Search

Background: The World Health Organization (WHO) Labour Care Guide (LCG) is a paper-based labour monitoring tool designed to facilitate the implementation of WHO's latest guidelines for effective, respectful care during labour and childbirth. Implementing the LCG into routine intrapartum care requires a strategy that improves healthcare provider practices during labour and childbirth. Such a strategy might optimize the use of Caesarean section (CS), along with potential benefits on the use of other obstetric interventions, maternal and perinatal health outcomes, and women's experience of care. However, the effects of a strategy to implement the LCG have not been evaluated in a randomised trial. This study aims to: (1) develop and optimise a strategy for implementing the LCG (formative phase); and (2) To evaluate the implementation of the LCG strategy compared with usual care (trial phase). Methods: In the formative phase, we will co-design the LCG strategy with key stakeholders informed by facility assessments and provider surveys, which will be field tested in one hospital. The LCG strategy includes a LCG training program, ongoing supportive supervision from senior clinical staff, and audit and feedback using the Robson Classification. We will then conduct a stepped-wedge, cluster-randomized pilot trial in four public hospitals in India, to evaluate the effect of the LCG strategy intervention compared to usual care (simplified WHO partograph). The primary outcome is the CS rate in nulliparous women with singleton, term, cephalic pregnancies in spontaneous labour (Robson Group 1). Secondary outcomes include clinical and process of care outcomes, as well as women's experience of care outcomes. We will also conduct a process evaluation during the trial, using standardized facility assessments, in-depth interviews and surveys with providers, audits of completed LCGs, labour ward observations and document reviews. An economic evaluation will consider implementation costs and cost-effectiveness. Discussion: Findings of this trial will guide clinicians, administrators and policymakers on how to effectively implement the LCG, and what (if any) effects the LCG strategy has on process of care, health and experience outcomes. The trial findings will inform the rollout of LCG internationally. Trial registration: CTRI/2021/01/030695 (Protocol version 1.4, 25 April 2022). Plain language summary: The new WHO Labour Care Guide (LCG) is an innovative partograph that emphasises women-centred, evidence-based care during labour and childbirth. Together with clinicians working at four hospitals in India, we will develop and test a strategy to implement the LCG into routine care in labour wards of these hospitals. We will use a randomised trial design where this LCG strategy is introduced sequentially in each of the four hospitals, in a random order. We will collect data on all women giving birth and their newborns during this period and analyse whether the LCG strategy has any effects on the use of Caesarean section, women's and newborn's health outcomes, and women's experiences during labour and childbirth. While the trial is being conducted, we will also collect qualitative and quantitative data from doctors, nurses and midwives working in these hospitals, to understand their perspectives and experiences of using the LCG in their day-to-day work. In addition, we will collect economic data to understand how much the LCG strategy costs, and how much money it might save if it is effective. Through this study, our international collaboration will generate critical evidence and innovative tools to support implementation of the LCG in other countries. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objectives: To investigate the nature and context of mistreatment during labour and childbirth at public and private sector maternity facilities in Uttar Pradesh, India. Methods: This study analyses mixed-methods data obtained through systematic clinical observations and open-ended comments recorded by the observers to describe care provision for 275 mothers and their newborns at 26 hospitals in three districts of Uttar Pradesh from 26 May to 8 July 2015. We conducted a bivariate descriptive analysis of the quantitative data and used a thematic approach to analyse qualitative data. Findings: All women in the study encountered at least one indicator of mistreatment. There was a high prevalence of not offering birthing position choice (92%) and routine manual exploration of the uterus (80%) in facilities in both sectors. Private sector facilities performed worse than the public sector for not allowing birth companions (p = 0.02) and for perineal shaving (p = < 0.001), whereas the public sector performed worse for not ensuring adequate privacy (p = < 0.001), not informing women prior to a vaginal examination (p = 0.01) and for physical violence (p = 0.04). Prepared comments by observers provide further contextual insights into the quantitative data, and additional themes of mistreatment, such as deficiencies in infection prevention, lack of analgesia for episiotomy, informal payments and poor hygiene standards at maternity facilities were identified. Conclusions: Mistreatment of women frequently occurs in both private and public sector facilities. This paper contributes to the literature on mistreatment of women during labour and childbirth at maternity facilities in India by articulating new constructs of overtreatment and under-treatment. There are five key implications of this study. First, a systematic and context-specific effort to measure mistreatment in public and private sector facilities in high burden states in India is required. Second, a training initiative to orient all maternity care personnel to the principles of respectful maternity care would be useful. Third, innovative mechanisms to improve accountability towards respectful maternity care are required. Fourth, participatory community and health system interventions to support respectful maternity care would be useful. Lastly, we note that there needs to be a long-term, sustained investment in health systems so that supportive and enabling work-environments are available to front- line health workers. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: India launched a national conditional cash transfer program, Janani Suraksha Yojana (JSY), aimed at reducing maternal mortality by promoting institutional delivery in 2005. It provides a cash incentive to women who give birth in public health facilities. This paper studies the extent of program uptake, reasons for participation/ non participation, factors associated with non uptake of the program, and the role played by a program volunteer, accredited social health activist (ASHA), among mothers in Ujjain district in Madhya Pradesh, India. Methods: A cross-sectional study was conducted from January to May 2011 among women giving birth in 30 villages in Ujjain district. A semi-structured questionnaire was administered to 418 women who delivered in 2009. Socio-demographic and pregnancy related characteristics, role of the ASHA during delivery, receipt of the incentive, and reasons for place of delivery were collected. Multinomial regression analysis was used to identify predictors for the outcome variables; program delivery, private facility delivery, or a home delivery. Results: The majority of deliveries (318/418; 76%) took place within the JSY program; 81% of all mothers below poverty line delivered in the program. Ninety percent of the women had prior knowledge of the program. Most program mothers reported receiving the cash incentive within two weeks of delivery. The ASHA's influence on the mother's decision on where to deliver appeared limited. Women who were uneducated, multiparious or lacked prior knowledge of the JSY program were significantly more likely to deliver at home. Conclusion: In this study, a large proportion of women delivered under the program. Most mothers reporting timely receipt of the cash transfer. Nevertheless, there is still a subset of mothers delivering at home, who do not or cannot access emergency obstetric care under the program and remain at risk of maternal death. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Antenatal care (ANC) services are a prime focus of the Government of India's National Health Mission (NHM), of which a key pillar is the promotion of maternal and child health. To ensure uninterrupted service delivery at the last mile, a cadre of Frontline Health Workers (FLHWs) has been appointed and health centres established at the village level. However, the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic and the nationwide lockdown from late March to June 2020 impacted pregnant women's access to institutional antenatal care services. Methods: Using a qualitative research design, data was collected through 12 in-depth interviews (IDIs) with pregnant women and 17 IDIs with frontline health workers in the selected six districts under study. The narratives were analysed using inductive coding in Atlas.ti. Results: During the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic, pregnant women, most of whom belonged to poor and marginalised groups, were left with limited access to health centres and FLHWs. Respondents from the study areas of rural Jharkhand, Madhya Pradesh and Uttar Pradesh extensively reported concerns stemming from the lockdown that influenced their decision to access ANC services. These included anxieties around meeting their families' daily needs due to a loss of livelihood (in particular, abject food insecurity), inability to access healthcare, and a sense of mistrust in public health systems and functionaries. All of these, coupled with the real threat to health posed by COVID-19, disrupted their plans for pregnancy and delivery, further compunding the risk to their health and wellbeing. Conclusion: This study identified several social, behavioural and structural facets of the communities that contributed to the confusion, anxiety and helplessness experienced during the COVID-19 first wave by both groups, viz. pregnant women and FLHWs. In planning and implementing initiaves to ensure the delivery and uptake of ANC services in this and similar contexts during times of crisis, these facets must be considered. Plain language summary: This article highlights the status of ANC services during the nationwide lockdown imposed in the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic in the Indian states of Jharkhand, Madhya Pradesh and Uttar Pradesh. Data was collected through 12 in-depth interviews with pregnant women and 17 in-depth interviews with frontline health workers. Findings suggest that pregnant women were aware of the unprecedented threat of COVID-19 and recommended protective measures through trusted sources of information, including their local Accredited Social Health Activist (ASHA). However, both pregnant women and FLHWs believed that the information they received on the health risks of the pandemic and strategies to address these was inadequate. Temporary suspension of health services in the rural countryside meant that pregnant women could not track the foetus's health status, resulting in confusion and distress. Limited or no interaction with FLHWs, coupled with a reported lack of attention to conditions unrelated to COVID-19 and discrimination at healthcare institutions increased the uncertainty around institutional deliveries. This was further heightened by the loss of livelihoods due to the shutdown of businesses during the lockdown, as the respondents could not turn to private hospitals for childbirth. This resulted in the collapse of the trust of pregnant women and their families in the public healthcare system. To bridge this gap and alleviate the sense of mistrust the pandemic has created in its end-users, strategies to improve the utilisation of health services should respond to the barriers identified in this study. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: The study aims to assess the discordance between self-reported and observed measures of mistreatment of women during childbirth in public health facilities in Uttar Pradesh, India, as well as correlates of these measures and their discordance. Methods: Cross sectional data were collected through direct observation of deliveries and follow-up interviews with women (n = 875) delivering in 81 public health facilities in Uttar Pradesh. Participants were surveyed on demographics, mistreatment during childbirth, and maternal and newborn complications. Provider characteristics (training, age) were obtained through interviews with providers, and observation data were obtained from checklists completed by trained nurse investigators to document quality of care at delivery. Mistreatment was assessed via self-report and observed measures which included 17 and 6 items respectively. Cohen's kappas assessed concordance between the 6 items common in the self-report and observed measures. Regression models assessed associations between characteristics of women and providers for each outcome. Results: Most participants (77.3%) self-reported mistreatment in at least 1 of the 17-item measure. For the 6 items included in both self-report and observations, 9.1% of women self-reported mistreatment, whereas observers reported 22.4% of women being mistreated. Cohen's kappas indicated mostly fair to moderate concordance. Regression analyses found that multiparous birth (AOR = 1.50, 95% CI = 1.06-2.13), post-partum maternal complications (AOR = 2.0, 95% CI = 1.34-3.06); new-born complications (AOR = 2.6, 95% CI = 1. 96-4.03) and not having an Skilled Birth Attendant (SBA) trained provider (AOR = 1.47, 95% CI = 1.05-2.04) were associated with increased risk for mistreatment as measured by self-report. In contrast, only provider characteristics like older provider (AOR = 1.03, 95% CI = 1.02-1.05) and provider not trained in SBA (AOR = 1.44, 95% CI = 1.02-2.02) were associated with mistreatment as measured through observations. Younger age at marriage (AOR = 0.86, 95% CI = 0.78-0.95) and provider characteristics (older provider AOR = 1.05, 95% CI = 1.01-1.09; provider not trained in SBA AOR = 0.96, 95% CI = 0.92-0.99) were associated with discordance (based on mistreatment reported by observer but not by women). Conclusion: Provider mistreatment during childbirth is prevalent in Uttar Pradesh and may be under-reported by women, particularly when they are younger or when providers are older or less trained. The findings warrant programmatic action as well as more research to better understand the context and drivers of both behavior and reporting. Trial registration: CTRI/2015/09/006219. Registered 28 September 2015. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]