No abstract

IntroductionRoma, the largest minority group in Europe, face widespread racism and health disadvantage. Using qualitative data from Serbia and Macedonia, our objective was to develop a conceptual framework showing how three levels of racism--personal, internalized, and institutional--affect access to maternal health care among Romani women.MethodsEight focus groups of Romani women aged 14-44 (n = 71), as well as in-depth semi-structured interviews with gynecologists (n = 8) and key informants from NGOs and state institutions (n = 11) were conducted on maternal health care seeking, experiences during care, and perceived health care discrimination. Transcripts were coded, and analyzed using a grounded theory approach. Themes were categorized into domains.ResultsTwenty-two emergent themes identified barriers that reflected how racism affects access to maternal health care. The domains into which the themes were classified were perceptions and interactions with health system, psychological factors, social environment and resources, lack of health system accountability, financial needs, and exclusion from education.ConclusionsThe experiences of Romani women demonstrate psychosocial and structural pathways by which racism and discrimination affect access to prenatal and maternity care. Interventions to address maternal health inequalities should target barriers within all three levels of racism.

BackgroundPromoting respect and dignity is a key component of providing quality care during facility-based childbirth and is becoming a critical indicator of maternal health care. Providing quality care requires essential skills and attitudes from healthcare providers, as their role is central to optimizing interventions in maternity settings.MethodsIn 13 facilities in Kenya we conducted a mixed methods, pre-post study design to assess health providers’ perspectives of a multi-component intervention (the Heshima project), which aimed to mitigate aspects of disrespect and abuse during facility-based childbirth. Providers working in maternity units at study facilities were interviewed using a two-part quantitative questionnaire: an interviewer-guided section on knowledge and practice, and a self-administered section focusing on intrinsic value systems and perceptions. Eleven distinct composite scores were created on client rights and care, provider emotional wellbeing, and work environments. Bivariate analyses compared pre- and post-scores. Qualitative in-depth interviews focused on underlying factors that affected provider attitudes and behaviors including the complexities of service delivery, and perceptions of the Heshima interventions.ResultsComposite scales were developed on provider knowledge of client rights (Chronbach α = 0.70), client-centered care (α = 0.80), and HIV care (α = 0.81); providers’ emotional health (α = 0.76) and working relationships (α = 0.88); and provider perceptions of management (α = 0.93), job fairness (α = 0.68), supervision (α = 0.84), promotion (α = 0.83), health systems (α = 0.85), and work environment (α = 0.85). Comparison of baseline and endline individual item scores and composite scores showed that provider knowledge of client rights and practice of a rights-based approach, treatment of clients living with HIV, and client-centered care during labor, delivery, and postnatal periods improved (p < 0.001). Changes in emotional health, perceptions of management, job fairness, supervision, and promotion seen in composite scores did not directly align with changes in item-specific responses. Qualitative data reveal health system challenges limit the translation of providers’ positive attitudes and behaviors into implementation of a rights-based approach to maternity care.ConclusionBehavior change interventions, central to promoting respectful care, are feasible to implement, as seen in the Heshima experience, but require sustained interaction with health systems where providers practice. Provider emotional health has the potential to drive (mis)treatment and affect women’s care.Electronic supplementary materialThe online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s12978-017-0364-8) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

