Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31829427›Full record

Trial reportInternational journal for quality in health care : journal of the International Society for Quality in Health Care2020

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

Elysia Larson, Godfrey M Mbaruku, Jessica Cohen, Margaret E Kruk

Abstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in International journal for quality in health care : journal of the International Society for Quality in Health Care, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
16citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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

16 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Trial
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Survey of practices for the clinical management of febrile neutropenia in children in hematology-oncology units in Latin America.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2021
    Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. 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

4 authors.

Elysia LarsonDepartment of Global Health and Population, Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health, Boston, USA.
Godfrey M MbarukuIfakara Health Institute, Dar es Salaam, Tanzania.
Jessica CohenDepartment of Global Health and Population, Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health, Boston, USA.
Margaret E KrukDepartment of Global Health and Population, Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health, Boston, USA.

Funding

BIOSTATISTICS/EPIDEMIOLOGY TRAINING GRANTS IN AIDST32AI007358 · NIAID · HARVARD UNIVERSITY (SCH OF PUBLIC HLTH) · PI Michael David Hughes · 1989 to 2026
$12.4M
Improving Maternal and Newborn Health Using the HIV/AIDS Program Platform in TanzR01AI093182 · NIAID · HARVARD SCHOOL OF PUBLIC HEALTH · PI KRUK, MARGARET E. · 2011 to 2015
$3.6M
NIAID NIH HHS R01 AI093182NIAID NIH HHS T32 AI007358
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveTo test the success of a maternal healthcare quality improvement intervention in actually improving quality.

designCluster-randomized controlled study with implementation evaluation; we randomized 12 primary care facilities to receive a quality improvement intervention, while 12 facilities served as controls.

settingFour districts in rural Tanzania.

participantsHealth facilities (24), providers (70 at baseline; 119 at endline) and patients (784 at baseline; 886 at endline).

interventionsIn-service training, mentorship and supportive supervision and infrastructure support.

main outcome measuresWe measured fidelity with indictors of quality and compared quality between intervention and control facilities using difference-in-differences analysis.

resultsQuality 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.

conclusionsA 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.

Indexed as

AdolescentAdultDelivery, ObstetricFemaleHumansInfant, NewbornInservice TrainingMaleMaternal Health ServicesPatient SatisfactionPregnancyPrimary Health CareQuality ImprovementQuality of Health CareRural PopulationSurveys and Questionnairescluster-randomized controlled studyimplementation sciencematernal healthquality improvementquality measurementTanzania

Identifiers

PMID31829427
PMCPMC7172021

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.