19
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Assessing drivers of implementing “Scaling-up the Systems Analysis and Improvement Approach” for Prevention of Mother-to-Child HIV Transmission in Mozambique (SAIA-SCALE) over implementation waves

      research-article
      1 , 2 , 3 , , 1 , 4 , 1 , 5 , 6 , 6 , 6 , 6 , 7 , 7 , 7 , 7 , 1 , 8 , 9 , 10 , 1 , 11 , 7 , 1 , 12 , 13 , 1 , 10 , 14
      Implementation Science Communications
      BioMed Central
      Systems Analysis and Improvement Approach (SAIA), Scale-up, Mozambique, Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR), Prevention of mother-to-child HIV transmission (PMTCT), Implementation science, Implementation determinants

      Read this article at

      ScienceOpenPublisherPMC
          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 Systems Analysis and Improvement Approach (SAIA) is an evidence-based package of systems engineering tools originally designed to improve patient flow through the prevention of Mother-to-Child transmission of HIV (PMTCT) cascade. SAIA is a potentially scalable model for maximizing the benefits of universal antiretroviral therapy (ART) for mothers and their babies. SAIA-SCALE was a stepped wedge trial implemented in Manica Province, Mozambique, to evaluate SAIA’s effectiveness when led by district health managers, rather than by study nurses. We present the results of a qualitative assessment of implementation determinants of the SAIA-SCALE strategy during two intensive and one maintenance phases.

          Methods

          We used an extended case study design that embedded the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR) to guide data collection, analysis, and interpretation. From March 2019 to April 2020, we conducted in-depth individual interviews (IDIs) and focus group discussions (FGDs) with district managers, health facility maternal and child health (MCH) managers, and frontline nurses at 21 health facilities and seven districts of Manica Province (Chimoio, Báruè, Gondola, Macate, Manica, Sussundenga, and Vanduzi).

          Results

          We included 85 participants: 50 through IDIs and 35 from three FGDs. Most study participants were women (98%), frontline nurses (49.4%), and MCH health facility managers (32.5%). An identified facilitator of successful intervention implementation (regardless of intervention phase) was related to SAIA’s compatibility with organizational structures, processes, and priorities of Mozambique’s health system at the district and health facility levels. Identified barriers to successful implementation included (a) inadequate health facility and road infrastructure preventing mothers from accessing MCH/PMTCT services at study health facilities and preventing nurses from dedicating time to improving service provision, and (b) challenges in managing intervention funds.

          Conclusions

          The SAIA-SCALE qualitative evaluation suggests that the scalability of SAIA for PMTCT is enhanced by its fit within organizational structures, processes, and priorities at the primary level of healthcare delivery and health system management in Mozambique. Barriers to implementation that impact the scalability of SAIA include district-level financial management capabilities and lack of infrastructure at the health facility level. SAIA cannot be successfully scaled up to adequately address PMTCT needs without leveraging central-level resources and priorities.

          Trial registration

          ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03425136. Registered on 02/06/2018.

          Supplementary Information

          The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s43058-023-00422-6.

          Related collections

          Most cited references27

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

          Consolidated criteria for reporting qualitative research (COREQ): a 32-item checklist for interviews and focus groups.

          Qualitative research explores complex phenomena encountered by clinicians, health care providers, policy makers and consumers. Although partial checklists are available, no consolidated reporting framework exists for any type of qualitative design. To develop a checklist for explicit and comprehensive reporting of qualitative studies (in depth interviews and focus groups). We performed a comprehensive search in Cochrane and Campbell Protocols, Medline, CINAHL, systematic reviews of qualitative studies, author or reviewer guidelines of major medical journals and reference lists of relevant publications for existing checklists used to assess qualitative studies. Seventy-six items from 22 checklists were compiled into a comprehensive list. All items were grouped into three domains: (i) research team and reflexivity, (ii) study design and (iii) data analysis and reporting. Duplicate items and those that were ambiguous, too broadly defined and impractical to assess were removed. Items most frequently included in the checklists related to sampling method, setting for data collection, method of data collection, respondent validation of findings, method of recording data, description of the derivation of themes and inclusion of supporting quotations. We grouped all items into three domains: (i) research team and reflexivity, (ii) study design and (iii) data analysis and reporting. The criteria included in COREQ, a 32-item checklist, can help researchers to report important aspects of the research team, study methods, context of the study, findings, analysis and interpretations.
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: not found
            • Article: not found

            How Many Interviews Are Enough?: An Experiment with Data Saturation and Variability

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

              Code Saturation Versus Meaning Saturation: How Many Interviews Are Enough?