BackgroundWith the 40th anniversary of the Declaration of Alma-Ata, a global effort is underway to re-focus on strengthening primary health care systems, with emphasis on leveraging community health workers (CHWs) towards the goal of achieving universal health coverage for all. Institutionalizing effective, sustainable community health systems is currently limited by a lack of standard metrics for measuring CHW performance and the systems they work within. Developed through iterative consultations, supported by the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation and in partnership with USAID and UNICEF, this paper details a framework, list of indicators, and measurement considerations for monitoring CHW performance in low- and middle-income countries.MethodsA review of peer-reviewed articles, reports, and global data collection tools was conducted to identify key measurement domains in monitoring CHW performance. Three consultations were successively convened with global stakeholders, community health implementers, advocates, measurement experts, and Ministry of Health representatives using a modified Delphi approach to build consensus on priority indicators. During this process, a structured, web-based survey was administered to identify the importance and value of specific measurement domains, sub-domains, and indicators determined through the literature reviews and initial stakeholder consultations. Indicators with more than 75% support from participants were further refined with expert qualitative input.ResultsTwenty-one sub-domains for measurement were identified including measurement of incentives for CHWs, supervision and performance appraisal, data use, data reporting, service delivery, quality of services, CHW absenteeism and attrition, community use of services, experience of services, referral/counter-referral, credibility/trust, and programmatic costs. Forty-six indicators were agreed upon to measure the sub-domains. In the absence of complete population enumeration and digitized health information systems, the quality of metrics to monitor CHW programs is limited.ConclusionsBetter data collection approaches at the community level are needed to strengthen management of CHW programs and community health systems. The proposed list of metrics balances exhaustive and pragmatic measurement of CHW performance within primary healthcare systems. Adoption of the proposed framework and associated indicators by CHW program implementors may improve programmatic effectiveness, strengthen their accountability to national community health systems, drive programmatic quality improvement, and plausibly improve the impact of these programs.

BackgroundMedical barriers refer to unnecessary policies or procedures imposed by health care providers that are not necessarily medically advised; these restrictions impede clients’ access to family planning (FP). This mixed methods study investigates provider imposed barriers to provision of FP using recent quantitative and qualitative data from urban Uttar Pradesh, India.MethodsBaseline quantitative data were collected in six cities in Uttar Pradesh, India from service delivery points (SDP), using facility audits, exit interviews, and provider surveys; for this study, the focus is on the provider surveys. More than 250 providers were surveyed in each city. Providers were asked about the FP methods they provide, and if they restrict clients’ access to each method based on age, parity, partner consent, or marital status. For the qualitative research, we conducted one-on-one interviews with 21 service providers in four of the six cities in Uttar Pradesh. Each interview lasted approximately 45 minutes.ResultsThe quantitative findings show that providers restrict clients’ access to spacing and long-acting and permanent methods of FP based on age, parity, partner consent and marital status. Qualitative findings reinforce that providers, at times, make judgments about their clients’ education, FP needs and ability to understand FP options thereby imposing unnecessary barriers to FP methods.ConclusionsProvider restrictions on FP methods are common in these urban Uttar Pradesh sites. This means that women who are young, unmarried, have few or no children, do not have the support of their partner, or are less educated may not be able to access or use FP or their preferred method. These findings highlight the need for in-service training for staff, with a focus on reviewing current guidelines and eligibility criteria for provision of methods.

BackgroundGlobally, there is renewed interest in and momentum for strengthening community health systems, as also emphasized by the recent Astana Declaration. Recent reviews have identified factors critical to successful community health worker (CHW) programs but pointed to significant evidence gaps. This review aims to propose a global research agenda to strengthen CHW programs.Methods and resultsWe conducted a search for extant systematic reviews on any intermediate factors affecting the effectiveness of CHW programs in February 2018. A total of 30 articles published after year 2000 were included. Data on research gaps were abstracted and summarized under headings based on predominant themes identified in the literature. Following this data gathering phase, two technical advisory groups comprised of experts in the field of community health—including policymakers, implementors, researchers, advocates and donors—were convened to discuss, validate, and prioritize the research gaps identified.Research gap areas that were identified in the literature and validated through expert consultation include selection and training of CHWs, community embeddedness, institutionalization of CHW programs (referrals, supervision, and supply chain), CHW needs including incentives and remuneration, governance and sustainability of CHW programs, performance and quality of care, and cost-effectiveness of CHW programs. Priority research questions included queries on effective policy, financing, governance, supervision and monitoring systems for CHWs and community health systems, implementation questions around the role of digital technologies, CHW preferences, and drivers of CHW motivation and retention over time.ConclusionsAs international interest and investment in CHW programs and community health systems continue to grow, it becomes critical not only to analyze the evidence that exists, but also to clearly define research questions and collect additional evidence to ensure that CHW programs are effective, efficient, equity promoting, and evidence based. Generally, the literature places a strong emphasis on the need for higher quality, more robust research.Electronic supplementary materialThe online version of this article (10.1186/s12960-019-0362-8) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

No abstract

No abstract