18
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Listening to the community: Using formative research to strengthen maternity waiting homes in Zambia

      research-article

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Background

          The WHO recommends maternity waiting homes (MWH) as one intervention to improve maternal and newborn health. However, persistent structural, cultural and financial barriers in their design and implementation have resulted in mixed success in both their uptake and utilization. Guidance is needed on how to design a MWH intervention that is acceptable and sustainable. Using formative research and guided by a sustainability framework for health programs, we systematically collected data from key stakeholders and potential users in order to design a MWH intervention in Zambia that could overcome multi-dimensional barriers to accessing facility delivery, be acceptable to the community and be financially and operationally sustainable.

          Methods and findings

          We used a concurrent triangulation study design and mixed methods. We used free listing to gather input from a total of 167 randomly sampled women who were pregnant or had a child under the age of two (n = 59), men with a child under the age of two (n = 53), and community elders (n = 55) living in the catchment areas of four rural health facilities in Zambia. We conducted 17 focus group discussions (n = 135) among a purposive sample of pregnant women (n = 33), mothers-in-law (n = 32), traditional birth attendants or community maternal health promoters (n = 38), and men with a child under two (n = 32). We administered 38 semi-structured interviews with key informants who were identified by free list respondents as having a stake in the condition and use of MWHs. Lastly, we projected fixed and variable recurrent costs for operating a MWH.

          Respondents most frequently mentioned distance, roads, transport, and the quality of MWHs and health facilities as the major problems facing pregnant women in their communities. They also cited inadequate advanced planning for delivery and the lack of access to delivery supplies and baby clothes as other problems. Respondents identified the main problems of MWHs specifically as over-crowding, poor infrastructure, lack of amenities, safety concerns, and cultural issues. To support operational sustainability, community members were willing to participate on oversight committees and contribute labor. The annual fixed recurrent cost per 10-bed MWH was estimated as USD543, though providing food and charcoal added another $3,000USD. Respondents identified water pumps, an agriculture shop, a shop for baby clothes and general goods, and grinding mills as needs in their communities that could potentially be linked with an MWH for financial sustainability.

          Conclusions

          Findings informed the development of an intervention model for renovating existing MWH or constructing new MWH that meets community standards of safety, comfort and services offered and is aligned with government policies related to facility construction, ownership, and access to health services. The basic strategies of the new MWH model include improving community acceptability, strengthening governance and accountability, and building upon existing efforts to foster financial and operational sustainability. The proposed model addresses the problems cited by our respondents and challenges to MWHs identified by in previous studies and elicits opportunities for social enterprises that could serve the dual purpose of meeting a community need and generating revenue for the MWH.

          Related collections

          Most cited references21

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Community-based participatory research contributions to intervention research: the intersection of science and practice to improve health equity.

          Community-based participatory research (CBPR) has emerged in the last decades as a transformative research paradigm that bridges the gap between science and practice through community engagement and social action to increase health equity. CBPR expands the potential for the translational sciences to develop, implement, and disseminate effective interventions across diverse communities through strategies to redress power imbalances; facilitate mutual benefit among community and academic partners; and promote reciprocal knowledge translation, incorporating community theories into the research. We identify the barriers and challenges within the intervention and implementation sciences, discuss how CBPR can address these challenges, provide an illustrative research example, and discuss next steps to advance the translational science of CBPR.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Too far to walk: maternal mortality in context.

            The Prevention of Maternal Mortality Program is a collaborative effort of Columbia University's Center for Population and Family Health and multidisciplinary teams of researchers from Ghana, Nigeria and Sierra Leone. Program goals include dissemination of information to those concerned with preventing maternal deaths. This review, which presents findings from a broad body of research, is part of that activity. While there are numerous factors that contribute to maternal mortality, we focus on those that affect the interval between the onset of obstetric complication and its outcome. If prompt, adequate treatment is provided, the outcome will usually be satisfactory; therefore, the outcome is most adversely affected by delayed treatment. We examine research on the factors that: (1) delay the decision to seek care; (2) delay arrival at a health facility; and (3) delay the provision of adequate care. The literature clearly indicates that while distance and cost are major obstacles in the decision to seek care, the relationships are not simple. There is evidence that people often consider the quality of care more important than cost. These three factors--distance, cost and quality--alone do not give a full understanding of decision-making process. Their salience as obstacles is ultimately defined by illness-related factors, such as severity. Differential use of health services is also shaped by such variables as gender and socioeconomic status. Patients who make a timely decision to seek care can still experience delay, because the accessibility of health services is an acute problem in the developing world. In rural areas, a woman with an obstetric emergency may find the closest facility equipped only for basic treatments and education, and she may have no way to reach a regional center where resources exist. Finally, arriving at the facility may not lead to the immediate commencement of treatment. Shortages of qualified staff, essential drugs and supplies, coupled with administrative delays and clinical mismanagement, become documentable contributors to maternal deaths. Findings from the literature review are discussed in light of their implications for programs. Options for health programs are offered and examples of efforts to reduce maternal deaths are presented, with an emphasis on strategies to mobilize and adapt existing resources.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Designing a mixed methods study in primary care.

