Supportive care is a key component of person-centered maternity care (PCMC), and includes aspects such as timely and attentive care, pain control, and the health facility environment. Yet, few researchers have explored the degree of supportive care delivered or providers' perceptions on supportive care practices during childbirth. The researchers' aim is to evaluate the extent of supportive care provided to women during childbirth and to identify the drivers behind the lack of supportive care from the perspective of maternity providers in a rural county in Western Kenya. Data are from a mixed-methods study in Migori County in Western Kenya with 49 maternity providers (32 clinical and 17 non-clinical). Providers were asked structured questions on various aspects of supportive care followed by open ended questions on why certain practices were performed or not. We conducted descriptive analysis of the quantitative data and thematic analysis of the qualitative data. We analyzed data and found inconsistent and suboptimal practices with regards to supportive care. Some providers reported long patient wait times in their facilities as well as the inability to provide the best care due to staff shortages in their facilities. Others also reported low interest and inquiry about women's experience of pain during childbirth, which was driven by perceptions of pain during childbirth as normal, facility culture and norms, and lack of pain medicine. For the facility environment, providers reported relatively clean facilities. They, however, noted inconsistent water and electricity as well as inadequate safety. We conclude that many drivers of the lack of supportive care are caused by structural health systems issues, therefore a health system strengthening approach can be useful for improving the supportive care dimension of PCMC, and thus quality of care overall.

Background

Effective communication and respect for women's autonomy are critical components of person-centered care. Yet, there is limited evidence in low-resource settings on providers' perceptions of the importance and extent of communication and women's autonomy during childbirth. Similarly, few studies have assessed the potential barriers to effective communication and maintenance of women's autonomy during childbirth. We sought to bridge these gaps.

Methods

Data are from a mixed-methods study in Migori County in Western Kenya with 49 maternity providers (32 clinical and 17 non-clinical). Providers were asked structured questions on various aspects of communication and autonomy followed by open ended questions on why certain practices were performed or not. We conducted descriptive analysis of the quantitative data and thematic analysis of the qualitative data.

Results

Despite acknowledging the importance of various aspects of communication and women's autonomy, providers reported incidences of poor communication and lack of respect for women's autonomy: 57% of respondents reported that providers never introduce themselves to women and 38% reported that women are never able to be in the birthing position of their choice. Also, 33% of providers reported that they did not always explain why they are doing exams or procedures and 73% reported that women were not always asked for permission before exams or procedures. The reasons for lack of communication and autonomy fall under three themes with several sub-themes: (1) work environment-perceived lack of time, language barriers, stress and burnout, and facility culture; (2) provider knowledge, intentions, and assumptions-inadequate provider knowledge and skill, forgetfulness and unconscious behaviors, self-protection and comfort, and assumptions about women's knowledge and expectations; and (3) women's ability to demand or command effective communication and respect for their autonomy-women's lack of participation, women's empowerment and provider bias.

Conclusions

Most providers recognize the importance of various aspects of communication and women's autonomy, but they fail to provide it for various reasons. To improve communication and autonomy, we need to address the different factors that negatively affect providers' interactions with women.

Background

This study aimed to assess the quality of antenatal care (ANC) women received in Migori county, Kenya-including both service provision and experience dimensions-and to examine factors associated with each dimension.

Methods

We used survey data collected in 2016 in Migori county from 1031 women aged 15-49 who attended ANC at least once in their most recent pregnancy. ANC quality service provision was measured by nine questions on receipt of recommended ANC services, and experience of care by 18 questions on information, communication, dignity, and facility environment. We summed the responses to the individual items to generate ANC service provision and experience of care scores. We used both linear and logistic regression to examine predictors.

Results

The average service provision score was 10.9 (SD = 2.4) out of a total of 16. Most women received some recommended services once, but not at the frequency recommended by the Kenyan Ministry of Health. About 90% had their blood pressure measured, and 78% had a urine test, but only 58 and 14% reported blood pressure monitoring and urine test, respectively, at every visit. Only 16% received an ultrasound at any time during ANC. The average experience score is 27.3 (SD = 8.2) out of a total score of 42, with key gaps demonstrated in communication. About half of women were not educated on pregnancy complications. Also, about one-third did not often understand the purposes of tests and medicines received and did not feel able to ask questions to the health care provider. In multivariate analysis, women who were literate, employed, and who received all their ANC in a health center had higher experiences scores than women who were illiterate (coefficient = 1.52, CI:0.26,2.79), unemployed (coefficient = 2.73, CI:1.46,4.00), and received some ANC from a hospital (coefficient = 1.99, CI: 0.84, 3.14) respectively. The wealthiest women had two times higher odds of receiving an ultrasound than the poorest women (OR = 2.00, CI:1.20,3.33).

Conclusion

Quality of ANC is suboptimal in both service provision and experience domains, with disparities by demographic and socioeconomic factors and facility type. More efforts are needed to improve quality of ANC and to eliminate the disparities.

