BackgroundFacility-based childbirth in low-resource settings has increased dramatically over the last two decades, yet quality of care gaps persist and mortality rates remain high. The World Health Organization (WHO) Safe Childbirth Checklist, a quality improvement tool, promotes systematic adherence to practices known to save lives and prevent harm during childbirth. MethodsWe conducted a matched-pair, cluster-randomized controlled trial in 60 pairs o facilities across 24 districts of Uttar Pradesh, India to test the effectiveness of the BetterBirth program, an 8-month coaching-based implementation of the Checklist, on a composite outcome of 7-day maternal/perinatal mortality and maternal morbidity. Outcomes—assessed 8-42 days post-partum—were compared between study arms adjusting for clustering and matching. We also compared birth attendants’ mean adherence to 18 essential birth practices in 15 matched pairs of facilities at 2 and 12 months after intervention initiation. ResultsOf 161,107 eligible women, we enrolled 157,689 (98%) and determined 7-day outcomes for 157,145 (99.7%) mother-newborn dyads. Of 4888 observed births, birth attendants’ adherence to practices was significantly higher in the intervention (I) than control (C) arm (I: 73% vs. C: 42% at 2 months, p≤0.01; I: 62% vs. C: 44% at 12 months, p≤0.01). However, we found no difference in the composite outcome (I: 15.1% C: 15.3%, RR: 0.99, 95% CI: 0.83-1.18, p=0.90). ConclusionThe coaching-based WHO Safe Childbirth Checklist program produced increased adherence to some essential birth practices, but did not reduce morbidity and mortality. (Clinical Trials #NCT02148952; The Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation)

BackgroundThe BetterBirth trial tested the effect of a peer coaching program around the WHO Safe Childbirth Checklist for birth attendants in primary-level facilities in Uttar Pradesh, India on a composite measure of perinatal and maternal mortality and maternal morbidity. This study aimed to examine the adherence to essential birth practices between two different cadres of birth attendants—nurses and auxiliary nurse midwives (ANMs)—during and after a peer coaching intervention for the WHO Safe Childbirth Checklist.MethodsThis is a secondary analysis of birth attendant characteristics, coaching visits, and behavior uptake during the BetterBirth trial through birth attendant surveys, coach observations, and independent observations. Descriptive statistics were calculated overall, and by staffing cadre (staff nurses and ANMs) for demographic characteristics. Logistic regression using the Pearson overdispersion correction (to account for clustering by site) was used to assess differences between staff nurses and ANMs in the intervention group during regular coaching (2-month time point) and 4 months after the coaching program ended (12-month time point).ResultsOf the 570 birth attendants who responded to the survey in intervention and control arms, 474 were staff nurses (83.2%) and 96 were ANMs (16.8%). In the intervention arm, more staff nurses (240/260, 92.3%) received coaching at all pause points compared to ANMs (40/53, 75.5%). At baseline, adherence to practices was similar between ANMs and staff nurses (~ 30%). Overall percent adherence to essential birth practices among ANMs and nurses was highest at 2 months after intervention initiation, when frequent coaching visits occurred (68.1% and 64.1%, respectively, p = 0.76). Practice adherence tapered to 49.2% among ANMs and 56.1% among staff nurses at 12 months, which was 4 months after coaching had ended (p = 0.68).ConclusionsOverall, ANMs and nurses responded similarly to the coaching intervention with the greatest increase in percent adherence to essential birth practices after 2 months of coaching and subsequent decrease in adherence 4 months after coaching ended. While coaching is an effective strategy to support some aspects of birth attendant competency, the structure, content, and frequency of coaching may need to be customized according to the birth attendant training and competency.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov: NCT2148952; Universal Trial Number: U1111–1131-5647.

Implementation of the WHO Safe Childbirth Checklist with peer coaching resulted in >90% adherence to 35 of 39 essential birth practices among birth attendants after 8 months, but adherence to some practices was lower when the coach was absent.

(N Engl J Med. 2017;377(24):2313–2324) The Safe Childbirth Checklist, created by the World Health Organization, is a practical tool encompassing a bundle of 28 essential birth practices. In the present study, the authors performed a large cluster-randomized trial of the BetterBirth program, which involves a coaching-based implementation of this checklist, to determine whether or not facility-based birth adherence to this checklist improved evidence-based care. The authors hypothesized that, if implemented at the cluster level, the intervention would reduce the composite outcome of stillbirth, early neonatal death, maternal death, or maternal severe complications during postpartum days 0 to 7.

