Explore the vast range of titles available.

Background Poor intrapartum care in India contributes to high maternal and newborn mortality. India’s Labor Room Quality Improvement Initiative (LaQshya) launched in 2017, aims to improve intrapartum care by minimizing complications, enforcing protocols, and promoting respectful maternity care (RMC). However, limited studies pose a challenge to fully examine its potential to assess quality of maternal and newborn care. This study aims to bridge this knowledge gap and reviews LaQshya’s ability to assess maternal and newborn care quality. Findings will guide modifications for enhancing LaQshya’s effectiveness. Methods We reviewed LaQshya’s ability to assess the quality of care through a two-step approach: a comprehensive descriptive analysis using document reviews to highlight program attributes, enablers, and challenges affecting LaQshya’s quality assessment capability, and a comparison of its measurement parameters with the 352 quality measures outlined in the WHO Standards for Maternal and Newborn Care. Comparing LaQshya with WHO standards offers insights into how its measurement criteria align with global standards for assessing maternity and newborn care quality. Results LaQshya utilizes several proven catalysts to enhance and measure quality- institutional structures, empirical measures, external validation, certification, and performance incentives for high-quality care. The program also embodies contemporary methods like quality circles, rapid improvement cycles, ongoing facility training, and plan-do-check, and act (PDCA) strategies for sustained quality enhancement. Key drivers of LaQshya’s assessment are- leadership, staff mentoring, digital infrastructure and stakeholder engagement from certified facilities. However, governance issues, understaffing, unclear directives, competency gaps, staff reluctance towards new quality improvement approaches inhibit the program, and its capacity to enhance quality of care. LaQshya addresses 76% of WHO’s 352 quality measures for maternal and newborn care but lacks comprehensive assessment of crucial elements: harmful labor practices, mistreatment of mothers or newborns, childbirth support, and effective clinical leadership and supervision. Conclusion LaQshya is a powerful model for evaluating quality of care, surpassing other global assessment tools. To achieve its maximum potential, we suggest strengthening district governance structures and offering tailored training programs for RMC and other new quality processes. Furthermore, expanding its quality measurement metrics to effectively assess provider accountability, patient outcomes, rights, staff supervision, and health facility leadership will increase its ability to assess quality improvements.

As maternal mortality and morbidity rates stagnate or increase worldwide, there is an urgent need to address health system issues that impede access to high-quality care. Learning from efforts to address the value, safety, and effectiveness of reproductive and maternal health care is essential to advancing quality improvement efforts.

Background The rapid urbanization of Kenya has led to an increase in the growth of informal settlements. There are challenges with access to maternal, newborn, and child health (MNCH) services and higher maternal mortality rates in settlements. The Kuboresha Afya Mitaani (KAM) study aimed to improve access to MNCH services. We evaluate one component of the KAM study, PROMPTS (Promoting Mothers through Pregnancy and Postpartum), an innovative digital health intervention aimed at improving MNCH outcomes. PROMPTS is a two-way AI-enabled SMS-based platform that sends messages to pregnant and postnatal mothers based on pregnancy stage, and connects mothers with a clinical help desk to respond and refer urgent cases in minutes. Methods PROMPTS was rolled out in informal settlements in Mathare and Kawangware in Nairobi County. The study adopted a pre-post intervention design, comparing baseline and endline population outcomes (1,416 participants, Baseline = 678, Endline = 738). To further explore PROMPTS's effect, outcomes were compared between endline participants enrolled and not enrolled in PROMPTS (738 participants). Outcomes related to antenatal (ANC) and postnatal (PNC) service uptake and knowledge were assessed using univariate and multivariate linear and logistic regression. Results Between baseline and enldine, mothers were 1.85 times more likely to report their babies and 1.88 times more likely to report themselves being checked by a provider post-delivery. There were improvements in moms and babies receiving care on time. 45% of the 738 endline participants were enrolled in the PROMPTS program, with 87% of these participants sending at least one message to the system. Enrolled mothers were 2.28 times more likely to report completing four or more ANC visits relative to unenrolled mothers. Similarly, enrolled mothers were 4.20 times more likely to report their babies and 1.52 times more likely to report themselves being checked by a provider post-delivery compared to unenrolled mothers. Conclusions This research demonstrates that a digital health tool can be used to improve care-seeking and knowledge levels among pregnant and postnatal women in informal settlements. Additional research is needed to refine and target solutions amongst those that were less likely to enroll in PROMPTS and to further drive improved MNCH outcomes amongst this population.

