| Literature DB >> 23418446 |
Ebenezer Oduro-Mensah1, Aku Kwamie, Edward Antwi, Sarah Amissah Bamfo, Helen Mary Bainson, Benjamin Marfo, Mary Amoakoh Coleman, Diederick E Grobbee, Irene Akua Agyepong.
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: To explore the "how" and "why" of care decision making by frontline providers of maternal and newborn services in the Greater Accra region of Ghana and determine appropriate interventions needed to support its quality and related maternal and neonatal outcomes.Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2013 PMID: 23418446 PMCID: PMC3572062 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0055610
Source DB: PubMed Journal: PLoS One ISSN: 1932-6203 Impact factor: 3.240
Figure 1Initial Conceptual framework.
“How” and “Why” care decisions are made by frontline providers of maternal and newborn services
Figure 2Final Conceptual framework based on data analysis.
“How” and “Why” care decisions are made by frontline providers of maternal and newborn services.
Demographic Data of Respondents to questionnaire survey on Reproductive and Neonatal Health (RNH) service provision.
| Variables | Rural district | Municipality | Sub-metropolis | Total | % of all respondents | ||||||||
| MCH staff | FP staff | Total | MCH staff | FP staff | Total | MCH staff | FP staff | Total | MCH staff | FP staff | Total | ||
| N = 16 | N = 6 | N = 22 | N = 16 | N = 5 | N = 21 | N = 18 | N = 4 | n = 22 | N = 50 | N = 15 | N = 65 | ||
| Mean age in years (SD) | 35.8 (10.4) | 39 (12.6) | 44.4 (12.0) | 50 (5.7) | 45.8 (11.0) | 50.5 (6.4) | 42.7 (11.7) | 45 (10.7) | |||||
| Male | 1 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 3 | 0 | 3 | 5% |
| Female | 15 | 6 | 21 | 15 | 5 | 20 | 17 | 4 | 21 | 47 | 15 | 62 | 95% |
|
| |||||||||||||
| District hospital | 8 | 2 | 10 | 3 | 0 | 3 | 8 | 2 | 10 | 19 | 4 | 23 | 35% |
| Polyclinic/Health centre | 4 | 3 | 7 | 12 | 3 | 15 | 8 | 2 | 10 | 24 | 8 | 32 | 49% |
| CHPS zone /compound | 4 | 1 | 5 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 2 | 0 | 2 | 7 | 1 | 8 | 12% |
| Private | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 2 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 2 | 2 | 3% |
|
| |||||||||||||
| Medical Doctor | 1 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 3 | 0 | 3 | 5% |
| Physician Assistant | 1 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 3 | 0 | 3 | 5% |
| Nurse | 14 | 6 | 20 | 14 | 5 | 19 | 16 | 4 | 20 | 44 | 15 | 59 | 91% |
Responses to use of and Types of Aids to Decision Making among Frontline Service Providers of Reproductive and Neonatal Health Services.
| Variables | Rural district | Municipality | Sub-metropolis | Total | % of all respondents | ||||||||
| MCH staff | FP staff | Total | MCH staff | FP staff | Total | MCH staff | FP staff | Total | MCH staff | FP staff | Total | ||
| N = 16 | N = 6 | N = 22 | N = 16 | N = 5 | N = 21 | N = 18 | N = 4 | n = 22 | N = 50 | N = 15 | N = 65 | ||
|
| |||||||||||||
| Yes | 16 | 6 | 22 | 16 | 5 | 21 | 16 | 4 | 20 | 48 | 15 | 63 | 97% |
| No | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 2 | 0 | 2 | 2 | 0 | 2 | 3% |
|
| |||||||||||||
| Printed Protocol /Guidelines | 16 | 6 | 22 | 15 | 5 | 20 | 15 | 4 | 19 | 46 | 15 | 61 | 94% |
| Charts | 16 | 6 | 22 | 14 | 5 | 19 | 13 | 4 | 17 | 43 | 15 | 58 | 89% |
| Workshops | 16 | 5 | 21 | 15 | 5 | 20 | 13 | 4 | 17 | 44 | 14 | 58 | 89% |
| Expert advice | 16 | 6 | 22 | 14 | 5 | 19 | 13 | 4 | 17 | 43 | 15 | 58 | 89% |
| Telephone | 14 | 3 | 17 | 14 | 3 | 17 | 13 | 2 | 15 | 41 | 8 | 49 | 75% |
|
| |||||||||||||
| Never or rarely | 1 | 0 | 1 | 2 | 4% | ||||||||
| Occasionally, frequently or always | 12 | 14 | 17 | 43 | 86% | ||||||||
| Non-respondents | 3 | 2 | 0 | 5 | 10% | ||||||||
Responses to the use of Information Communication Technology as Aids to Clinical Decision Making.
