Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28720114›Full record

ArticleImplementation science : IS2017

Effects of the EQUIP quasi-experimental study testing a collaborative quality improvement approach for maternal and newborn health care in Tanzania and Uganda.

P Waiswa, F Manzi, G Mbaruku, A K Rowe, M Marx, G Tomson, T Marchant, B A Willey, J Schellenberg, S Peterson and 2 more

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Implementation science : IS, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 34 papers, 5 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
34citing papers in PubMed, 5 pooled it
14.2field-weighted citation impact, top 1% 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

34 citing papers in PubMed, 5 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 66 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Trial
  7. Did a quality improvement intervention improve quality of maternal health care? Implementation evaluation from a cluster-randomized controlled study.International journal for quality in health care : journal of the International Society for Quality in Health Care · 2020
    Trial
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Review
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

12 authors at 7 institutions in 6 countries.

P WaiswaCollege of Health Sciences, School of Public Health, Makerere University, Kampala, Uganda. PWaiswa2001@yahoo.com.ORCID 0000-0001-9868-0515
F ManziIfakara Health Institute, Dar-es-Salaam, Tanzania.
G MbarukuIfakara Health Institute, Dar-es-Salaam, Tanzania.
A K RoweMalaria Branch, Division of Parasitic Diseases and Malaria, Center for Global Health, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Atlanta, GA, USA.
M MarxEvaplan GmbH the University of Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany.
G TomsonDepartment of Public Health Sciences, Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, Sweden.
T MarchantDepartment of Disease Control, London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, London, UK.
B A WilleyDepartment Infectious Disease Epidemiology, London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, London, UK.
J SchellenbergDepartment of Disease Control, London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, London, UK.
S PetersonCollege of Health Sciences, School of Public Health, Makerere University, Kampala, Uganda.
C HansonDepartment of Public Health Sciences, Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, Sweden.
EQUIP study team
Ifakara Health Institute · TZKarolinska Institutet · SELondon School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine · GBCenters for Disease Control and Prevention · USHeidelberg University · DEMakerere University · UGUppsala University · SE

Funding

Medical Research Council MR/K012126/1
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundQuality improvement is a recommended strategy to improve implementation levels for evidence-based essential interventions, but experience of and evidence for its effects in low-resource settings are limited. We hypothesised that a systemic and collaborative quality improvement approach covering district, facility and community levels, supported by report cards generated through continuous household and health facility surveys, could improve the implementation levels and have a measurable population-level impact on coverage and quality of essential services.

methodsCollaborative quality improvement teams tested self-identified strategies (change ideas) to support the implementation of essential maternal and newborn interventions recommended by the World Health Organization. In Tanzania and Uganda, we used a plausibility design to compare the changes over time in one intervention district with those in a comparison district in each country. Evaluation included indicators of process, coverage and implementation practice analysed with a difference-of-differences and a time-series approach, using data from independent continuous household and health facility surveys from 2011 to 2014. Primary outcomes for both countries were birth in health facilities, breastfeeding within 1 h after birth, oxytocin administration after birth and knowledge of danger signs for mothers and babies. Interpretation of the results considered contextual factors.

resultsThe intervention was associated with improvements on one of four primary outcomes. We observed a 26-percentage-point increase (95% CI 25-28%) in the proportion of live births where mothers received uterotonics within 1 min after birth in the intervention compared to the comparison district in Tanzania and an 8-percentage-point increase (95% CI 6-9%) in Uganda. The other primary indicators showed no evidence of improvement. In Tanzania, we saw positive changes for two other outcomes reflecting locally identified improvement topics. The intervention was associated with an increase in preparation of clean birth kits for home deliveries (31 percentage points, 95% CI 2-60%) and an increase in health facility supervision by district staff (14 percentage points, 95% CI 0-28%).

conclusionsThe systemic quality improvement approach was associated with improvements of only one of four primary outcomes, as well as two Tanzania-specific secondary outcomes. Reasons for the lack of effects included limited implementation strength as well a relatively short follow-up period in combination with a 1-year recall period for population-based estimates and a limited power of the study to detect changes smaller than 10 percentage points.

trial registrationPan African Clinical Trials Registry: PACTR201311000681314.

Indexed as

Health Knowledge, Attitudes, PracticeBreast FeedingCooperative BehaviorHome ChildbirthHumansLive BirthMaternal-Child Health ServicesOxytocinProgram EvaluationPublic Health SurveillanceQuality ImprovementQuality Indicators, Health CareTanzaniaUgandaOxytocin

Identifiers

PMID28720114
PMCPMC5516352
OpenAlexW2736648460

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.