Assessing quality of care in maternity services in low and middle-income countries: Development of a Maternity Patient Reported Outcome Measure

Health system utilization and perceived quality among adults in Lao PDR: evidence from a nationally representative phone survey

BACKGROUND

The World Health Organization (WHO) defines quality health services as being effective, safe, people-centered, timely, equitable, integrated and efficient. It is critical to understand people's perspectives and care experiences to measure progress against these goals. However, many low- and middle-income governments do not routinely collect such information. In this study, we aim to measure health systems performance from the perspective of the adult population of users and non-users in Lao PDR.

METHODS

Using the People's Voice Survey (PVS), a novel phone-based survey designed to integrate people's voices into primary care performance measurement, we conducted a cross-sectional survey of the general adult (18+) population in Lao PDR in 2022. We analyzed health care utilization patterns, user-reported quality of care, and coverage of key preventive health services. Data from the most recent MICS survey was used to create sampling weights generating nationally representative estimates.

RESULTS

A total of 2007 adults completed interviews in approximately 3.5 months. About two thirds (65%) of respondents reported visiting a health facility in the past year and, of these, the majority (61%) visited a hospital as opposed to a health center or clinic. Among those that recently visited health facilities, 28% rated their experience as "poor" or "fair". 16% had unmet need for care and 12% reported discrimination during treatment in the past year. 12% of women over 50 years old reported receiving a mammogram and 59% of adults reported receiving blood pressure screening in the previous year.

CONCLUSIONS

The study presents data from the first nationally representative survey in Lao PDR to measure health system performance. The results indicate that, despite progress towards universal coverage of health insurance in Lao PDR, significant gaps remain, particularly with respect to bypassing of primary care facilities, significant unmet need for care, experiences of discrimination, and overall low perceptions of quality of care.

Respectful Maternal Care Experience in Low- and Middle-Income Countries: A Systematic Review

Background and Objectives: Respectful maternity care promotes practices that acknowledge women's preferences and women and newborns' needs. It is an individual-centered strategy founded on ethical and human rights principles. The objective of this systematic review is to identify the impact of income on maternal care and respectful maternity care in low- and middle-income countries. Materials and Methods: Data were searched from Google Scholar, PubMed, Web of Science, NCBI, CINAHL, National Library of Medicine, ResearchGate, MEDLINE, EMBASE database, Scopus, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), and Maternity and Infant Care database. This review followed PRISMA guidelines. The initial search for publications comparing low- and middle-income countries with respectful maternity care yielded 6000 papers, from which 700 were selected. The review articles were further analyzed to ensure they were pertinent to the comparative impact of income on maternal care. A total of 24 articles were included, with preference given to those published from 2010 to 2023 during the last fourteen years. Results: Considering this study's findings, respectful maternity care is a crucial component of high-quality care and human rights. It can be estimated that there is a direct association between income and maternity care in LMICs, and maternity care is substandard compared to high-income countries. Moreover, it is determined that the evidence for medical tools that can enhance respectful maternity care is sparse. Conclusions: This review highlights the significance of improving maternal care experiences, emphasizing the importance of promoting respectful practices and addressing disparities in low- and middle-income countries.

Woman-Centered Care: Standardized Outcomes Measure

Background and Objectives: Patient- or woman-centered care, prioritizing women's perspectives, needs, and preferences, is a widely recommended approach to enhance the quality of maternity care services. It aligns with the broader principles of patient-centered care, emphasizing the importance of a collaborative and respectful relationship between healthcare providers and women. This study evaluates low-risk pregnancies managed by midwives and obstetrician-gynecologists in Lithuania using patient-reported outcome measures and patient-reported experience measures. Materials and Methods: A prospective cohort study was conducted between September 2022 and April 2023. Data were collected through patient-reported questionnaires. Results: A total of 153 pregnant women who had singleton, low-risk pregnancies participated in the study, of whom 24.8% had their pregnancies supervised by a midwife, and 75.2% of the participants had their pregnancies supervised by an obstetrician-gynecologist. The study found no statistically significant differences in assessed patient-reported outcome measures and patient-reported experience measures between both models of care. Conclusions: Adopting patient-centered approaches enables healthcare systems to understand and address women's specific needs and preferences, fostering high-quality and woman-centered care. This research adds to the growing evidence supporting midwife-led care and emphasizes the importance of personalized, woman-centered approaches in maternity care, ultimately enhancing maternal health outcomes and promoting positive experiences for low-risk pregnant women. The quality of care provided by midwives remains uncompromised and equivalently proficient compared to the care provided by collaborative teams.

The acceptability of implementing patient-reported measures in routine maternity care: A systematic review

INTRODUCTION

Patient-reported measures (PRMs) are becoming popular as they might influence clinical decisions, help to deliver patient-centered care, and improve health care quality. However, the limited knowledge and consensus about the acceptability of implementing PRMs in maternity care hinder their widespread use in clinical practice, and evidence-based recommendations are lacking. This systematic review aims to synthesize available evidence on the acceptability of implementing PRMs in routine maternity care.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Literature on the implementation of PRMs in maternity care was electronically searched in six databases (PsycARTICLES, PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, and CINAHL), screened and selected for the topic of "acceptability". Theoretical Framework of Acceptability was used as the basic framework guiding data analysis and synthesis. Evidence was thematically analyzed and synthesized. Mixed Method Appraisal Tool and GRADE-CERQual approach were used to assess the quality of studies and evaluate the confidence in the review findings.

RESULTS

Overall, 4971 articles were screened. From 24 studies, we identified five themes regarding the acceptability of implementing PRMs in routine maternity care: (1) user's action and behavior, (2) stakeholders' attitudes, (3) perceived benefits, (4) perceived challenges and risks, and (5) stakeholders' preferences and suggestions on implementation. While pregnant and postpartum women, health professionals and other stakeholders involved in maternity care were generally positive about the implementation of PRMs in routine care and recognized the potential benefits (eg health improvement, women empowerment, care and services improvement and healthcare system advancement), they pointed out possible challenges and risks in answering PRMs questions, responding to answers, and setting up integrated information systems as well as suggested solutions in the aspects of PRMs data collection, follow-up care, and system-level management. The confidence in the review findings was moderate due to methodological limitations of included studies.

CONCLUSIONS

Available empirical evidence suggested that the use of PRMs in routine maternity care is acceptable among stakeholders involved in maternity care and the potential benefits of its integration in routine clinical practice to healthcare improvement has been recognized. However, possible challenges in data collection, follow-up care arrangement and system-level integration should be appropriately addressed.