"
Journal
Journal of global health
ISSN: 2047-2986
Titre abrégé: J Glob Health
Pays: Scotland
ID NLM: 101578780
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
06 2019
06 2019
Historique:
entrez:
14
3
2019
pubmed:
14
3
2019
medline:
22
3
2019
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
To achieve Sustainable Development Goals and Universal Health Coverage, programmatic data are essential. The Every Newborn Action Plan, agreed by all United Nations member states and >80 development partners, includes an ambitious Measurement Improvement Roadmap. Quality of care at birth is prioritised by both Every Newborn and Ending Preventable Maternal Mortality strategies, hence metrics need to advance from health service contact alone, to content of care. As facility births increase, monitoring using routine facility data in DHIS2 has potential, yet validation research has mainly focussed on maternal recall surveys. The EN-BIRTH is an observational study including >20 000 facility births in three countries (Tanzania, Bangladesh and Nepal) to validate selected indicators. Direct clinical observation will be compared with facility register data and a pre-discharge maternal recall survey for indicators including: uterotonic administration, immediate newborn care, neonatal resuscitation and Kangaroo mother care. Indicators including neonatal infection management and antenatal corticosteroid administration, which cannot be easily observed, will be validated using inpatient records. Trained clinical observers in Labour/Delivery ward, Operation theatre, and Kangaroo mother care ward/areas will collect data using a tablet-based customised data capturing application. Sensitivity will be calculated for numerators of all indicators and specificity for those numerators with adequate information. Other objectives include comparison of denominator options (ie, true target population or surrogates) and quality of care analyses, especially regarding intervention timing. Barriers and enablers to routine recording and data usage will be assessed by data flow assessments, quantitative and qualitative analyses. To our knowledge, this is the first large, multi-country study validating facility-based routine data compared to direct observation for maternal and newborn care, designed to provide evidence to inform selection of a core list of indicators recommended for inclusion in national DHIS2. Availability and use of such data are fundamental to drive progress towards ending the annual 5.5 million preventable stillbirths, maternal and newborn deaths.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
To achieve Sustainable Development Goals and Universal Health Coverage, programmatic data are essential. The Every Newborn Action Plan, agreed by all United Nations member states and >80 development partners, includes an ambitious Measurement Improvement Roadmap. Quality of care at birth is prioritised by both Every Newborn and Ending Preventable Maternal Mortality strategies, hence metrics need to advance from health service contact alone, to content of care. As facility births increase, monitoring using routine facility data in DHIS2 has potential, yet validation research has mainly focussed on maternal recall surveys. The
METHODS
EN-BIRTH is an observational study including >20 000 facility births in three countries (Tanzania, Bangladesh and Nepal) to validate selected indicators. Direct clinical observation will be compared with facility register data and a pre-discharge maternal recall survey for indicators including: uterotonic administration, immediate newborn care, neonatal resuscitation and Kangaroo mother care. Indicators including neonatal infection management and antenatal corticosteroid administration, which cannot be easily observed, will be validated using inpatient records. Trained clinical observers in Labour/Delivery ward, Operation theatre, and Kangaroo mother care ward/areas will collect data using a tablet-based customised data capturing application. Sensitivity will be calculated for numerators of all indicators and specificity for those numerators with adequate information. Other objectives include comparison of denominator options (ie, true target population or surrogates) and quality of care analyses, especially regarding intervention timing. Barriers and enablers to routine recording and data usage will be assessed by data flow assessments, quantitative and qualitative analyses.
CONCLUSIONS
To our knowledge, this is the first large, multi-country study validating facility-based routine data compared to direct observation for maternal and newborn care, designed to provide evidence to inform selection of a core list of indicators recommended for inclusion in national DHIS2. Availability and use of such data are fundamental to drive progress towards ending the annual 5.5 million preventable stillbirths, maternal and newborn deaths.
Identifiants
pubmed: 30863542
doi: 10.7189/jogh.09.010902
pii: jogh-09-010902
pmc: PMC6406050
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Observational Study
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
010902Subventions
Organisme : World Health Organization
ID : 001
Pays : International
Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts
Competing interests: The authors completed the Unified Competing Interest form at www.icmje.org/coi_disclosure.pdf (available upon request from the corresponding author), and declare no conflicts of interest.
