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...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: 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.
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