ArticleHealth services insights2026
Evaluating a Multi-Site Quality Improvement Intervention for Early Essential Newborn Care: Trends and Persistent Gaps Across Three Assessment Rounds in Viet Nam.
Article in Health services insights, 2026. 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
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Early Essential Newborn Care (EENC) is an evidence-based strategy to reduce neonatal morbidity and mortality, yet implementation gaps persist in many low- and middle-income countries. In Vietnam, a multi-site quality improvement initiative, including clinical training, on-site coaching, supportive supervision, and facility-level quality improvement planning, was implemented to strengthen EENC practices across diverse hospital settings. Methods: A repeated cross-sectional study was conducted in 14 hospitals across four provinces using data from three assessment rounds (December 2022, March 2024, and August 2024). Targeted EENC quality improvement activities were implemented between Rounds 1 and 2 and reinforced between Rounds 2 and 3. Medical record reviews, maternal interviews, and facility assessments were used to evaluate changes in EENC implementation. Indicators were selected based on WHO EENC standards, clinical and programmatic relevance, alignment with the intervention package, and availability across all three rounds. Proportions were compared using chi-square or Fisher's exact tests, as appropriate. Results: Improvements were observed in several technical practices. Immediate skin-to-skin contact increased from 32.5% in Round 1 to 73.8% in Round 3, and sustained skin-to-skin contact from 8.2% to 38.4% (p<0.001). Vitamin K1 administration rose from 93.0% to 99.3%, and non-application of antibiotic eye ointment from 88.8% to 98.8% (p<0.001). However, several indicators declined, including non-separation of mother and newborn (96.8% to 81.0%), early breastfeeding initiation (83.1% to 73.5%), no prelacteal feeding (28.0% to 19.1%), uterotonic use (99.3% to 94.6%), and uterine contraction monitoring (98.9% to 90.2%) (all p≤0.03). In Round 3, cesarean births showed persistent gaps compared with vaginal births. Conclusion: The quality improvement initiative was associated with gains in selected technical EENC practices. However, declines in maternal monitoring and mother-infant support practices, and persistent gaps after cesarean birth, indicate that training and supervision alone are insufficient. Broader health-system strengthening is required to sustain full EENC implementation.
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.