Did a quality improvement intervention improve quality of maternal health care? Implementation evaluation from a cluster-randomized controlled study

Author:

Larson Elysia12,Mbaruku Godfrey M3,Cohen Jessica1,Kruk Margaret E1

Affiliation:

1. Department of Global Health and Population, Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health, Boston, USA

2. Department of Biostatistics, Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health, Boston, MA, USA

3. Ifakara Health Institute, Dar es Salaam, Tanzania

Abstract

Abstract Objective To test the success of a maternal healthcare quality improvement intervention in actually improving quality. Design Cluster-randomized controlled study with implementation evaluation; we randomized 12 primary care facilities to receive a quality improvement intervention, while 12 facilities served as controls. Setting Four districts in rural Tanzania. Participants Health facilities (24), providers (70 at baseline; 119 at endline) and patients (784 at baseline; 886 at endline). Interventions In-service training, mentorship and supportive supervision and infrastructure support. Main outcome measures We measured fidelity with indictors of quality and compared quality between intervention and control facilities using difference-in-differences analysis. Results Quality of care was low at baseline: the average provider knowledge test score was 46.1% (range: 0–75%) and only 47.9% of women were very satisfied with delivery care. The intervention was associated with an increase in newborn counseling (β: 0.74, 95% CI: 0.13, 1.35) but no evidence of change across 17 additional indicators of quality. On average, facilities reached 39% implementation. Comparing facilities with the highest implementation of the intervention to control facilities again showed improvement on only one of the 18 quality indicators. Conclusions A multi-faceted quality improvement intervention resulted in no meaningful improvement in quality. Evidence suggests this is due to both failure to sustain a high-level of implementation and failure in theory: quality improvement interventions targeted at the clinic-level in primary care clinics with weak starting quality, including poor infrastructure and low provider competence, may not be effective.

Funder

U.S. National Institutes of Health

Publisher

Oxford University Press (OUP)

Subject

Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health,Health Policy,General Medicine

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3