Background Timely, appropriate, and equitable access to quality healthcare during pregnancy is proven to contribute to better health outcomes of birthing individuals and infants following birth. Equity is conceptualized as the absence of differences in healthcare access and quality among population groups. Healthcare policies are guides for front-line practices, and despite merits of contemporary policies striving to foster equitable healthcare, inequities persist. The purpose of this umbrella review is to identify prenatal healthcare practices, summarize how equities/inequities are reported in relation to patient experiences or health outcomes when accessing or using services, and collate equity reporting characteristics. Methods For this umbrella review, six electronic databases were searched (Medline, EMBASE, APA PsychInfo, CINAHL, International Bibliography of the Social Sciences, and Cochrane Library). Included studies were extracted for publication and study characteristics, equity reporting, primary outcomes (prenatal care influenced by equity/inequity) and secondary outcomes (infant health influenced by equity/inequity during pregnancy). Data was analyzed deductively using the PROGRESS-Plus equity framework and by summative content analysis for equity reporting characteristics. The included articles were assessed for quality using the Risk of Bias Assessment Tool for Systematic Reviews. Results The search identified 8065 articles and 236 underwent full-text screening. Of the 236, 68 systematic reviews were included with first authors representing 20 different countries. The population focus of included studies ranged across prenatal only ( n  = 14), perinatal ( n  = 25), maternal ( n  = 2), maternal and child ( n  = 19), and a general population ( n  = 8). Barriers to equity in prenatal care included travel and financial burden, culturally insensitive practices that deterred care engagement and continuity, and discriminatory behaviour that reduced care access and satisfaction. Facilitators to achieve equity included innovations such as community health workers, home visitation programs, conditional cash transfer programs, virtual care, and cross-cultural training, to enhance patient experiences and increase their access to, and use of health services. There was overlap across PROGRESS-Plus factors. Conclusions This umbrella review collated inequities present in prenatal healthcare services, globally. Further, this synthesis contributes to future solution and action-oriented research and practice by assembling evidence-informed opportunities, innovations, and approaches that may foster equitable prenatal health services to all members of diverse communities.

Background Abortion stigma involves the stereotyping of, discrimination against, and delegitimization of those who seek and provide abortion. Experiences of abortion care are shaped by stigma at the meso (e.g., lack of local providers) and macro (e.g., abortion regulations) levels. Yet abortion stigma and quality of care are often examined separately. This study sought to articulate the impact of abortion stigma on quality of care in the context of healthcare interactions. It did so by characterizing the features of stigmatizing and non-stigmatizing care in the context of macro-level stigma and other structural factors that influence abortion-seeking experiences, including the coronavirus pandemic’s influence on the health system. Methods This qualitative study comprised in-depth interviews with people who sought abortion across Australia between March 2020 and November 2022, recruited through social media and flyers in clinics. Thematic analysis drew on concepts of micro, meso, and macro stigma and person-centered care. We developed typologies of the interactions between abortion seekers and healthcare workers by analytically grouping together negative and positive experiences to characterize features of stigmatizing and and non-stigmatizing care in the context of macro-level influences. Results We interviewed 24 abortion seekers and developed five typologies of stigmatizing care: creating barriers; judging; ignoring emotional and information needs; making assumptions; and minimizing interactions. There are five corresponding positive typologies. Macro-level factors, from abortion regulations to rural and pandemic-related health system pressures, contributed to poor experiences in care. Conclusions The positive experiences in this study illustrate how a lack of stigma enables patient-centered care. The negative experiences reflect the interrelationship between stigmatizing beliefs among healthcare workers, macro-level (policy and regulatory) abortion stigma, and structural health service limitations exacerbated during the pandemic. Interventions are needed to reduce stigmatizing interactions between abortion seekers and healthcare workers, and should also consider macro-level factors that influence the behaviors of healthcare workers and experiences of abortion seekers. Without addressing stigma at multiple levels, equitable access to high-quality abortion care will be difficult to achieve. Efforts to integrate stigma reduction into quality improvement have relevance for maternal and reproductive health services globally.

