1
|
Griffin G, Bradfield Z, Than KK, Smith R, Tanimizu A, Raina N, Homer CSE. Strengthening midwifery in the South-East Asian region: A scoping review of midwifery-related research. PLoS One 2023; 18:e0294294. [PMID: 38100488 PMCID: PMC10723687 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0294294] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/03/2023] [Accepted: 10/29/2023] [Indexed: 12/17/2023] Open
Abstract
Improving sexual, reproductive, maternal, newborn, and adolescent health outcomes necessitates greater commitment to, and investments in, midwifery. To identify future research priorities to advance and strengthen midwifery, we conducted a scoping review to synthesise and report areas of midwifery that have been explored in the previous 10 years in the 11 countries of the World Health Organization's South-East Asia region. Electronic peer-reviewed databases were searched for primary peer-reviewed research published in any language, published between January 2012 and December 2022 inclusive. A total of 7086 citations were screened against the review inclusion criteria. After screening and full text review, 195 sources were included. There were 94 quantitative (48.2%), 67 qualitative (34.4%) and 31 mixed methods (15.9%) studies. The majority were from Indonesia (n = 93, 47.7%), India (n = 41, 21.0%) and Bangladesh (n = 26, 13.3%). There were no sources identified from the Democratic People's Republic of Korea or the Maldives. We mapped the findings against six priority areas adapted from the 2021 State of the World's Midwifery Report and Regional Strategic Directions for Strengthening Midwifery in the South-East Asia region (2020-2024): practice or service delivery (n = 73, 37.4%), pre-service education (n = 60, 30.8%), in-service education or continuing professional development (n = 51, 26.2%), workforce management (n = 46, 23.6%), governance and regulation (n = 21, 10.8%) and leadership (n = 12, 6.2%). Most were published by authors with affiliations from the country where the research was conducted. The volume of published midwifery research reflects country-specific investment in developing a midwifery workforce, and the transition to midwifery-led care. There was variation between countries in how midwife was defined, education pathways, professional regulation, education accreditation, governance models and scope of practice. Further evaluation of the return on investment in midwifery education, regulation, deployment and retention to support strategic decision-making is recommended. Key elements of leadership requiring further exploration included career pathways, education and development needs and regulatory frameworks to support and embed effective midwifery leadership at all levels of health service governance.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Georgia Griffin
- Maternal, Child and Adolescent Health Program, Burnet Institute, Melbourne, Australia
- Faculty of Health Sciences, Curtin University, Perth, Australia
| | - Zoe Bradfield
- Faculty of Health Sciences, Curtin University, Perth, Australia
| | - Kyu Kyu Than
- Burnet Myanmar Program, Burnet Institute, Yangon, Myanmar
| | - Rachel Smith
- Maternal, Child and Adolescent Health Program, Burnet Institute, Melbourne, Australia
| | - Ai Tanimizu
- Family and Gender through the Life Course, South-East Asia Regional Office, World Health Organization, New Delhi, India
| | - Neena Raina
- Family and Gender through the Life Course, South-East Asia Regional Office, World Health Organization, New Delhi, India
| | - Caroline S. E. Homer
- Maternal, Child and Adolescent Health Program, Burnet Institute, Melbourne, Australia
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Khatri R, Endalamaw A, Erku D, Wolka E, Nigatu F, Zewdie A, Assefa Y. Continuity and care coordination of primary health care: a scoping review. BMC Health Serv Res 2023; 23:750. [PMID: 37443006 DOI: 10.1186/s12913-023-09718-8] [Citation(s) in RCA: 8] [Impact Index Per Article: 8.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/06/2023] [Accepted: 06/19/2023] [Indexed: 07/15/2023] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Healthcare coordination and continuity of care conceptualize all care providers and organizations involved in health care to ensure the right care at the right time. However, systematic evidence synthesis is lacking in the care coordination of health services. This scoping review synthesizes evidence on different levels of care coordination of primary health care (PHC) and primary care. METHODS We conducted a scoping review of published evidence on healthcare coordination. PubMed, Scopus, Embase, CINAHL, Cochrane, PsycINFO, Web of Science and Google Scholar were searched until 30 November 2022 for studies that describe care coordination/continuity of care in PHC and primary care. We followed the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses Extension for Scoping Reviews (PRISMA-ScR) guidelines to select studies. We analysed data using a thematic analysis approach and explained themes adopting a multilevel (individual, organizational, and system) analytical framework. RESULTS A total of 56 studies were included in the review. Most studies were from upper-middle-income or high-income countries, primarily focusing on continuity/care coordination in primary care. Ten themes were identified in care coordination in PHC/primary care. Four themes under care coordination at the individual level were the continuity of services, linkage at different stages of health conditions (from health promotion to rehabilitation), health care from a life-course (conception to elderly), and care coordination of health services at places (family to hospitals). Five themes under organizational level care coordination included interprofessional, multidisciplinary services, community collaboration, integrated care, and information in care coordination. Finally, a theme under system-level care coordination was related to service management involving multisectoral coordination within and beyond health systems. CONCLUSIONS Continuity and coordination of care involve healthcare provisions from family to health facility throughout the life-course to provide a range of services. Several issues could influence multilevel care coordination, including at the individual (services or users), organizational (providers), and system (departments and sectors) levels. Health systems should focus on care coordination, ensuring types of care per the healthcare needs at different stages of health conditions by a multidisciplinary team. Coordinating multiple technical and supporting stakeholders and sectors within and beyond health sector is also vital for the continuity of care especially in resource-limited health systems and settings.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Resham Khatri
- School of Public Health, the University of Queensland, Brisbane, Australia.
