Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28655800›Full record

ArticleGlobal health, science and practice2017

Improving Adherence to Essential Birth Practices Using the WHO Safe Childbirth Checklist With Peer Coaching: Experience From 60 Public Health Facilities in Uttar Pradesh, India.

Megan Marx Delaney, Pinki Maji, Tapan Kalita, Nabihah Kara, Darpan Rana, Krishan Kumar, Jenny Masoinneuve, Simon Cousens, Atul A Gawande, Vishwajeet Kumar and 7 more

Erratum issuedOpen access · diamondAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Global health, science and practice, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 38 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
38citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
11.0field-weighted citation impact, top 2% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

38 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 57 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Trial
  5. Trial
  6. Trial
  7. Effectiveness of a WHO Safe Childbirth Checklist Coaching-based intervention on the availability of Essential Birth Supplies in Uttar Pradesh, India.International journal for quality in health care : journal of the International Society for Quality in Health Care · 2018
    Trial
  8. Trial
  9. Trial
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

17 authors at 7 institutions in 4 countries.

Megan Marx DelaneyAriadne Labs, a Joint Center between Brigham and Women's Hospital and the Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health, Boston, MA, USA.
Pinki MajiPopulation Services International, Lucknow, Uttar Pradesh, India.
Tapan KalitaPopulation Services International, Lucknow, Uttar Pradesh, India.
Nabihah KaraAriadne Labs, a Joint Center between Brigham and Women's Hospital and the Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health, Boston, MA, USA.
Darpan RanaPopulation Services International, Lucknow, Uttar Pradesh, India.
Krishan KumarPopulation Services International, Lucknow, Uttar Pradesh, India.
Jenny MasoinneuveAriadne Labs, a Joint Center between Brigham and Women's Hospital and the Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health, Boston, MA, USA.
Simon CousensLondon School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine, London, UK.
Atul A GawandeAriadne Labs, a Joint Center between Brigham and Women's Hospital and the Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health, Boston, MA, USA.
Vishwajeet KumarCommunity Empowerment Lab, Lucknow, Uttar Pradesh, India.
Bhala KodkanyJawaharlal Nehru Medical College, Karnataka, India.
Narender SharmaPopulation Services International, Lucknow, Uttar Pradesh, India.
Rajiv SaurastriPopulation Services International, Lucknow, Uttar Pradesh, India.
Vinay Pratap SinghPopulation Services International, Lucknow, Uttar Pradesh, India.
Lisa R HirschhornAriadne Labs, a Joint Center between Brigham and Women's Hospital and the Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health, Boston, MA, USA.
Katherine Ea SemrauAriadne Labs, a Joint Center between Brigham and Women's Hospital and the Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health, Boston, MA, USA.
Rebecca FirestonePopulation Services International, Washington, DC, USA. rfirestone@post.harvard.edu.
Population Services International · INBrigham and Women's Hospital · USEmpowerment Program · USHarvard University · USJawaharlal Nehru Medical College · INLondon School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine · GBNorthwestern University · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundAdherence to evidence-based essential birth practices is critical for improving health outcomes for mothers and newborns. The WHO Safe Childbirth Checklist (SCC) incorporates these practices, which occur during 4 critical pause points: on admission, before pushing (or cesarean delivery), soon after birth, and before discharge. A peer-coaching strategy to support consistent use of the SCC may be an effective approach to increase birth attendants' adherence to these practices.

methodsWe assessed data from 60 public health facilities in Uttar Pradesh, India, that received an 8-month staggered coaching intervention from December 2014 to September 2016 as part of the BetterBirth Trial, which is studying effectiveness of an SCC-centered intervention on maternal and neonatal harm. Nurse coaches recorded birth attendants' adherence to 39 essential birth practices. Practice adherence was calculated for each intervention month. After 2 months of coaching, a subsample of 15 facilities was selected for independent observation when the coach was not present. We compared adherence to the 18 practices recorded by both coaches and independent observers.

resultsCoaches observed birth attendants' behavior during 5,971 deliveries. By the final month of the intervention, 35 of 39 essential birth practices had achieved >90% adherence in the presence of a coach, compared with only 7 of 39 practices during the first month. Key behaviors with the greatest improvement included explanation of danger signs, temperature measurement, assessment of fetal heart sounds, initiation of skin-to-skin contact, and breastfeeding. Without a coach present, birth attendants' average adherence to practices and checklist use was 24 percentage points lower than when a coach was present (range: -1% to 62%).

conclusionImplementation of the WHO Safe Childbirth Checklist with coaching improved uptake of and adherence to essential birth practices. Coordination and communication among facility staff, as well as behaviors with an immediate, tangible benefit, showed the greatest improvement. Difficult-to-perform behaviors and those with delayed or theoretical benefits were less likely to be sustained without a coach present. Coaching may be an important component in implementing the Safe Childbirth Checklist at scale.Note: At the time of publication of this article, the results of evaluation of the impact of the BetterBirth intervention were pending publication in another journal. After the impact findings have been published, we will update this article on the effect of the intervention on birth practices with a reference to the impact findings.

Indexed as

Delivery, ObstetricMentoringPeer GroupPractice Guidelines as TopicChecklistFemaleGuideline AdherenceHealth FacilitiesHumansIndiaPregnancyPublic SectorQuality ImprovementWorld Health Organization

Identifiers

PMID28655800
PMCPMC5487085
OpenAlexW2733999977

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.