Background Early initiation of prenatal care is widely accepted to improve the health outcomes of pregnancy for both mothers and their infants. Identification of the various barriers to entry into care that patients experience may inform and improve health care provision and, in turn, improve the patient’s ability to receive necessary care. Aim This study implements a mixed-methods approach to establish methods and procedures for identifying barriers to early entry to prenatal care in a medically-vulnerable patient population and areas for future quality improvement initiatives. Methods An initial chart review was conducted on obstetrics patients that initiated prenatal care after their first trimester at a large federally qualified health center in Brooklyn, NY, to determine patient-specified reasons for delay. A thematic analysis of these data was implemented in combination with both parametric and non-parametric analyses to characterize the population of interest, and to identify the primary determinants of delayed entry. Results The age of patients in the population of interest ( n  = 169) was bimodal, with a range of 15 – 43 years and a mean of 28 years. The mean gestational age of entry into prenatal care was 19 weeks. The chart review revealed that 8% recently moved to Brooklyn from outside of NYC or the USA. Nine percent had difficulty scheduling an initial prenatal visit within their first trimester. Teenage pregnancy accounted for 7%. Provider challenges with documentation (21%) were noted. The most common themes identified ( n  = 155) were the patient being in transition (21%), the pregnancy being unplanned (17%), and issues with linkage to care (15%), including no shows or patient cancellations. Patients who were late to prenatal care also differed from their peers dramatically, as they were more likely to be Spanish-speaking, to be young, and to experience a relatively long delay between pregnancy confirmation and entry into care. Moreover, the greatest determinant of delayed entry into care was patient age. Conclusion Our study provides a process for other like clinics to identify patients who are at risk for delayed entry to prenatal care and highlight common barriers to entry. Future initiatives include the introduction of a smart data element to document reasons for delay and use of community health workers for dedicated outreach after no show appointments or patient cancellations.

Background There is an urgent global call for health systems to strengthen access to quality sexual, reproductive, maternal, newborn and adolescent health, particularly for the most vulnerable. Professional midwives with enabling environments are identified as an important solution. However, a multitude of barriers prevent midwives from fully realizing their potential. Effective interventions to address known barriers and enable midwives and quality sexual, reproductive, maternal, newborn and adolescent health are less well known. This review intends to evaluate the literature on (1) introducing midwives in low- and middle-income countries, and (2) on mentoring as a facilitator to enable midwives and those in midwifery roles to improve sexual, reproductive, maternal, newborn and adolescent health service quality within health systems. Methods An integrative systematic literature review was conducted, guided by the Population, Intervention, Comparison, Outcome framework. Articles were reviewed for quality and relevance using the Gough weight-of-evidence framework and themes were identified. A master table categorized articles by Gough score, methodology, country of focus, topic areas, themes, classification of midwives, and mentorship model. The World Health Organization health systems building block framework was applied for data extraction and analysis. Results Fifty-three articles were included: 13 were rated as high, 36 as medium, and four as low according to the Gough criteria. Studies that focused on midwives primarily highlighted human resources, governance, and service delivery while those focused on mentoring were more likely to highlight quality services, lifesaving commodities, and health information systems. Midwives whose pre-service education met global standards were found to have more efficacy. The most effective mentoring packages were comprehensive, integrated into existing systems, and involved managers. Conclusions Effectively changing sexual, reproductive, maternal, newborn and adolescent health systems is complex. Globally standard midwives and a comprehensive mentoring package show effectiveness in improving service quality and utilization. Trial registration The protocol is registered in PROSPERO (CRD42022367657).

Background By addressing physical and psychosocial needs, group care (GC) improves health-related behaviours, peer support, parent-provider interactions and may improve birth outcomes. Hence, global implementation of GC is encouraged. Context analyses prior to implementation are vital to elucidate which local factors may support or hinder implementation. Methods Contextual analyses conducted in the Netherlands and Suriname were compared to identify the factors relevant to the implementability of GC as perceived by healthcare professionals (HCPs). 32 semi-structured interviews were conducted with Dutch and Surinamese healthcare professionals. Audio recordings were transcribed verbatim and coded using the Framework approach. The Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research guided the development of the interview guide and of the coding tree. Results Outer setting: Concerns regarding funding surfaced in both countries. Due to limited health insurance coverage, additional fees would limit accessibility in Suriname. In the Netherlands, midwives dreaded lower revenue due to reimbursement policies that favour one-on-one care. Inner setting: Appropriate space for GC was absent in one Dutch and three Surinamese facilities. Role division regarding GC implementation was clearer in the Netherlands than in Suriname. Innovation: HCPs from both countries expected increased social support, health knowledge among women, and continuity of care(r). Individuals/innovation deliverers: Self-efficacy and motivation emerged as intertwined determinants to GC implementation in both countries. Individuals/innovation recipients: Competing demands can potentially lower acceptability of GC in both countries. While Dutch HCPs prioritised an open dialogue with mothers, Surinamese HCPs encouraged the inclusion of partners. Process: Campaigns to raise awareness of GC were proposed. Language barriers were a concern for Dutch but not for Surinamese HCPs. Conclusions While the most striking differences between both countries were found in the outer setting, they trickle down and affect all layers of context. Ultimately, at a later stage, the process evaluation will show if those outer setting barriers we identified prior to implementation actually hindered GC implementation. Changes to the health care systems would ensure sustained implementation in both countries, and this conclusion feeds into a more general discussion: how to proceed when contextual analyses reveal barriers that cannot be addressed with the time and resources available.