- Health Social Science and Development Research Institute, Kathmandu, Nepal.
| | - Aklilu Endalamaw
- School of Public Health, the University of Queensland, Brisbane, Australia
- College of Medicine and Health Sciences, Bahir Dar University, Bahir Dar, Ethiopia
| | - Daniel Erku
- Centre for Applied Health Economics, School of Medicine, Griffith University, Mount Gravatt, Australia
- Menzies Health Institute Queensland, Griffith University, Mount Gravatt, Australia
| | - Eskinder Wolka
- International Institute for Primary Health Care-Ethiopia, Addis Ababa, Ethiopia
| | - Frehiwot Nigatu
- International Institute for Primary Health Care-Ethiopia, Addis Ababa, Ethiopia
| | - Anteneh Zewdie
- International Institute for Primary Health Care-Ethiopia, Addis Ababa, Ethiopia
| | - Yibeltal Assefa
- School of Public Health, the University of Queensland, Brisbane, Australia
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
Perrin Franck C, Babington-Ashaye A, Dietrich D, Bediang G, Veltsos P, Gupta PP, Juech C, Kadam R, Collin M, Setian L, Serrano Pons J, Kwankam SY, Garrette B, Barbe S, Bagayoko CO, Mehl G, Lovis C, Geissbuhler A. iCHECK-DH: Guidelines and Checklist for the Reporting on Digital Health Implementations. J Med Internet Res 2023; 25:e46694. [PMID: 37163336 PMCID: PMC10209789 DOI: 10.2196/46694] [Citation(s) in RCA: 14] [Impact Index Per Article: 14.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/23/2023] [Revised: 04/18/2023] [Accepted: 04/21/2023] [Indexed: 05/11/2023] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Implementation of digital health technologies has grown rapidly, but many remain limited to pilot studies due to challenges, such as a lack of evidence or barriers to implementation. Overcoming these challenges requires learning from previous implementations and systematically documenting implementation processes to better understand the real-world impact of a technology and identify effective strategies for future implementation. OBJECTIVE A group of global experts, facilitated by the Geneva Digital Health Hub, developed the Guidelines and Checklist for the Reporting on Digital Health Implementations (iCHECK-DH, pronounced "I checked") to improve the completeness of reporting on digital health implementations. METHODS A guideline development group was convened to define key considerations and criteria for reporting on digital health implementations. To ensure the practicality and effectiveness of the checklist, it was pilot-tested by applying it to several real-world digital health implementations, and adjustments were made based on the feedback received. The guiding principle for the development of iCHECK-DH was to identify the minimum set of information needed to comprehensively define a digital health implementation, to support the identification of key factors for success and failure, and to enable others to replicate it in different settings. RESULTS The result was a 20-item checklist with detailed explanations and examples in this paper. The authors anticipate that widespread adoption will standardize the quality of reporting and, indirectly, improve implementation standards and best practices. CONCLUSIONS Guidelines for reporting on digital health implementations are important to ensure the accuracy, completeness, and consistency of reported information. This allows for meaningful comparison and evaluation of results, transparency, and accountability and informs stakeholder decision-making. i-CHECK-DH facilitates standardization of the way information is collected and reported, improving systematic documentation and knowledge transfer that can lead to the development of more effective digital health interventions and better health outcomes.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Caroline Perrin Franck
- Department of Radiology and Medical Informatics, Faculty of Medicine, University of Geneva, Geneva, Switzerland
- Geneva Digital Health Hub, Geneva, Switzerland
| | - Awa Babington-Ashaye
- Department of Radiology and Medical Informatics, Faculty of Medicine, University of Geneva, Geneva, Switzerland
- Geneva Digital Health Hub, Geneva, Switzerland
| | | | - Georges Bediang
- Faculty of Medicine and Biomedical Sciences, University of Yaoundé 1, Yaoundé, Cameroon
| | | | | | - Claudia Juech
- Government Innovation, Bloomberg Philanthropies, New York, NY, United States
| | - Rigveda Kadam
- Foundation for Innovative New Diagnostics, Geneva, Switzerland
| | | | | | | | - S Yunkap Kwankam
- International Society for Telemedicine & eHealth, Basel, Switzerland
| | | | | | - Cheick Oumar Bagayoko
- Centre d'Innovation et de Santé Digitale, DigiSanté-Mali, Université des sciences, des techniques et des technologies de Bamako, Bamako, Mali
- Centre d'Expertise et de Recherche en Télémédecine et E-Santé, Bamako, Mali
| | - Garrett Mehl
- Department of Digital Health and Innovation, World Health Organization, Geneva, Switzerland
| | - Christian Lovis
- Department of Radiology and Medical Informatics, Faculty of Medicine, University of Geneva, Geneva, Switzerland
- Division of Medical Information Sciences, Geneva University Hospitals, Geneva, Switzerland
| | - Antoine Geissbuhler
- Department of Radiology and Medical Informatics, Faculty of Medicine, University of Geneva, Geneva, Switzerland
- Geneva Digital Health Hub, Geneva, Switzerland
- Division of Medical Information Sciences, Geneva University Hospitals, Geneva, Switzerland
| |
Collapse
|