Search

BackgroundDigital innovations have shown promise for improving maternal health service delivery. However, low- and middle-income countries are still at the adoption-utilization stage. Evidence on mobile health has been described as a black box, with gaps in theoretical explanations that account for the ecosystem of health care and their effect on adoption mechanisms. Bliss4Midwives, a modular integrated diagnostic kit to support antenatal care service delivery, was piloted for 1 year in Northern Ghana. Although both users and beneficiaries valued Bliss4Midwives, results from the pilot showed wide variations in usage behavior and duration of use across project sites. ObjectiveTo strengthen the design and implementation of an improved prototype, the study objectives were two-fold: to identify causal factors underlying the variation in Bliss4Midwives usage behavior and understand how to overcome or leverage these in subsequent implementation cycles. MethodsUsing a multiple case study design, a realist evaluation of Bliss4Midwives was conducted. A total of 3 candidate program theories were developed and empirically tested in 6 health facilities grouped into low and moderate usage clusters. Quantitative and qualitative data were collected and analyzed using realist thinking to build configurations that link intervention, context, actors, and mechanisms to program outcomes, by employing inductive and deductive reasoning. Nonparametric t test was used to compare the perceived usefulness and perceived ease of use of Bliss4Midwives between usage clusters. ResultsWe found no statistically significant differences between the 2 usage clusters. Low to moderate adoption of Bliss4Midwives was better explained by fear, enthusiasm, and high expectations for service delivery, especially in the absence of alternatives. Recognition from pregnant women, peers, supervisors, and the program itself was a crucial mechanism for device utilization. Other supportive mechanisms included ownership, empowerment, motivation, and adaptive responses to the device, such as realignment and negotiation. Champion users displayed high adoption-utilization behavior in contexts of participative or authoritative supervision, yet used the device inconsistently. Intervention-related (technical challenges, device rotation, lack of performance feedback, and refresher training), context-related (staff turnover, competing priorities, and workload), and individual factors (low technological self-efficacy, baseline knowledge, and internal motivation) suppressed utilization mechanisms. ConclusionsThis study shed light on optimal conditions necessary for Bliss4Midwives to thrive in a complex social and organizational setting. Beyond usability and viability studies, advocates of innovative technologies for maternal care need to consider how implementation strategies and contextual factors, such as existing collaborations and supervision styles, trigger mechanisms that influence program outcomes. In addition to informing scale-up of the Bliss4Midwives prototype, our results highlight the need for interventions that are guided by research methods that account for complexity.

We urgently need answers to basic epidemiological questions regarding SARS-CoV-2 infection in pregnant and postpartum women and its effect on their newborns. While many national registries, health facilities, and research groups are collecting relevant data, we need a collaborative and methodologically rigorous approach to better combine these data and address knowledge gaps, especially those related to rare outcomes. We propose that using a sequential, prospective meta-analysis (PMA) is the best approach to generate data for policy- and practice-oriented guidelines. As the pandemic evolves, additional studies identified retrospectively by the steering committee or through living systematic reviews will be invited to participate in this PMA. Investigators can contribute to the PMA by either submitting individual patient data or running standardized code to generate aggregate data estimates. For the primary analysis, we will pool data using two-stage meta-analysis methods. The meta-analyses will be updated as additional data accrue in each contributing study and as additional studies meet study-specific time or data accrual thresholds for sharing. At the time of publication, investigators of 25 studies, including more than 76,000 pregnancies, in 41 countries had agreed to share data for this analysis. Among the included studies, 12 have a contemporaneous comparison group of pregnancies without COVID-19, and four studies include a comparison group of non-pregnant women of reproductive age with COVID-19. Protocols and updates will be maintained publicly. Results will be shared with key stakeholders, including the World Health Organization (WHO) Maternal, Newborn, Child, and Adolescent Health (MNCAH) Research Working Group. Data contributors will share results with local stakeholders. Scientific publications will be published in open-access journals on an ongoing basis.

