Sam Nigri, Carolina Mohaptra, Vandana Osoti, Alfred Roberti, Javier Solomon, Dennis Suleiman, Maryam Robbers, Gianna Sutherland, Shireen Vernekar, Sunil Althabe, Fernando Bonet, Mercedes Oladapo, Olufemi T. Usability, acceptability, and feasibility of the World Health Organization Labour Care Guide: A mixed‐methods, multicountry evaluation |
title | Usability, acceptability, and feasibility of the World Health Organization Labour Care Guide: A mixed‐methods, multicountry evaluation |
title_full | Usability, acceptability, and feasibility of the World Health Organization Labour Care Guide: A mixed‐methods, multicountry evaluation |
title_fullStr | Usability, acceptability, and feasibility of the World Health Organization Labour Care Guide: A mixed‐methods, multicountry evaluation |
title_full_unstemmed | Usability, acceptability, and feasibility of the World Health Organization Labour Care Guide: A mixed‐methods, multicountry evaluation |
title_short | Usability, acceptability, and feasibility of the World Health Organization Labour Care Guide: A mixed‐methods, multicountry evaluation |
title_sort | usability, acceptability, and feasibility of the world health organization labour care guide: a mixed‐methods, multicountry evaluation |
topic | Original Articles |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8246537/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33225484 http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/birt.12511 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT vogeljoshuap usabilityacceptabilityandfeasibilityoftheworldhealthorganizationlabourcareguideamixedmethodsmulticountryevaluation AT comriethomsonliz usabilityacceptabilityandfeasibilityoftheworldhealthorganizationlabourcareguideamixedmethodsmulticountryevaluation AT pingrayveronica usabilityacceptabilityandfeasibilityoftheworldhealthorganizationlabourcareguideamixedmethodsmulticountryevaluation AT gadamaluis usabilityacceptabilityandfeasibilityoftheworldhealthorganizationlabourcareguideamixedmethodsmulticountryevaluation AT galadancihadiza usabilityacceptabilityandfeasibilityoftheworldhealthorganizationlabourcareguideamixedmethodsmulticountryevaluation AT goudarshivaprasad usabilityacceptabilityandfeasibilityoftheworldhealthorganizationlabourcareguideamixedmethodsmulticountryevaluation AT laisserrose usabilityacceptabilityandfeasibilityoftheworldhealthorganizationlabourcareguideamixedmethodsmulticountryevaluation AT lavendertina usabilityacceptabilityandfeasibilityoftheworldhealthorganizationlabourcareguideamixedmethodsmulticountryevaluation AT lissauerdavid usabilityacceptabilityandfeasibilityoftheworldhealthorganizationlabourcareguideamixedmethodsmulticountryevaluation AT misrasujata usabilityacceptabilityandfeasibilityoftheworldhealthorganizationlabourcareguideamixedmethodsmulticountryevaluation AT pujaryeshita usabilityacceptabilityandfeasibilityoftheworldhealthorganizationlabourcareguideamixedmethodsmulticountryevaluation AT qureshizahidap usabilityacceptabilityandfeasibilityoftheworldhealthorganizationlabourcareguideamixedmethodsmulticountryevaluation AT amoletaiwo usabilityacceptabilityandfeasibilityoftheworldhealthorganizationlabourcareguideamixedmethodsmulticountryevaluation AT berruetamabel usabilityacceptabilityandfeasibilityoftheworldhealthorganizationlabourcareguideamixedmethodsmulticountryevaluation AT dankishiyafaisal usabilityacceptabilityandfeasibilityoftheworldhealthorganizationlabourcareguideamixedmethodsmulticountryevaluation AT gwakogeorge usabilityacceptabilityandfeasibilityoftheworldhealthorganizationlabourcareguideamixedmethodsmulticountryevaluation AT homercarolinese usabilityacceptabilityandfeasibilityoftheworldhealthorganizationlabourcareguideamixedmethodsmulticountryevaluation AT jobanputrajonathan usabilityacceptabilityandfeasibilityoftheworldhealthorganizationlabourcareguideamixedmethodsmulticountryevaluation AT mejasam usabilityacceptabilityandfeasibilityoftheworldhealthorganizationlabourcareguideamixedmethodsmulticountryevaluation AT nigricarolina usabilityacceptabilityandfeasibilityoftheworldhealthorganizationlabourcareguideamixedmethodsmulticountryevaluation AT mohaptravandana usabilityacceptabilityandfeasibilityoftheworldhealthorganizationlabourcareguideamixedmethodsmulticountryevaluation AT osotialfred usabilityacceptabilityandfeasibilityoftheworldhealthorganizationlabourcareguideamixedmethodsmulticountryevaluation AT robertijavier usabilityacceptabilityandfeasibilityoftheworldhealthorganizationlabourcareguideamixedmethodsmulticountryevaluation AT solomondennis usabilityacceptabilityandfeasibilityoftheworldhealthorganizationlabourcareguideamixedmethodsmulticountryevaluation AT suleimanmaryam usabilityacceptabilityandfeasibilityoftheworldhealthorganizationlabourcareguideamixedmethodsmulticountryevaluation AT robbersgianna usabilityacceptabilityandfeasibilityoftheworldhealthorganizationlabourcareguideamixedmethodsmulticountryevaluation AT sutherlandshireen usabilityacceptabilityandfeasibilityoftheworldhealthorganizationlabourcareguideamixedmethodsmulticountryevaluation AT vernekarsunil usabilityacceptabilityandfeasibilityoftheworldhealthorganizationlabourcareguideamixedmethodsmulticountryevaluation AT althabefernando usabilityacceptabilityandfeasibilityoftheworldhealthorganizationlabourcareguideamixedmethodsmulticountryevaluation AT bonetmercedes usabilityacceptabilityandfeasibilityoftheworldhealthorganizationlabourcareguideamixedmethodsmulticountryevaluation AT oladapoolufemit usabilityacceptabilityandfeasibilityoftheworldhealthorganizationlabourcareguideamixedmethodsmulticountryevaluation |