              Mixed methods or multimethod research holds potential for rigorous, methodologically sound investigations in primary care. The objective of this study was to use criteria from the literature to evaluate 5 mixed methods studies in primary care and to advance 3 models useful for designing such investigations. We first identified criteria from the social and behavioral sciences to analyze mixed methods studies in primary care research. We then used the criteria to evaluate 5 mixed methods investigations published in primary care research journals. Of the 5 studies analyzed, 3 included a rationale for mixing based on the need to develop a quantitative instrument from qualitative data or to converge information to best understand the research topic. Quantitative data collection involved structured interviews, observational checklists, and chart audits that were analyzed using descriptive and inferential statistical procedures. Qualitative data consisted of semistructured interviews and field observations that were analyzed using coding to develop themes and categories. The studies showed diverse forms of priority: equal priority, qualitative priority, and quantitative priority. Data collection involved quantitative and qualitative data gathered both concurrently and sequentially. The integration of the quantitative and qualitative data in these studies occurred between data analysis from one phase and data collection from a subsequent phase, while analyzing the data, and when reporting the results. We recommend instrument-building, triangulation, and data transformation models for mixed methods designs as useful frameworks to add rigor to investigations in primary care. We also discuss the limitations of our study and the need for future research.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                Role: ConceptualizationRole: Data curationRole: Formal analysisRole: Funding acquisitionRole: InvestigationRole: MethodologyRole: VisualizationRole: Writing – original draftRole: Writing – review & editing
                Role: ConceptualizationRole: Formal analysisRole: Funding acquisitionRole: InvestigationRole: MethodologyRole: Writing – original draftRole: Writing – review & editing
                Role: Data curationRole: Formal analysisRole: Project administrationRole: VisualizationRole: Writing – review & editing
                Role: Data curationRole: Project administrationRole: Writing – review & editing
                Role: Project administrationRole: Writing – review & editing
                Role: ConceptualizationRole: Writing – original draftRole: Writing – review & editing
                Role: Project administrationRole: Writing – review & editing
                Role: Writing – review & editing
                Role: ConceptualizationRole: Funding acquisitionRole: MethodologyRole: Writing – original draftRole: Writing – review & editing
                Role: Editor
                Journal
                PLoS One
                PLoS ONE
                plos
                plosone
                PLoS ONE
                Public Library of Science (San Francisco, CA USA )
                1932-6203
                15 March 2018
                2018
                : 13
                : 3
                : e0194535
                Affiliations
                [1 ] Department of Global Health, Boston University School of Public Health, Boston, Massachusetts, United States of America
                [2 ] Zambia Center for Applied Health Research and Development (ZCAHRD), Lusaka, Zambia
                [3 ] Department of Public Health, Ministry of Health, Lusaka, Zambia
                [4 ] Department of Medicine, Boston Medical Center, Boston, Massachusetts, United States of America
                King's College London, UNITED KINGDOM
                Author notes

                Competing Interests: We received funding from a commercial source, 'Merck' through its corporate responsibility Merck for Mothers program. This does not alter our adherence to PLOS ONE policies on sharing data and materials.

                Author information
                http://orcid.org/0000-0002-4713-4642
                http://orcid.org/0000-0003-2547-597X
                http://orcid.org/0000-0002-4700-1495
                Article
                PONE-D-17-30896
                10.1371/journal.pone.0194535
                5854412
                29543884
                5d034fe3-8e41-42c6-baa6-c269cec2e432
                © 2018 Scott et al

                This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.

                History
                : 23 August 2017
                : 5 March 2018
                Page count
                Figures: 0, Tables: 6, Pages: 16
                Funding
                Funded by: Merck for Mothers
                Award ID: GHH-I-00-07-0023-00
                Award Recipient :
                This program was funded by and is being implemented in collaboration with Merck for Mothers, Merck’s 10-year, $500 million initiative to help create a world where no woman dies giving life. Merck for Mothers is known as MSD for Mothers outside the United States and Canada. Grant GHH I-00- 07-0023-00, http://merckformothers.com/, http://www.msdresponsibility.com/our-giving/employee-giving/msd-fellowship-for-global-health/. The funders had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript.
                Categories
                Research Article
                Medicine and Health Sciences
                Women's Health
                Maternal Health
                Pregnancy
                Medicine and Health Sciences
                Women's Health
                Obstetrics and Gynecology
                Pregnancy
                Medicine and Health Sciences
                Women's Health
                Maternal Health
                Birth
                Labor and Delivery
                Medicine and Health Sciences
                Women's Health
                Obstetrics and Gynecology
                Birth
                Labor and Delivery
                Social Sciences
                Economics
                Finance
                People and Places
                Geographical Locations
                Africa
                Zambia
                Social Sciences
                Sociology
                Culture
                Research and Analysis Methods
                Research Design
                Medicine and Health Sciences
                Pediatrics
                Child Health
                Medicine and Health Sciences
                Public and Occupational Health
                Child Health
                Engineering and Technology
                Civil Engineering
                Transportation Infrastructure
                Roads
                Engineering and Technology
                Transportation
                Transportation Infrastructure
                Roads
                Custom metadata
                We have made the aggregate free list data available in the supporting information files. There are ethical restrictions to publicly sharing the qualitative focus group discussion and key informant transcripts due to the sensitive nature and potentially identifiable information that are detailed in the transcripts. The Boston University IRB and the ERES Converge IRB in Zambia approved that data would only be presented in aggregate form. Data requests may be sent to the Boston University IRB at medirb@ 123456bu.edu .

                Uncategorized
                Uncategorized

                Comments

                Comment on this article