Implementation, Mechanisms and Context of the MAMAACT Intervention to Reduce Ethnic and Social Disparity in Stillbirth and Infant Health.
antenatal care
complex interventions
cultural competence
disadvantaged groups
disparities
ethnicity
health literacy
immigrants
pregnancy complications
process evaluation
Journal
International journal of environmental research and public health
ISSN: 1660-4601
Titre abrégé: Int J Environ Res Public Health
Pays: Switzerland
ID NLM: 101238455
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
14 08 2021
14 08 2021
Historique:
received:
08
07
2021
revised:
09
08
2021
accepted:
11
08
2021
entrez:
27
8
2021
pubmed:
28
8
2021
medline:
3
9
2021
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
The MAMAACT intervention aimed to address ethnic and social disparity in stillbirth and infant health by improving management of pregnancy complications. This process evaluation of the intervention was guided by the British Medical Research Council's framework. We examined implementation through dose, reach, and fidelity, important mechanisms and the influence of contextual factors. The intervention included a six-hour training session for antenatal care (ANC) midwives in intercultural communication and cultural competence, two follow-up dialogue meetings, and health education materials (leaflet and app) on warning signs of severe pregnancy complications and how to respond for pregnant women. A mixed-methods approach was applied. Cross-sectional survey data and administrative data were used to assess intervention reach and dose. Qualitative data (records from dialogue meetings with midwives, participant observations and field notes from ANC visits, focus group interviews with midwives, and individual interviews with non-Western immigrant women) evaluated intervention fidelity, mechanisms, and contextual barriers. More than 80% of women received the MAMAACT leaflet and many found the content useful. The app was used more selectively. Midwives described being more aware and reflective in their communication with women from various cultural backgrounds. Organizational factors in ANC (time pressure, lack of flexibility in visits, poor interpreter services), barriers in women's everyday life (lack of social network, previous negative experiences/lack of trust and domestic responsibilities), and habitual interaction patterns among midwives served as contextual barriers. The reach of the intervention was high and it was evaluated positively by both pregnant women and midwives. Organizational factors hindered changes towards more needs-based communication in ANC potentially hindering the intended mechanisms of the intervention. When interpreting the intervention effects, attention should be drawn to both organizational and interpersonal factors in the clinic as well as the pregnant women's life situations.
Identifiants
pubmed: 34444335
pii: ijerph18168583
doi: 10.3390/ijerph18168583
pmc: PMC8391863
pii:
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Références
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2014 May 05;(5):CD009405
pubmed: 24793445
Reprod Health Matters. 2011 May;19(37):144-53
pubmed: 21555095
BMC Health Serv Res. 2020 Oct 7;20(1):919
pubmed: 33028319
BMJ Open. 2019 Jul 31;9(7):e030314
pubmed: 31371301
BMJ. 2015 Mar 19;350:h1258
pubmed: 25791983
J Obstet Gynaecol Can. 2012 Apr;34(4):348-352
pubmed: 22472334
BMC Public Health. 2013 Jul 16;13:658
pubmed: 23855504
Eur J Epidemiol. 2017 Jul;32(7):537-546
pubmed: 28776115
BMJ Open. 2020 Feb 18;10(2):e031290
pubmed: 32075823
Scand J Public Health. 2012 Dec;40(8):795-805
pubmed: 23221918
Int J Nurs Stud. 2020 Nov;111:103742
pubmed: 32992080
Health Lit Res Pract. 2019 Jul 01;3(2):e127-e146
pubmed: 31294314
BMC Health Serv Res. 2015 Nov 16;15:510
pubmed: 26573437
Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2021 Apr 06;18(7):
pubmed: 33917631
BMJ Open. 2018 Nov 8;8(11):e023531
pubmed: 30413512
Soc Sci Med. 2013 Sep;93:113-20
pubmed: 23906128
BMJ. 2008 Sep 29;337:a1655
pubmed: 18824488
Midwifery. 2021 Apr;95:102935
pubmed: 33556845
Arch Dis Child Fetal Neonatal Ed. 2016 Mar;101(2):F121-6
pubmed: 26297221
Eur J Public Health. 2015 Aug;25(4):620-5
pubmed: 25587005
Med Educ. 2009 Mar;43(3):229-37
pubmed: 19250349
BMC Med Res Methodol. 2006 Jul 26;6:35
pubmed: 16872487
BJOG. 2002 Jun;109(6):677-82
pubmed: 12118647
Scand J Public Health. 2021 Apr 16;:14034948211004320
pubmed: 33863261
Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand. 2009;88(2):134-48
pubmed: 19096947
Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2020 Feb 06;17(3):
pubmed: 32041327
BMC Pregnancy Childbirth. 2021 Apr 29;21(1):340
pubmed: 33926420
PLoS Med. 2006 Oct;3(10):e294
pubmed: 17076546
BJOG. 2008 Dec;115(13):1630-40
pubmed: 19035939
Best Pract Res Clin Obstet Gynaecol. 2016 Apr;32:100-12
pubmed: 26472711
BMC Pregnancy Childbirth. 2020 Feb 19;20(1):118
pubmed: 32075593
BMC Health Serv Res. 2018 Apr 2;18(1):232
pubmed: 29609614
PLoS One. 2019 Jul 30;14(7):e0219971
pubmed: 31361783
Lancet. 2016 Feb 13;387(10019):691-702
pubmed: 26794070
Sci Rep. 2021 Apr 12;11(1):8001
pubmed: 33846451
Dan Med J. 2016 Mar;63(3):
pubmed: 26931191