ArticlePloS one2024
Good practices to optimise the performance of maternal and neonatal quality improvement teams: Results from a longitudinal qualitative evaluation in South Africa, before, and during COVID-19.
Article in PloS one, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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.
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.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Many maternal and neonatal deaths can be avoided if quality healthcare is provided. To this end, the South African National Department of Health implemented a quality improvement (QI) programme (2018-2022) to improve maternal and neonatal health services in 21 public health facilities. This study sought to identify good practices aimed at improving QI teams' performance by identifying optimal facility-level contextual factors and implementation processes. We purposively selected 14 facilities of the 21 facilities for a longitudinal qualitative process evaluation. We interviewed 17 team leaders, 47 members, and five QI advisors who provided technical support to the teams. The data were analysed using framework analysis. We choose the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research as framework given that it explicates contexts and processes that shape programme implementation. Six quality improvement teams were assessed as well-performing, and eight as less well-performing. This research conceptualises a 'life course lens' for setting up and managing a QI team. We identified eight good practices, six related to implementation processes, and two contextual variables that will optimise team performance. The two most impactful practices to improve the performance of a QI team were (i) selecting healthcare workers with quality improvement-specific characteristics, and (ii) appointing advisors whose interpersonal skills match their technical quality improvement competencies.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.