| Literature DB >> 35480409 |
Beverly Marion Ochieng1, Giorgia Lattanzi2, Milka Choge3, Dan Clement Owino Kaseje1, Amardeep Singh Thind4.
Abstract
Introduction: maternal and neonatal health status indicators have steadily improved over time in Kenya. Significant challenges remain, including persistent inequities between population subgroups, and a health system that delivers variable quality care and inconsistent access to care. This paper highlights results of an ex-post evaluation to assess the impact of maternal and health systems strengthening intervention to improve newborn health outcomes in Bungoma County, Kenya, focusing on access to and quality of maternal and neonatal care.Entities:
Keywords: Maternal; access; care; health systems; neonatal; quality; utilization
Mesh:
Year: 2022 PMID: 35480409 PMCID: PMC9011907 DOI: 10.11604/pamj.2022.41.125.30170
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Pan Afr Med J
maternal and new-born improvement (MANI) programme intervention package
| Intervention package | Intervention programme activities |
|---|---|
| Health systems strengthening | Leadership and governance: conducted policy dialogue meetings which resulted in the development of the county health policy, county health bill, county procurement policy, the new staff transfers policy, county annual work plans and budgets, annual review reports and application of the organizational capacity assessment (OCA) tool and capacity development plans; fora used were the monthly management breakfast meetings with county leadership, the set-up of technical working groups and a partner coordination forum; major focus included coaching and mentorship on leadership and governance of the CHMT; service delivery: focused on MNH - supportive supervision; performance review, mentorship; quality improvement; infection prevention and control; and referral systems |
| Demand creation for maternal and neonatal care services | Health financing: transport voucher system that was given to the women in intervention supported MANI sub counties; community support: including support to implementing the national community health strategy and more specifically establishing and strengthening community units (CU); support to Community Health Volunteers (CHV) and birth companions; social behavior change and communication; respectful maternity care; community scorecard and demand generation |
| Health workforce | Health service provider training and medical products, vaccines and technologies: included in-service and pre-service training in emergency obstetric and neonatal care (EmONC), quality improvement (QI) and maternal and perinatal death surveillance and response (MPDSR) training for hospital health service providers; leadership and governance -management training to hospital management boards; health facility management committees and support to planning and budgeting. Health service management training: technical working groups (TWGs) were created and operational, including for human resources for health, health care financing, quality of service delivery, monitoring and evaluation, community health services, and health products and technology management. Health information systems (HIS): at sub-county level support focused on the intervention sub-county annual work plans and budgets and application of the OCA with intervention sub-county teams as well as orientation and training of Hospital Management Boards (HMBs), micro support for health facility planning and budgeting and orientation and training of Health Facility Management Committees (HFMC) |
CHMT: county health management team; MNH: maternal neonatal health; MANI: maternal and new-born improvement
Figure 1map of Bungoma County, highlighting health facilities and sub-counties supported by the MANI project and Save the Children International
"patched up" study design