Over the last three decades, integrated care has emerged as an important health system strategy to improve population health while addressing the unique needs of structurally marginalised communities. However, less attention has been given to the role of integrated care in addressing issues related to inequities in health and health care. In this commentary we introduce the concept of Equity Promoting Integrated Care (EPIC) that situates integrated care in a social justice context to frame the actions necessary to center equity as a priority for integrated care. We suggest that efforts to advance the design and implementation of integrated care should focus on three avenues for future research and practice, namely, the collaborative mobilization of a global network of integrated care stakeholders to advocate for social justice and health equity, investing in equity-focused approaches to implementation science that highlight the importance of social concepts such as colonialism and intersectionality to advance the theory and practice of implementing EPIC models of care, and leveraging innovative approaches to measuring equity-related aspects of integrated care to inform continuous improvement of health systems. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Realist evaluation is in essence a theory-building and testing approach. We argue that in practice, the theory-building potential of realist evaluation, review and research is not fully exploited in the field of global health. Our assumption is that the Structure-Agency-Culture explanatory framework of critical realist Margaret Archer could stimulate realist evaluators to conceptualize and systematically explore how structural and cultural conditions interact with programmes that aim at introducing social change. We propose step-wise guidance towards integrating the Structure–Agency–Culture framework into the development of realist programme theories. We present a worked example from an urban adolescent health study in poor neighbourhoods of Kampala, Mumbai, New Delhi and Cotonou. The guidance aims to bring to the fore the role of agency and context through the analysis of the interactions between structure, culture, agency and mechanisms. This is helpful in realist research in general, and in evaluations of complex interventions oriented towards social change. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: The declaration of Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID‐19) as a Public Health Emergency of International Concern (PHEIC) on 30 January 2020 required rapid implementation of early investigations to inform appropriate national and global public health actions. Methods: The suite of existing pandemic preparedness generic epidemiological early investigation protocols was rapidly adapted for COVID‐19, branded the 'UNITY studies' and promoted globally for the implementation of standardized and quality studies. Ten protocols were developed investigating household (HH) transmission, the first few cases (FFX), population seroprevalence (SEROPREV), health facilities transmission (n = 2), vaccine effectiveness (n = 2), pregnancy outcomes and transmission, school transmission, and surface contamination. Implementation was supported by WHO and its partners globally, with emphasis to support building surveillance and research capacities in low‐ and middle‐income countries (LMIC). Results: WHO generic protocols were rapidly developed and published on the WHO website, 5/10 protocols within the first 3 months of the response. As of 30 June 2021, 172 investigations were implemented by 97 countries, of which 62 (64%) were LMIC. The majority of countries implemented population seroprevalence (71 countries) and first few cases/household transmission (37 countries) studies. Conclusion: The widespread adoption of UNITY protocols across all WHO regions indicates that they addressed subnational and national needs to support local public health decision‐making to prevent and control the pandemic. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Cost is a major barrier to maternal health service utilisation for many women in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs). However, comparable evidence of the available cost data in these countries is limited. We conducted a systematic review and comparative analysis of costs of utilising maternal health services in these settings. Methods: We searched peer-reviewed and grey literature databases for articles reporting cost of utilising maternal health services in LMICs published post-2000. All retrieved records were screened and articles meeting the inclusion criteria selected. Quality assessment was performed using the relevant cost-specific criteria of the Consolidated Health Economic Evaluation Reporting Standards (CHEERS) checklist. To guarantee comparability, disaggregated costs data were inflated to 2019 US dollar equivalents. Total adjusted costs and cost drivers associated with utilising each service were systematically compared. Where heterogeneity in methods or non-disaggregated costs was observed, narrative synthesis was used to summarise findings. Results: Thirty-six studies met our inclusion criteria. Many of the studies costed multiple services. However, the most frequently costed services were utilisation of normal vaginal delivery (22 studies), caesarean delivery (13), and antenatal care (ANC) (10). The least costed services were post-natal care (PNC) and post-abortion care (PAC) (5 each). Studies used varied methods for data collection and analysis and their quality ranged from low to high with most assessed as average or high. Generally, across all included studies, cost of utilisation progressively increased from ANC and PNC to delivery and PAC, and from public to private providers. Medicines and diagnostics were main cost drivers for ANC and PNC while cost drivers were variable for delivery. Women experienced financial burden of utilising maternal health services and also had to pay some unofficial costs to access care, even where formal exemptions existed. Conclusion: Consensus regarding approach for costing maternal health services will help to improve their relevance for supporting policy-making towards achieving universal health coverage. If indeed the post-2015 mission of the global community is to "leave no one behind," then we need to ensure that women and their families are not facing unnecessary and unaffordable costs that could potentially tip them into poverty. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

There have been recent concerns about the failure of several global health interventions. Interventions are considered to have failed when they are unable to achieve the intended results. Failure may be linked to how the intervention was designed (design failure) or how it was implemented (implementation failure). Recently, substantial efforts have been employed to improve the outcomes of health interventions. These efforts have led to the development of several theories, models, and frameworks in implementation science to improve the quality of implementation, bridging the divide between evidence and practice. But significant gaps still exist. Whereas much work has been done to develop frameworks and approaches to improve implementation fidelity, not as much effort has been done to guide the adherence of interventions to program theory during the design of the programs. Further, there have been concerns about the applicability of these frameworks in the real-world. This article uses examples to illustrate these gaps and further proposes a pragmatic framework to address identified gaps, thus aiding evidence-informed program design and implementation. The proposed Theory-Design-Implementation (TyDI) framework will support policymakers, program planners and implementers to address potential design and implementation failure, thus improving the fidelity of interventions. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]