              Saturation is a core guiding principle to determine sample sizes in qualitative research, yet little methodological research exists on parameters that influence saturation. Our study compared two approaches to assessing saturation: code saturation and meaning saturation. We examined sample sizes needed to reach saturation in each approach, what saturation meant, and how to assess saturation. Examining 25 in-depth interviews, we found that code saturation was reached at nine interviews, whereby the range of thematic issues was identified. However, 16 to 24 interviews were needed to reach meaning saturation where we developed a richly textured understanding of issues. Thus, code saturation may indicate when researchers have "heard it all," but meaning saturation is needed to "understand it all." We used our results to develop parameters that influence saturation, which may be used to estimate sample sizes for qualitative research proposals or to document in publications the grounds on which saturation was achieved.

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                celsoi@uw.edu , cinguane@gmail.com
                Journal
                Implement Sci Commun
                Implement Sci Commun
                Implementation Science Communications
                BioMed Central (London )
                2662-2211
                24 July 2023
                24 July 2023
                2023
                : 4
                : 84
                Affiliations
                [1 ]GRID grid.34477.33, ISNI 0000000122986657, Department of Global Health, , University of Washington, ; Seattle, WA USA
                [2 ]GRID grid.34477.33, ISNI 0000000122986657, Hans Rosling Center for Population Health, 700D.4, , University of Washington, ; Box 351620, 3980 15Th Ave. NE, Seattle, WA 98105 USA
                [3 ]Cooperativa de Ideias e Pesquisa em Saúde - CO-IDEAS, Maputo City, Mozambique
                [4 ]GRID grid.34477.33, ISNI 0000000122986657, Department of Child, Family and Population Health Nursing, , University of Washington, ; Seattle, WA USA
                [5 ]Manica Province Social Affairs Services, Chimoio, Mozambique
                [6 ]Manica Province Health Directorate, Chimoio, Mozambique
                [7 ]Comité Para a Saúde de Moçambique, Maputo City, Mozambique
                [8 ]GRID grid.415752.0, ISNI 0000 0004 0457 1249, National Department of Public Health, , Ministry of Health, ; Maputo City, Mozambique
                [9 ]GRID grid.14013.37, ISNI 0000 0004 0640 0021, Center for Public Health Sciences, , University of Iceland, ; Reykjavik, Iceland
                [10 ]GRID grid.34477.33, ISNI 0000000122986657, Department of Epidemiology, , University of Washington, ; Seattle, WA USA
                [11 ]Health Alliance International, Beira, Mozambique
                [12 ]GRID grid.34477.33, ISNI 0000000122986657, Department of Anthropology, , University of Washington, ; Seattle, WA USA
                [13 ]GRID grid.8295.6, ISNI 0000 0001 0943 5818, Department of Community Health, Faculty of Medicine, , Universidade Eduardo Mondlane, ; Maputo City, Mozambique
                [14 ]GRID grid.34477.33, ISNI 0000000122986657, Department of Industrial & Systems Engineering, , University of Washington, ; Seattle, WA USA
                Author information
                http://orcid.org/0000-0002-4669-5800
                Article
                422
                10.1186/s43058-023-00422-6
                10364357
                6072b1e6-b45f-4dea-8750-ed73cf521016
                © The Author(s) 2023

                Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver ( http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data.

                History
                : 15 July 2022
                : 1 April 2023
                Funding
                Funded by: National Institutes of Health (US)
                Award ID: R01MH113435
                Award Recipient :
                Funded by: FundRef http://dx.doi.org/10.13039/100000862, Doris Duke Charitable Foundation;
                Award ID: P30AI027757
                Award Recipient :
                Categories
                Research
                Custom metadata
                © BioMed Central Ltd. 2023

                systems analysis and improvement approach (saia),scale-up,mozambique,consolidated framework for implementation research (cfir),prevention of mother-to-child hiv transmission (pmtct),implementation science,implementation determinants

                Comments

                Comment on this article

                Related Documents Log