Objective This study aimed to elucidate the maternal complications and risk factors linked with assisted vaginal delivery. Methods We conducted a retrospective, descriptive analysis of hospital records, identifying 3500 cases of vaginal delivery between 2020 and 2022. Data encompassing demographics, complications from the vaginal delivery including post-partum haemorrhage, birth passage injuries, puerperal infection and other pertinent details were documented. Various critical factors, including the duration of the second stage of labor, maternal anemia, underlying maternal health conditions such as diabetes mellitus and hypertension, neonatal birth weight, maternal weight, the expertise of the attending surgeon, and the timing of deliveries were considered. Results The rates for assisted vacuum and forceps delivery were 6.0% (211/3500 cases) and 0.3% (12/3500), respectively. Postpartum haemorrhage emerged as the predominant complication in vaginal deliveries, with a rate of 7.3% (256/3500; P  < 0.001). Notably, postpartum haemorrhage had significant associations with gestational diabetes mellitus class A1 (adjusted odds ratio [AOR] 1.46; 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.01–2.11; P  = 0.045), assisted vaginal delivery (AOR 5.11; 95% CI 1.30–20.1; P  = 0.020), prolonged second stage of labour (AOR 2.68; 95% CI 1.09–6.58; P  = 0.032), elevated maternal weight (71.4 ± 12.2 kg; AOR 1.02; 95% CI 1.01–1.03; P  = 0.003) and neonates being large for their gestational age (AOR 3.02; 95% CI 1.23–7.43; P  = 0.016). Conclusions The primary complication arising from assisted vaginal delivery was postpartum haemorrhage. Associated factors were a prolonged second stage of labour, foetal distress, large-for-gestational-age neonates and elevated maternal weight. Cervical and labial injuries correlated with neonates being large for their gestational age. Notably, puerperal infections were related to maternal anaemia (haematocrit levels < 33%). Clinical trial registration Thai Clinical Trials Registry: 20220126004.

In the United Kingdom, roughly 1 in 250 babies are stillborn each year. Most women who experience stillbirth become pregnant again – 80% within a year of loss. Presently, obstetric-led care is recommended; though there is a growing body of evidence to support provision of specialist services. The Rainbow Clinic is a specialist antenatal service providing care for pregnancies after loss incorporating clinical and psychological care. This study aimed to assess patient experience at the Rainbow Clinic and identify areas for clinical improvement. A 13-item questionnaire was distributed to pregnant women who attended the Rainbow Clinics at the Oxford Road and Wythenshawe sites of Saint Mary’s Hospital, Manchester, UK between July 2016 and June 2021. Descriptive statistics and unpaired t-test were used for quantitative data and summative content analysis for qualitative data. Four-hundred and fifty-six women completed the questionnaire. The mean patient experience score per quarter was stable with an average of 21.1 (± 3.0) for the five years, with a maximum attainable score of 25. The COVID-19 pandemic had no effect on patient experience at the Rainbow Clinic (pre-pandemic vs. during-pandemic: mean 21.2 v 21.3; p = 0.75). Free-text responses demonstrated women felt positively about the antenatal care received. Identified areas for improvement included “more awareness of the [Rainbow] sticker” to ensure women with previous loss are identified; increased publicity of the Rainbow Clinic services; developing more clinics at different locations to improve accessibility; and continuing specialist input into intrapartum care. Specialist antenatal care provided by the Rainbow Clinic was rated as of a high standard. Potential future improvements include sticker alterations (or other mechanisms to identify women who have experienced a previous loss) and develop increased awareness of the clinic in other institutions.