Références
Radiol Manage. 1996 May-Jun;18(3):45-9
pubmed: 10158370
Lancet. 2005 Mar 5-11;365(9462):891-900
pubmed: 15752534
Health Policy Plan. 2009 May;24(3):217-28
pubmed: 19304786
Trop Doct. 2009 Jul;39(3):145-9
pubmed: 19535748
Int J Gynaecol Obstet. 2009 Oct;107 Suppl 1:S47-62, S63-4
pubmed: 19815203
BMC Public Health. 2011 Apr 13;11 Suppl 3:S12
pubmed: 21501429
Midwifery. 2012 Jun;28(3):329-39
pubmed: 21684639
Lancet. 2012 Jun 9;379(9832):2162-72
pubmed: 22682464
BMC Pediatr. 2012 Oct 05;12:159
pubmed: 23039709
BMJ Open. 2013 Apr 24;3(4):null
pubmed: 23619087
PLoS Med. 2013;10(5):e1001421
pubmed: 23667338
PLoS Med. 2013;10(5):e1001423
pubmed: 23667340
PLoS One. 2013 May 07;8(5):e60694
pubmed: 23667427
PLoS One. 2013 May 07;8(5):e60762
pubmed: 23667429
Pediatr Res. 2013 Dec;74 Suppl 1:1-3
pubmed: 24240732
J Clin Epidemiol. 2014 Mar;67(3):267-77
pubmed: 24275499
Birth. 2014 Sep;41(3):237-44
pubmed: 24720614
Lancet. 2014 Jul 12;384(9938):189-205
pubmed: 24853593
Lancet. 2014 Aug 2;384(9941):455-67
pubmed: 24853599
Lancet. 2014 Aug 2;384(9941):438-54
pubmed: 24853600
Lancet. 2014 Jul 12;384(9938):174-88
pubmed: 24853603
Lancet. 2014 Nov 22;384(9957):1869-1877
pubmed: 25128271
BMC Pediatr. 2014 Sep 16;14:233
pubmed: 25227941
Lancet. 2015 Feb 14;385(9968):629-639
pubmed: 25458726
Bull World Health Organ. 2015 Jan 1;93(1):19-28
pubmed: 25558104
Lancet Glob Health. 2015 May;3(5):e260-70
pubmed: 25866355
BJOG. 2015 Jul;122(8):1045-9
pubmed: 25929823
PLoS One. 2015 May 22;10(5):e0126840
pubmed: 26000829
BJOG. 2016 Feb;123(3):427-36
pubmed: 26259689
BJOG. 2016 Apr;123(5):745-53
pubmed: 26331389
BMC Pregnancy Childbirth. 2015;15 Suppl 2:S5
pubmed: 26391115
BMC Pregnancy Childbirth. 2015;15 Suppl 2:S8
pubmed: 26391444
BJOG. 2016 Apr;123(5):667-70
pubmed: 26681211
Int J Gynaecol Obstet. 2016 Feb;132(2):139-45
pubmed: 26686027
Lancet Glob Health. 2016 Feb;4(2):e98-e108
pubmed: 26795602
Collegian. 2016;23(1):47-52
pubmed: 27188039
Pediatrics. 2016 Jun;137(6):
pubmed: 27225317
J Glob Health. 2016 Jun;6(1):010405
pubmed: 27231541
BMC Pregnancy Childbirth. 2016 Aug 30;16:255
pubmed: 27577266
Med Educ. 2017 Jan;51(1):31-39
pubmed: 27580703
J Glob Health. 2016 Dec;6(2):020502
pubmed: 27606061
Lancet. 2017 Dec 17;388(10063):3027-3035
pubmed: 27839855
Australas Emerg Nurs J. 2017 Feb;20(1):25-30
pubmed: 28169134
J Glob Health. 2017 Jun;7(1):010801
pubmed: 28607675
Bull World Health Organ. 2017 Oct 1;95(10):683-694
pubmed: 29147041
BMJ. 2018 Jan 24;360:k55
pubmed: 29367432
Lancet Glob Health. 2018 Nov;6(11):e1196-e1252
pubmed: 30196093
J Glob Health. 2018 Dec;8(2):020804
pubmed: 30202519
Soc Sci Med. 2018 Oct;215:28-35
pubmed: 30205276
J Glob Health. 2019 Jun;9(1):010901
pubmed: 30820319
Stud Fam Plann. 1997 Sep;28(3):203-14
pubmed: 9322336