Disrespect and abuse during childbirth are violations of women's human rights and an indicator of poor-quality care. Disrespect and abuse during childbirth are widespread, yet data on providers' perspectives on the topic are limited. We examined providers' perspectives on the frequency and drivers of disrespect and abuse during facility-based childbirth in a rural county in Kenya. We used data from a mixed-methods study in a rural county in Western Kenya with 49 maternity providers (32 clinical and 17 non-clinical) in 2016. Providers were asked structured questions on disrespect and abuse, followed by open-ended questions on why certain behaviours were exhibited (or not). Most providers reported that women were often treated with dignity and respect. However, 53% of providers reported ever observing other providers verbally abuse women and 45% reported doing so themselves. Observation of physical abuse was reported by 37% of providers while 35% reported doing so themselves. Drivers of disrespect and abuse included perceptions of women being difficult, stress and burnout, facility culture and lack of accountability, poor facility infrastructure and lack of medicines and supplies, and provider attitudes. Provider bias, training and women's empowerment influenced how different women were treated. We conclude that disrespect and abuse are driven by difficult situations in a health system coupled with a facilitating sociocultural environment. Providers resorted to disrespect and abuse as a means of gaining compliance when they were stressed and feeling helpless. Interventions to address disrespect and abuse need to tackle the multiplicity of contributing factors. These should include empowering providers to deal with difficult situations, develop positive coping mechanisms for stress and address their biases. We also need to change the culture in facilities and strengthen the health systems to address the system-level stressors.

Background

Some opportunities to routinely capture and improve respectful maternity care (RMC) during facility-based childbirth include quality improvement (QI) initiatives, community-based monitoring efforts through community score cards (CSC), and performance-based financing (PBF) initiatives. But there is limited guidance on which types of RMC indicators are best suited for inclusion in these initiatives. We sought to provide practical evidence-based recommendations on indicators that may be used for routine measurement of RMC in programs.

Methods

We used a rapid review approach, which included (1) reviewing existing documents and publications to extract RMC indicators and identify which have or can be used in facility-based QI, CSCs, and PBF schemes; (2) surveying RMC and maternal health experts to rank indicators, and (3) analyzing survey data to select the most recommended indicators.

Results

We identified 49 indicators spanning several domains of RMC and mistreatment including dignified/nondignified care, verbal and physical abuse, privacy/confidentiality, autonomy/loss of autonomy, supportive care/lack thereof, communication, stigma, discrimination, trust, facility environment/culture, responsiveness, and nonevidence-based care. Based on the analysis of the survey data, we recommend 33 indicators (between 2 and 6 indicators for each RMC domain) that may be suited for incorporation in both facility-based QI and CSC-related monitoring efforts.

Conclusion

Integrating RMC indicators into QI and CSC initiatives, as well as in other maternal and neonatal health programs, could help improve RMC at the facility and community level. More research is needed into whether RMC can be integrated into PBF initiatives. Integration of RMC indicators into programs to improve quality of care and other health system outcomes will facilitate routine monitoring and accountability around experience of care. Measurement and improvement of women's experiences will increase maternal health service utilization and improve quality of care as a means of reducing maternal and neonatal morbidity and mortality.

BACKGROUND:mHealth technologies are proliferating globally to address quality and timeliness of health care delivery by Community Health Workers (CHWs). This study aimed to examine CHW and beneficiaries' perceptions of a new mHealth intervention (Common Application Software [CAS] for CHWs in India. The objectives of the study were to seek perspectives of CHWs and beneficiaries on the uptake of CAS, changes in CHW-beneficiary interactions since the introduction of CAS and potential barriers faced by CHWs in use of CAS. Further, important contextual factors related to CHW-beneficiary interface and dynamics that may have a bearing on CAS have been described. METHODS:A qualitative study was conducted in two states of India (Bihar and Madhya Pradesh) from March-April 2018 with CHWs (n = 32) and beneficiaries (n = 55). All interviews were conducted and recorded in Hindi, transcribed and translated into English, and coded and thematically analysed using Dedoose. FINDINGS:The mHealth intervention was acceptable to the CHWs who felt that CAS improved their status in the communities where they worked. Beneficiaries' views were a mix of positive and negative perceptions. The divergent views between CHWs and beneficiaries surrounding the use and impact of CAS highlight an underlying mistrust, socio-cultural barriers in engagement, and technological barriers in implementation. All these contextual factors can influence the perception and uptake of CAS. CONCLUSIONS:mHealth interventions targeting CHWs and beneficiaries have the potential to improve performance of CHWs, reduce barriers to information and potentially change the behaviors of beneficiaries. While technology is an enabler for CHWs to improve their service delivery, it does not necessarily help overcome social and cultural barriers that impede CHW-beneficiary interactions to bring about improvements in knowledge and health behaviors. Future interventions for CHWs including mHealth interventions should examine contextual factors along with the acceptability, accessibility, and usability by beneficiaries and community members.