Search

Background: In 2005-06, only 39 % of Indian women delivered in a health facility. Given that deliveries at home increase the risk of maternal mortality, it was in this context in 2005, that the Indian Government implemented the Janani Suraksha Yojana program that incentivizes poor women to give birth in a health facility by providing them with a cash transfer upon discharge. JSY helped raise institutional delivery to 74 % in the eight years since its implementation. Despite the success of the JSY in raising institutional delivery proportions, the large number of beneficiaries (105 million), and the cost of the program, there have been few qualitative studies exploring why women participate (or not) in the program. The objective of this paper was to explore this.Methods: In March 2013, we conducted 24 individual in-depth interviews with women who delivered within the previous 12 months in two districts of Madhya Pradesh, India. Qualitative framework analysis was used to analyze the data.Results: Our findings suggest that women's increased participation in the program reflect a shift in the social norm. Drivers of the shift include social pressure from the Accredited Social Health Activist (ASHA) to deliver in a health facility, and a growing individual perception of the importance for 'safe' and 'easy' delivery which was most likely an expression of the new social norm. While the incentive was an important influence on many women's choices, others did not perceive it as an important consideration in their decision to deliver in a health facility. Many women reported procedural difficulties to receive the benefit. Retaining the cash incentive was also an issue due to out-of-pocket expenditures incurred at the facility. Non-participation was often unintentional and caused by personal circumstances, poor geographic access or driven by a perception of poor quality of care provided in program facilities.Conclusions: In summary, while the cash incentive was important for some women in facilitating an institutional birth, the shift in social norm (possibly in part facilitated by the program) and therefore their own perceptions has played a major role in them giving birth in facilities. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Despite recognition of the adverse impacts of the mistreatment of women during pregnancy, labour and birth, there remains limited evidence on interventions that could reduce mistreatment and build a culture of respectful maternity care (RMC) in health facilities. The sustainability of effective individual interventions and their adaptability to various global contexts remain uncertain. In this systematic review, we aimed to synthesise the best available evidence that has been shown to be effective in reducing the mistreatment of women and/or enhancing RMC during women's maternity care in health facilities. Methods: We searched the online databases PubMed, CINAHL, EBSCO Nursing/Academic Edition, Embase, African Journals Online (AJOL), Scopus, Web of Science, and grey literature using predetermined search strategies. We included cluster randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and pre-and-post observational studies and appraised them using JBI critical appraisal checklists. The findings were synthesised narratively without conducting a meta-analysis. The certainty of evidence was assessed using GRADE criteria. Results: From the 1493 identified records, 11 studies from six sub-Sahara African countries and one study from India were included: three cluster RCTs and nine pre- and post-studies. We identified diverse interventions implemented via various approaches including individual health care providers, health systems, and policy amendments. Moderate certainty evidence from two cluster RCTs and four pre- and post-studies suggests that multi-component interventions can reduce the odds of mistreatment that women may experience in health facilities, with odds of reduction ranging from 18 per cent to 66 per cent. Similarly, women's perceptions of maternity care as respectful increased in moderate certainty evidence from two cluster RCTs and five pre- and post-studies with reported increases ranging from 5 per cent to 50 per cent. Conclusions: Multi-component interventions that address attitudes and behaviors of health care providers, motivate staff, engage the local community, and alleviate health facility and system constraints have been found to effectively reduce mistreatment of women and/or increase respectful maternity care. Such interventions which go beyond a single focus like staff training appear to be more likely to bring about change. Therefore, future interventions should consider diverse approaches that incorporate these components to improve maternal care. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: While increase in the number of women delivering in health facilities has been rapid, the quality of obstetric and neonatal care continues to be poor in India, contributing to high maternal and neonatal mortality.Methods: The USAID ASSIST Project supported health workers in 125 public health facilities (delivering approximately 180,000 babies per year) across six states to use quality improvement (QI) approaches to provide better care to women and babies before, during and immediately after delivery. As part of this intervention, each month, health workers recorded data related to nine elements of routine care alongside data on perinatal mortality. We aggregated facility level data and conducted segmented regression to analyse the effect of the intervention over time.Results: Care improved to 90-99% significantly (p < 0.001) for eight of the nine process elements. A significant (p < 0.001) positive change of 30-70% points was observed during post intervention for all the indicators and 3-17% points month-to-month progress shown from the segmented results. Perinatal mortality declined from 26.7 to 22.9 deaths/1000 live births (p < 0.01) over time, however, it is not clear that the intervention had any significant effect on it.Conclusion: These results demonstrate the effectiveness of QI approaches in improving provision of routine care, yet these approaches are underused in the Indian health system. We discuss the implications of this for policy makers. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Since 2005, India has implemented a national cash transfer programme, the Janani Suraksha Yojana (JSY), which provides women a cash transfer upon giving birth in an existing public facility. This has resulted in a steep rise in facility births across the country. The early years of the programme saw efforts being made to strengthen the ability of facilities to provide obstetric care. Given that the JSY has been able to draw millions of women into facilities to give birth (there have been more than 50 million beneficiaries thus far), it is important to study the ability of these facilities to provide emergency obstetric care (EmOC), as the functionality of these facilities is critical to improved maternal and neonatal outcomes. We studied the availability and level of provision of EmOC signal functions in public facilities implementing the JSY programme in three districts of Madhya Pradesh (MP) state, central India. These are measured against the World Health Report (WHR) 2005benchmarks. As a comparison, we also study the functionality and contribution of private sector facilities to the provision of EmOC in these districts.Methods: A cross-sectional survey of all healthcare facilities offering intrapartum care was conducted between February 2012 and April 2013. The EmOC signal functions performed in each facility were recorded, as were human resource data and birth numbers for each facility.Results: A total of 152 facilities were surveyed of which 118 were JSY programme facilities. Eighty-six percent of childbirths occurred at programme facilities, two thirds of which occurred at facilities that did not meet standards for the provision basic emergency obstetric care. Of the 29 facilities that could perform caesareans, none could perform all the basic EmOC functions. Programme facilities provided few EmOC signal functions apart from parenteral antibiotic or oxytocic administration. Complicated EmOC provision was found predominantly in non-programme (private) facilities; only one of six facilities able to provide such care was in the public sector and therefore in the JSY programme. Only 13 % of all qualified obstetricians practiced at programme facilities.Conclusions: Given the high proportion of births in public facilities in the state, the JSY programme has an opportunity to contribute to the reduction in maternal and perinatal mortality However, for the programme to have a greater impact on outcomes; EmOC provision must be significantly improved.. While private, non-programme facilities have better human resources and perform caesareans, most women in the state give birth under the JSY programme in the public sector. A demand-side programme such as the JSY will only be effective alongside an adequate supply side (i.e., a facility able to provide EmOC). [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Expanding institutional deliveries is a policy priority to achieve MDG5. India adopted a policy to encourage facility births through a conditional cash incentive scheme, yet 28% of deliveries still occur at home. In this context, it is important to understand the care experience of women who have delivered at home, and also at health facilities, analyzing any differences, so that services can be improved to promote facility births. This study aims to understand women's experience of delivery care during home and facility births, and the factors that influence women's decisions regarding their next place of delivery.Method: A community-based cross-sectional survey was undertaken in a district of Jharkhand state in India. Interviews with 500 recently delivered women (210 delivered at facility and 290 delivered at home) included socio-demographic characteristics, experience of their recent delivery, and preference of future delivery site. Data analysis included frequencies, binary and multiple logistic regressions.Results: There is no major difference in the experience of care between home and facility births, the only difference in care being with regard to pain relief through massage, injection and low cost of delivery for those having home births. 75% women wanted to deliver their next child at a facility, main reasons being availability of medicine (29.4%) and perceived health benefits for mother and baby (15%). Women with higher education (AOR = 1.67, 95% CI = 1.04-3.07), women who were above 25 years (AOR = 2.14, 95% CI = 1.26-3.64), who currently delivered at facility (AOR = 5.19, 95% CI = 2.97-9.08) and had health problem post-delivery (AOR = 1.85, 95% CI = 1.08-3.19) were significant predictors of future facility-based delivery.Conclusion: The predictors for facility deliveries include, availability of medicines and supplies, potential health benefits for the mother and newborn and the perception of good care from the providers. There is a growing preference for facility delivery particularly among women with higher age group, education, income and those who had antennal checkup. In order to uptake facility births, the quality improvement initiatives should regularly assess and address women's experiences of care. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]