| Variables | Rural district | Municipality | Sub-metropolis | Total | % of all respondents | ||||||||
| MCH staff | FP staff | Total | MCH staff | FP staff | Total | MCH staff | FP staff | Total | MCH staff | FP staff | Total | ||
| N = 16 | N = 6 | N = 22 | N = 16 | N = 5 | N = 21 | N = 18 | N = 4 | n = 22 | N = 50 | N = 15 | N = 65 | ||
|
| |||||||||||||
| Yes | 9 | 2 | 11 | 14 | 2 | 16 | 16 | 3 | 19 | 39 | 7 | 46 | 71% |
| No | 7 | 4 | 11 | 2 | 3 | 5 | 2 | 1 | 3 | 11 | 8 | 19 | 29% |
|
| |||||||||||||
| Yes | 16 | 6 | 22 | 16 | 2 | 18 | 15 | 4 | 19 | 47 | 12 | 59 | 91% |
| No | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 0 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 6 | 9% |
|
| |||||||||||||
| Yes | 12 | 3 | 15 | 13 | 4 | 17 | 13 | 1 | 14 | 38 | 8 | 46 | 71% |
| No | 4 | 2 | 6 | 3 | 0 | 3 | 5 | 3 | 8 | 12 | 5 | 17 | 26% |
| Non-respondents | 0 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 2 | 2 | 3% |
|
| |||||||||||||
| At least once a day | 1 | 0 | 1 | 3 | 0 | 3 | 3 | 0 | 3 | 7 | 0 | 7 | 11% |
| Several times a week | 8 | 2 | 10 | 8 | 2 | 10 | 4 | 0 | 4 | 20 | 4 | 24 | 37% |
| Occasionally | 3 | 1 | 4 | 2 | 2 | 4 | 6 | 1 | 7 | 11 | 4 | 15 | 23% |
|
| |||||||||||||
| Yes | 12 | 5 | 17 | 16 | 5 | 21 | 10 | 4 | 14 | 38 | 14 | 52 | 80% |
| No | 4 | 1 | 5 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 8 | 0 | 8 | 12 | 1 | 13 | 20% |
|
| |||||||||||||
| Yes | 12 | 3 | 15 | 16 | 3 | 19 | 13 | 0 | 13 | 41 | 6 | 47 | 72% |
| No | 4 | 3 | 7 | 0 | 2 | 2 | 5 | 4 | 9 | 9 | 9 | 18 | 28% |
|
| |||||||||||||
| Yes | 7 | 2 | 9 | 8 | 2 | 10 | 8 | 0 | 8 | 23 | 4 | 27 | 42% |
| No | 9 | 3 | 12 | 8 | 3 | 11 | 10 | 4 | 14 | 27 | 10 | 37 | 57% |
| Non-respondents | 0 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 2% |
Responses to the use of face-to-face meetings as aids to clinical decision making among frontline providers of reproductive and neonatal health services.
| Variables | Rural district | Municipality | Sub-metropolis | Total | % of all respondents | ||||||||
| MCH staff | FP staff | Total | MCH staff | FP staff | Total | MCH staff | FP staff | Total | MCH staff | FP staff | Total | ||
| N = 16 | N = 6 | N = 22 | N = 16 | N = 5 | N = 21 | N = 18 | N = 4 | n = 22 | N = 50 | N = 15 | N = 65 | ||
|
| |||||||||||||
| Yes | 5 | 3 | 8 | 9 | 5 | 14 | 10 | 0 | 10 | 24 | 8 | 32 | 49% |
| No | 11 | 2 | 13 | 7 | 0 | 7 | 8 | 4 | 12 | 26 | 6 | 32 | 49% |
| Non-respondent | 0 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 2% |
|
| |||||||||||||
| Yes | 14 | 5 | 19 | 15 | 5 | 20 | 13 | 4 | 17 | 42 | 14 | 56 | 86% |
| No | 2 | 0 | 2 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 5 | 0 | 5 | 8 | 0 | 8 | 12% |
| Non-respondents | 0 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 2% |
|
| |||||||||||||
| Once a week | 4 | 4 | 8 | 5 | 0 | 5 | 2 | 0 | 2 | 11 | 4 | 15 | 23% |
| Twice a month | 2 | 0 | 2 | 5 | 1 | 6 | 3 | 2 | 5 | 10 | 3 | 13 | 20% |
| Once a month | 7 | 1 | 8 | 4 | 4 | 8 | 7 | 2 | 9 | 18 | 7 | 25 | 38% |
| Less than once a month | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 2% |
| Thrice in a year | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 2% |
| Occasionally | 1 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 2% |
| Non-respondents | 2 | 1 | 3 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 5 | 0 | 5 | 8 | 1 | 9 | 14% |
Responses to availability of guidelines at the point of service delivery.