IntroductionEnding preventable deaths of newborns and children under 5 will not be possible without evidence-based strategies addressing the health and care of low birthweight (LBW, <2.5 kg) infants. The majority of LBW infants are born in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) and account for more than 60%–80% of newborn deaths. Feeding promotion tailored to meet the nutritional needs of LBW infants in LMICs may serve a crucial role in curbing newborn mortality rates and promoting growth. The Low Birthweight Infant Feeding Exploration (LIFE) study aims to establish foundational knowledge regarding optimal feeding options for LBW infants in low-resource settings throughout infancy.Methods and analysisLIFE is a formative, multisite, observational cohort study involving 12 study facilities in India, Malawi and Tanzania, and using a convergent parallel, mixed-methods design. We assess feeding patterns, growth indicators, morbidity, mortality, child development and health system inputs that facilitate or hinder care and survival of LBW infants.Ethics and disseminationThis study was approved by 11 ethics committees in India, Malawi, Tanzania and the USA. The results will be disseminated through peer-reviewed publications and presentations targeting the global and local research, clinical, programme implementation and policy communities.Trial registration numbersNCT04002908 and CTRI/2019/02/017475.

Background: Despite extensive efforts to develop and refine intervention packages, complex interventions often fail to produce the desired health impacts in full-scale evaluations. A recent example of this phenomenon is BetterBirth, a complex intervention designed to implement the World Health Organization's Safe Childbirth Checklist and improve maternal and neonatal health. Using data from the BetterBirth Program and its associated trial as a case study, we identified lessons to assist in the development and evaluation of future complex interventions. Methods: BetterBirth was refined across three sequential development phases prior to being tested in a matchedpair, cluster randomized trial in Uttar Pradesh, India. We reviewed published and internal materials from all three development phases to identify barriers hindering the identification of an optimal intervention package and identified corresponding lessons learned. For each lesson, we describe its importance and provide an example motivated by the BetterBirth Program's development to illustrate how it could be applied to future studies. Results: We identified three lessons: (1) develop a robust theory of change (TOC); (2) define optimization outcomes, which are used to assess the effectiveness of the intervention across development phases, and corresponding criteria for success, which determine whether the intervention has been sufficiently optimized to warrant full-scale evaluation; and (3) create and capture variation in the implementation intensity of components. When applying these lessons to the BetterBirth intervention, we demonstrate how a TOC could have promoted more complete data collection. We propose an optimization outcome and related criteria for success and illustrate how they could have resulted in additional development phases prior to the full-scale trial. Finally, we show how variation in components' implementation intensities could have been used to identify effective intervention components. Conclusion: These lessons learned can be applied during both early and advanced stages of complex intervention development and evaluation. By using examples from a real-world study to demonstrate the relevance of these lessons and illustrating how they can be applied in practice, we hope to encourage future researchers to collect and analyze data in a way that promotes more effective complex intervention development and evaluation.

Worldwide, many newborns die in the first month of life, with most deaths happening in low/middle-income countries (LMICs). Families’ use of evidence-based newborn care practices in the home and timely care-seeking for illness can save newborn lives. Postnatal education is an important investment to improve families’ use of evidence-based newborn care practices, yet there are gaps in the literature on postnatal education programees that have been evaluated to date. Recent findings from a 13 000+ person survey in 3 states in India show opportunities for improvement in postnatal education for mothers and families and their use of newborn care practices in the home. Our survey data and the literature suggest the need to incorporate the following strategies into future postnatal education programming: implement structured predischarge education with postdischarge reinforcement, using a multipronged teaching approach to reach whole families with education on multiple newborn care practices. Researchers need to conduct robust evaluation on postnatal education models incorporating these programee elements in the LMIC context, as well as explore whether this type of education model can work for other health areas that are critical for families to survive and thrive.

Summary Background A coaching-based implementation of the WHO Safe Childbirth Checklist in Uttar Pradesh, India, improved adherence to evidence-based practices, but did not reduce perinatal mortality, maternal morbidity, or maternal mortality. We examined facility-level correlates of the outcomes, which varied widely across the 120 study facilities. Methods We did a post-hoc analysis of the coaching-based implementation of the WHO Safe Childbirth Checklist in Uttar Pradesh. We used multivariable modelling to identify correlations between 30 facility-level characteristics and each health outcome (perinatal mortality, maternal morbidity, or maternal mortality). To identify contexts in which the intervention might have had an effect, we then ran the models on data restricted to the period of intensive coaching and among patients not referred out of the facilities. Findings In the multivariable context, perinatal mortality was associated with only 3 of the 30 variables: female literacy at the district level, geographical location, and previous neonatal mortality. Maternal morbidity was only associated with geographical location. No facility-level predictors were associated with maternal mortality. Among facilities in the lowest tertile of birth volume (<95 births per month), our models estimated perinatal mortality was 17 (95% CI 11·7–24·8) per 1000 births in the intervention group versus 38 (31·6–44·8) per 1000 in the control group (p<0·0001). Interpretation Mortality was not directly associated with measured facility-level indicators but was associated with general risk factors. The absence of correlation between expected predictors and patient outcomes and the association between improved outcomes and the intervention in smaller facilities suggest a need for additional measures of quality of care that take into account complexity. Funding Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation.