Search

Introduction Despite recommendations from the WHO, antenatal care (ANC) coverage remains low in many low-income and middle-income countries (LMICs). Community health workers (CHWs) can play an important role in expanding ANC coverage through pregnancy identification, provision of health education, screening for complications, delivery of therapeutic care and referral to higher levels of care. However, despite the success of CHW programmes in various countries, WHO has called for additional research to develop evidence-based models that optimise CHW service delivery and that can be replicated across geographies.Methods The ProCCM Trial was a cluster-randomised controlled trial to compare proactive home visits by CHWs (intervention, 69 village clusters) to the provision of CHW care at community fixed sites only (control, 68 village clusters) in the Bankass health district in Central Mali. In this study, we conducted a cost-effectiveness analysis of proactive CHW home visits in improving ANC utilisation, a secondary outcome of the ProCCM trial. We analysed five ANC outcomes: (1) number of ANC contacts, (2) at least one ANC contact, (3) at least four ANC contacts, (4) at least eight ANC contacts and (5) ANC initiated in the first trimester. We assumed two perspectives, a CHW programme’s and the Full ANC programme’s perspective, which included facility-based as well as community-based ANC. We estimated programme costs, incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) and probabilities of the intervention being more cost-effective than the control at different willingness-to-pay (WTP) thresholds.Results Proactive home visits were cost-saving from the CHW programme’s perspective (ICERs: −$21.39 to −$79.20 per ANC utilisation outcome) and from the Full ANC programme perspective (ICERs: −$1.70 to −$6.30 per ANC utilisation outcome) compared with the fixed-site CHW care. The likelihood of the intervention being more cost-effective than the control was 100% at WTP thresholds $0 per ANC utilisation outcome and between $12.5 and $50.00 per ANC utilisation outcome in the CHW- and Full ANC programme perspectives, respectively.Conclusion Our results provide evidence that proactive home visits produce more value per dollar spent as a means of improving the uptake of ANC services compared with fixed-site CHW services.Trial registration number NCT02694055.

Background Proactive community case management (ProCCM) has shown promise to advance goals of universal health coverage (UHC). ProCCM community health workers (CHWs) face operational challenges when pursuing their goal of visiting every household in their service area at least twice monthly to proactively find sick patients. We developed a software extension (UHC Mode) to an existing CHW mobile application featuring user interface design improvements to support CHWs in planning daily home visits. We evaluated the effect of UHC Mode on minimum expected home visit coverage.Methods We conducted a parallel-group, two-arm randomised controlled trial of ProCCM CHWs in two separate regions in Mali. CHWs were randomly assigned to UHC Mode or the standard mobile application (control) with a 1:1 allocation. Randomisation was stratified by health catchment area. CHWs and other programme personnel were not masked to arm allocation. CHWs used their assigned intervention for 4 months. Using a difference-in-differences analysis, we estimated the mean change in minimum expected home visit coverage from preintervention to postintervention between arms.Results Enrolment occurred in January 2019. Of 199 eligible CHWs randomised to the intervention or control arm, 196 were enrolled and 195 were included in the analysis. Households whose CHW used UHC Mode had 2.41 times higher odds of minimum expected home visit coverage compared with households whose CHW used the control (95% CI 1.68 to 3.47; p

Introduction Universal Health Coverage (UHC) is a critical goal under the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) for health. Achieving this goal for reproductive, maternal, newborn and child health (RMNCH) service coverage will require an understanding of national progress and how socioeconomic and demographic subgroups of women and children are being reached by health interventions.Methods We accessed coverage databases produced by the International Centre for Equity in Health, which were based on reanalysis of Demographic and Health Surveys, Multiple Indicator Cluster Surveys and Reproductive and Health Surveys. We limited the data to 58 countries with at least two surveys since 2008. We fitted multilevel linear regressions of coverage of RMNCH, divided into four main components—reproductive health, maternal health, child immunisation and child illness treatment—to estimate the average annual percentage point change (AAPPC) in coverage for the period 2008–2017 across these countries and for subgroups defined by maternal age, education, place of residence and wealth quintiles. We also assessed change in the pace of coverage progress between the periods 2000–2008 and 2008–2017.Results Progress in RMNCH coverage has been modest over the past decade, with statistically significant AAPPC observed only for maternal health (1.25, 95% CI 0.90 to 1.61) and reproductive health (0.83, 95% CI 0.47 to 1.19). AAPPC was not statistically significant for child immunisation and illness treatment. Progress, however, varied largely across countries, with fast or slow progressors spread throughout the low-income and middle-income groups. For reproductive and maternal health, low-income and lower middle-income countries appear to have progressed faster than upper middle-income countries. For these two components, faster progress was also observed in older women and in traditionally less well-off groups such as non-educated women, those living in rural areas or belonging to the poorest or middle wealth quintiles than among groups that are well off. The latter groups however continue to maintain substantially higher coverage levels over the former. No acceleration in RMNCH coverage was observed when the periods 2000–2008 and 2008–2017 were compared.Conclusion At the dawn of the SDGs, progress in coverage in RMNCH remains insufficient at the national level and across equity dimensions to accelerate towards UHC by 2030. Greater attention must be paid to child immunisation to sustain the past gains and to child illness treatment to substantially raise its coverage across all groups.