| Variables | Rural district | Municipality | Sub-metropolis | Total | % of all respondents | ||||||||
| MCH staff | FP staff | Total | MCH staff | FP staff | Total | MCH staff | FP staff | Total | MCH staff | FP staff | Total | ||
| N = 16 | N = 6 | N = 22 | N = 16 | N = 5 | N = 21 | N = 18 | N = 4 | n = 22 | N = 50 | N = 15 | N = 65 | ||
|
| |||||||||||||
| Yes, Safe Motherhood protocol | 9 | 12 | 12 | 33 | 66% | ||||||||
| Yes, Standard treatment guidelines | 15 | 14 | 10 | 39 | 78% | ||||||||
| Yes, others | 10 | 2 | 0 | 12 | 24% | ||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||
| Yes, Family planning protocol | 6 | 4 | 4 | 14 | 93% | ||||||||
| Yes, WHO Guidelines on FP | 4 | 2 | 3 | 9 | 60% | ||||||||
| Yes, eligibility criteria wheel | 4 | 2 | 3 | 9 | 60% | ||||||||
| Yes, flipcharts on FP | 6 | 5 | 4 | 15 | 100% | ||||||||
| Yes, flip charts on abortion | 1 | 0 | 2 | 3 | 20% | ||||||||
Summary of responses to the open ended question: “List three ways in which you believe you can best be assisted to make the right decisions at the point of service delivery when faced with an emergency and uncertain as to what to do”.
| Category of response | No. ofresponses | % of responses (N = 171) | % of staff (N = 65) | Examples of responses in this category |
| Protocols and Guidelines | 37 | 22% | 57% | 13 out of the 37 responses in the category specifically asked for “printed protocols”; 12 wanted “charts”; most of the rest mentioned specific protocols they wanted; a few just wanted unspecified “guidelines' or “protocols”. |
| Consultation - Senior colleague/Expert | 36 | 21% | 55% | “Access to the supervisor and calling them”; “advice from senior colleagues”; “an experienced midwife can be contacted”; “easy access to phone for calling a senior colleague for help”; “expert advice” |
| Equipment tools andsupplies | 26 | 15% | 40% | “Adequate provision of logistics”; “all equipment should be available”; “computers with internet access”; “basic emergency items should be made available e.g. oxygen cylinder” |
| Provide a Telephone/telephone | 15 | 9% | 23% | “Provision of an office phone”; “provision of official phones”; “telephone” |
| Periodic refresher training | 13 | 8% | 20% | “attend regular workshop to upgrade knowledge”; “regular in-service training”; “training programs”; “workshops” |
| Referral transportation/Ambulance | 14 | 8% | 22% | “ambulance availability”; “cash to assist clients transportation”; “means of transport for referral” |
| Other referral related | 6 | 4% | 9% | “prompt communication with referral centres”; “quick referral” |
| Staffing | 11 | 6% | 17% | “specialists care”; “specialists availability”; “a need for a doctor”; “more staff”; “doctors should be available and easily approachable”; “there should be an obstetrician on call 24/7” |
| Peer consultation | 7 | 4% | 11% | “advice from colleagues”; “by calling a colleague” |
| Client participation | 2 | 1% | 3% | An inauguration ceremony should be done to make community members aware of the Community Based Health Planning and Services (CHPS) compounds; The Community Health Committee should be inaugurated |
| Other /unclear howto categorize | 4 | 2% | 6% | “call for help”; “career progression”; “effective communication”; “regular facilitative supervision” |