Search

A crucial question in the aim to attain MDG5 is whether it can be achieved faster with the scaling up of multi-purpose health workers operating in the community or with the scaling up of professional skilled birth attendants working in health facilities. Most advisers concerned with maternal mortality reduction concur to promote births in facilities with professional attendants as the ultimate strategy. The evidence, however, is scarce on what it takes to progress in this path, and on the 'interim solutions' for situations where the majority of women still deliver at home. These questions are particularly relevant as we have reached the twentieth anniversary of the safe motherhood initiative without much progress made. In this paper we review the current situation of human resources for maternal health as well as the problems that they face. We propose seven key areas of work that must be addressed when planning for scaling up human resources for maternal health in light of MDG5, and finally we indicate some advances recently made in selected countries and the lessons learned from these experiences. Whilst the focus of this paper is on maternal health, it is acknowledged that the interventions to reduce maternal mortality will also contribute to significantly reducing newborn mortality. Addressing each of the seven key areas of work -- recommended by the first International Forum on 'Midwifery in the Community', Tunis, December 2006 -- is essential for the success of any MDG5 programme. We hypothesize that a great deal of the stagnation of maternal health programmes has been the result of confusion and careless choices in scaling up between a limited number of truly skilled birth attendants and large quantities of multi-purpose workers with short training, fewer skills, limited authority and no career pathways. We conclude from the lessons learnt that no significant progress in maternal mortality reduction can be achieved without a strong political decision to empower midwives and others with midwifery skills, and a substantial strengthening of health systems with a focus on quality of care rather than on numbers, to give them the means to respond to the challenge. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: There is a dearth of evidence on the causal effects of different care delivery approaches on health system satisfaction. A better understanding of public satisfaction with the health system is particularly important within the context of task shifting to community health workers (CHWs). This paper determines the effects of a CHW program focused on maternal health services on public satisfaction with the health system among women who are pregnant or have recently delivered.Methods: From January 2013 to April 2014, we carried out a cluster-randomized controlled health system implementation trial of a CHW program. Sixty wards in Dar es Salaam, Tanzania, were randomly allocated to either a maternal health CHW program (36 wards) or the standard of care (24 wards). From May to August 2014, we interviewed a random sample of women who were either currently pregnant or had recently delivered a child. We used five-level Likert scales to assess women's satisfaction with the CHW program and with the public-sector health system in Dar es Salaam.Results: In total, 2329 women participated in the survey (response rate 90.2%). Households in intervention areas were 2.3 times as likely as households in control areas to have ever received a CHW visit (95% CI 1.8, 3.0). The intervention led to a 16-percentage-point increase in women reporting they were satisfied or very satisfied with the CHW program (95% CI 3, 30) and a 15-percentage-point increase in satisfaction with the public-sector health system (95% CI 3, 27).Conclusions: A CHW program for maternal and child health in Tanzania achieved better public satisfaction than the standard CHW program. Policy-makers and implementers who are involved in designing and organizing CHW programs should consider the potential positive impact of the program on public satisfaction.Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov, EJF22802. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]