Joseph R Egger1, Jennifer Headley2, Yixuan Li2, Min Kyung Kim2, Julius Kirya3, Luke Aldridge4, Stefanie Weiland5, Joy Noel Baumgartner2. 1. Duke Global Health Institute, Duke University, 310 Trent Drive, Durham, NC, 27708, USA. joseph.egger@duke.edu. 2. Duke Global Health Institute, Duke University, 310 Trent Drive, Durham, NC, 27708, USA. 3. LifeNet International, Kampala, Uganda. 4. Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, Baltimore, MD, USA. 5. American Leprosy Missions, Washington, DC, USA.
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: Efforts to improve access to healthcare in low-income countries will not achieve the maternal and child health (MCH) Sustainable Development Goals unless a concomitant improvement in the quality of care (QoC) occurs. This study measures infrastructure and QoC indicators in rural Ugandan health facilities. Valid measure of the quality of current clinical practices in resource-limited settings are critical for effectively intervening to reduce adverse maternal and neonatal outcomes. METHODS: Facility-based assessments of infrastructure and clinical quality during labor and delivery were conducted in six primary care health facilities in the greater Masaka area, Uganda in 2017. Data were collected using direct observation of clinical encounters and facility checklists. Direct observation comprised the entire delivery process, from initial client assessment to discharge, and included emergency management (e.g. postpartum hemorrhage, neonatal resuscitation). Health providers were assessed on their adherence to best practice standards of care. RESULTS: The quality of facility infrastructure was relatively high in facilities, with little variation in availability of equipment and supplies. However, heterogeneity in adherence to best clinical practices was noted across procedure type and facility. Adherence to crude measures of clinical quality were relatively high but more sensitive measures of the same clinical practice were found to be much lower. CONCLUSIONS FOR PRACTICE: Standard indicators of clinical practice may be insufficient to validly measure clinical quality for maternal and newborn care if we want to document evidence of impact.
OBJECTIVES: Efforts to improve access to healthcare in low-income countries will not achieve the maternal and child health (MCH) Sustainable Development Goals unless a concomitant improvement in the quality of care (QoC) occurs. This study measures infrastructure and QoC indicators in rural Ugandan health facilities. Valid measure of the quality of current clinical practices in resource-limited settings are critical for effectively intervening to reduce adverse maternal and neonatal outcomes. METHODS: Facility-based assessments of infrastructure and clinical quality during labor and delivery were conducted in six primary care health facilities in the greater Masaka area, Uganda in 2017. Data were collected using direct observation of clinical encounters and facility checklists. Direct observation comprised the entire delivery process, from initial client assessment to discharge, and included emergency management (e.g. postpartum hemorrhage, neonatal resuscitation). Health providers were assessed on their adherence to best practice standards of care. RESULTS: The quality of facility infrastructure was relatively high in facilities, with little variation in availability of equipment and supplies. However, heterogeneity in adherence to best clinical practices was noted across procedure type and facility. Adherence to crude measures of clinical quality were relatively high but more sensitive measures of the same clinical practice were found to be much lower. CONCLUSIONS FOR PRACTICE: Standard indicators of clinical practice may be insufficient to validly measure clinical quality for maternal and newborn care if we want to document evidence of impact.
Entities:
Keywords:
Adherence; Clinical; Direct clinical observation; Low-income countries; Maternal and child health; Quality of care
Authors: Waldemar A Carlo; Shivaprasad S Goudar; Imtiaz Jehan; Elwyn Chomba; Antoinette Tshefu; Ana Garces; Sailajanandan Parida; Fernando Althabe; Elizabeth M McClure; Richard J Derman; Robert L Goldenberg; Carl Bose; Nancy F Krebs; Pinaki Panigrahi; Pierre Buekens; Hrishikesh Chakraborty; Tyler D Hartwell; Linda L Wright Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2010-02-18 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Joseph R Egger; Kayla Stankevitz; Robert Korom; Philip Angwenyi; Brittney Sullivan; Jun Wang; Sonia Hatfield; Emma Smith; Karishma Popli; Jessica Gross Journal: Health Policy Plan Date: 2017-07-01 Impact factor: 3.344
Authors: Florina Serbanescu; Howard I Goldberg; Isabella Danel; Tadesse Wuhib; Lawrence Marum; Walter Obiero; James McAuley; Jane Aceng; Ewlyn Chomba; Paul W Stupp; Claudia Morrissey Conlon Journal: BMC Pregnancy Childbirth Date: 2017-01-19 Impact factor: 3.007
Authors: Erlyn K Macarayan; Anna D Gage; Svetlana V Doubova; Frederico Guanais; Ephrem T Lemango; Youssoupha Ndiaye; Peter Waiswa; Margaret E Kruk Journal: Lancet Glob Health Date: 2018-11 Impact factor: 26.763
Authors: Elysia Larson; Daniel Vail; Godfrey M Mbaruku; Redempta Mbatia; Margaret E Kruk Journal: Int J Qual Health Care Date: 2017-02-01 Impact factor: 2.038
Authors: Joy Noel Baumgartner; Jennifer Headley; Julius Kirya; Josh Guenther; James Kaggwa; Min Kyung Kim; Luke Aldridge; Stefanie Weiland; Joseph Egger Journal: Health Policy Plan Date: 2021-08-12 Impact factor: 3.344