| 2015 | 2018 | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| NR | O1 | ||
| NR | X | O2 | |
| NR | O3 |
NR: non-random assignment; X: intervention; row 3 and 4 represent the intervention counties; row 5 represents the control counties
baseline vs end-line analyses
| Indicator | Baseline | End-line | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| N | % | N | % | |
|
| ||||
|
| ||||
| Zero | 181 | 78 | 287 | 74 |
| Some expenditure | 52 | 22 | 102 | 26 |
|
| ||||
| Zero | 0 | 0 | 39 | 16 |
| Some expenditure | 261 | 100 | 198 | 84 |
|
| ||||
| Zero | 97 | 59 | 314 | 84 |
| Some expenditure | 67 | 40 | 58 | 16 |
|
| ||||
|
| ||||
| No | 32 | 7 | 3 | 1 |
| Yes | 446 | 93 | 389 | 99 |
|
| ||||
| No | 221 | 46 | 102 | 26 |
| Yes | 257 | 54 | 290 | 74 |
|
| ||||
| No | 376 | 79 | 274 | 70 |
| Yes | 100 | 21 | 118 | 30 |
|
| ||||
| No | 124 | 26 | 19 | 5 |
| Yes | 352 | 74 | 373 | 95 |
|
| ||||
| No | 75 | 65 | 224 | 67 |
| Yes | 40 | 35 | 120 | 33 |
|
| ||||
|
| ||||
| No | 187 | 56 | 245 | 68 |
| Yes | 146 | 44 | 117 | 32 |
|
| ||||
|
| ||||
| No | 124 | 28 | 46 | 12 |
| Yes | 321 | 72 | 343 | 88 |
|
| ||||
| No | 250 | 72 | 136 | 36 |
| Yes | 97 | 28 | 237 | 64 |
| Type of delivery | ||||
| Caesarean section | 31 | 9 | 26 | 7 |
| Vaginal delivery | 321 | 91 | 347 | 93 |
|
| ||||
| Low | 86 | 57 | 48 | 38 |
| Medium | 31 | 21 | 66 | 53 |
| High | 33 | 22 | 11 | 9 |
|
| ||||
|
| ||||
| Low | 9 | 36 | 31 | 26 |
| Medium | 8 | 32 | 37 | 31 |
| High | 8 | 32 | 51 | 43 |
|
| ||||
| No | 153 | 48 | 113 | 33 |
| Yes | 168 | 52 | 228 | 67 |
p<0.05
intervention vs control group results
| Indicator | Intervention | Control | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| n | % | N | % | |
|
| ||||
|
| ||||
| Zero | 322 | 73 | 270 | 61 |
| Some expenditure | 121 | 27 | 172 | 39 |
|
| ||||
| Zero | 42 | 15 | 8 | 3 |
| Some expenditure | 237 | 85 | 229 | 97 |
|
| ||||
| Zero | 361 | 86 | 320 | 82 |
| Some expenditure | 61 | 14 | 70 | 18 |
|
| ||||
|
| ||||
| No | 4 | 1 | 7 | 2 |
| Yes | 444 | 99 | 441 | 98 |
|
| ||||
| No | 114 | 25 | 134 | 30 |
| Yes | 334 | 75 | 314 | 70 |
|
| ||||
| No | 316 | 71 | 329 | 73 |
| Yes | 132 | 29 | 119 | 27 |
|
| ||||
| No | 25 | 6 | 58 | 13 |
| Yes | 423 | 94 | 390 | 87 |
|
| ||||
| No | 258 | 61 | 172 | 44 |
| Yes | 165 | 39 | 218 | 56 |
|
| ||||
|
| ||||
| No | 254 | 88 | 130 | 73 |
| Yes | 36 | 12 | 47 | 27 |
|
| ||||
|
| ||||
| No | 205 | 46 | 243 | 55 |
| Yes | 239 | 54 | 198 | 45 |
|
| ||||
| No | 47 | 11 | 33 | 7 |
| Yes | 397 | 89 | 408 | 93 |
|
| ||||
| Caesarean section | 29 | 7 | 29 | 7 |
| Vaginal delivery | 394 | 93 | 363 | 93 |
|
| ||||
| Low | 70 | 42 | 120 | 55 |
| Medium | 83 | 50 | 84 | 39 |
| High | 12 | 7 | 14 | 6 |
|
| ||||
|
| ||||
| Low | 45 | 27 | 27 | 11 |
| Medium | 56 | 34 | 118 | 47 |
| High | 63 | 38 | 105 | 42 |
|
| ||||
| No | 119 | 31 | 101 | 29 |
| Yes | 266 | 69 | 253 | 71 |
p<0.05
overall summative results
| MNH Indicators | Baseline vs end-line (O1 vs O2) | Intervention vs control (O2 vs O3) |
|---|---|---|
|
| ||
| Expenditure for ANC services | + | |
| Expenditure for transport to the health facility for delivery | + | + |
| Expenditure for delivery | + | |
|
| ||
| At least one ANC contact with a formal provider | + | |
| At least four ANC contacts with a formal provider | + | |
| First ANC contact in the first trimester of pregnancy | + | |
| Delivery in a health facility | + | + |
| Postnatal care provided to the mother within 48 hours of delivery | _ | |
|
| ||
| Postnatal care provided to the child within 48 hours of delivery | - | _ |
| Quality of care (mother) | ||
| Quality of antenatal care | + | + |
| Satisfaction with the antenatal care received | + | |
|
| ||
| Quality of postnatal care provided to the mother | + | + |
| Quality of care (baby) | ||
| Quality of postnatal care provided to the child | - | |
| Initiation of breastfeeding within the first hour | + |