“…The study was funded by WHO's South-East Asia Region Office (WHO-SEARO) and implementation of QI was done by Nationwide Quality of Care Network, India. 5 The learnings and major challenges encountered in this process are presented in this paper.…”
ObjectiveHub and spoke model has been used across industries to augment peripheral services by centralising key resources. This exercise evaluated the feasibility of whether such a model can be developed and implemented for quality improvement across rural and urban settings in India with support from a network for quality improvement.MethodsThis model was implemented using support from the state and district administration. Medical colleges were designated as hubs and the secondary and primary care facilities as spokes. Training in quality improvement (QI) was done using WHO’s point of care quality improvement methodology. Identified personnel from hubs were also trained as mentors. Both network mentors (from QI network) and hub-mentors (from medical colleges) undertook mentoring visits to their allotted facilities. Each of the participating facility completed their QI projects with support from mentors.ResultsTwo QI training workshops and two experience sharing sessions were conducted for implementing the model. A total of 34 mentoring visits were undertaken by network mentors instead of planned 14 visits and rural hub-mentors could undertake only four visits against planned 18 visits. Ten QI projects were successfully completed by teams, 80% of these projects started during the initial intensive phase of mentoring. The projects ranged from 3 to 10 months with median duration being 5 months.DiscussionVarious components of a health system must work in synergy to sustain improvements in quality of care. Quality networks and collaboratives can play a significant role in creating this synergy. Active participation of district and state administration is a critical factor to produce a culture of quality in the health system.
“…The study was funded by WHO's South-East Asia Region Office (WHO-SEARO) and implementation of QI was done by Nationwide Quality of Care Network, India. 5 The learnings and major challenges encountered in this process are presented in this paper.…”
ObjectiveHub and spoke model has been used across industries to augment peripheral services by centralising key resources. This exercise evaluated the feasibility of whether such a model can be developed and implemented for quality improvement across rural and urban settings in India with support from a network for quality improvement.MethodsThis model was implemented using support from the state and district administration. Medical colleges were designated as hubs and the secondary and primary care facilities as spokes. Training in quality improvement (QI) was done using WHO’s point of care quality improvement methodology. Identified personnel from hubs were also trained as mentors. Both network mentors (from QI network) and hub-mentors (from medical colleges) undertook mentoring visits to their allotted facilities. Each of the participating facility completed their QI projects with support from mentors.ResultsTwo QI training workshops and two experience sharing sessions were conducted for implementing the model. A total of 34 mentoring visits were undertaken by network mentors instead of planned 14 visits and rural hub-mentors could undertake only four visits against planned 18 visits. Ten QI projects were successfully completed by teams, 80% of these projects started during the initial intensive phase of mentoring. The projects ranged from 3 to 10 months with median duration being 5 months.DiscussionVarious components of a health system must work in synergy to sustain improvements in quality of care. Quality networks and collaboratives can play a significant role in creating this synergy. Active participation of district and state administration is a critical factor to produce a culture of quality in the health system.
Background
Improving quality of care is a key priority to reduce neonatal mortality and stillbirths. The Safe Care, Saving Lives programme aimed to improve care in newborn care units and labour wards of 60 public and private hospitals in Telangana and Andhra Pradesh, India, using a collaborative quality improvement approach. Our external evaluation of this programme aimed to evaluate programme effects on implementation of maternal and newborn care practices, and impact on stillbirths, 7- and 28-day neonatal mortality rate in labour wards and neonatal care units. We also aimed to evaluate programme implementation and mechanisms of change.
Methods
We used a quasi-experimental plausibility design with a nested process evaluation. We evaluated effects on stillbirths, mortality and secondary outcomes relating to adherence to 20 evidence-based intrapartum and newborn care practices, comparing survey data from 29 hospitals receiving the intervention to 31 hospitals expected to receive the intervention later, using a difference-in-difference analysis. We analysed programme implementation data and conducted 42 semi-structured interviews in four case studies to describe implementation and address four theory-driven questions to explain the quantitative results.
Results
Only 7 of the 29 intervention hospitals were engaged in the intervention for its entire duration. There was no evidence of an effect of the intervention on stillbirths [DiD − 1.3 percentage points, 95% CI − 2.6–0.1], on neonatal mortality at age 7 days [DiD − 1.6, 95% CI − 9–6.2] or 28 days [DiD − 3.0, 95% CI − 12.9—6.9] or on adherence to target evidence-based intrapartum and newborn care practices. The process evaluation identified challenges in engaging leaders; challenges in developing capacity for quality improvement; and challenges in activating mechanisms of change at the unit level, rather than for a few individuals, and in sustaining these through the creation of new social norms.
Conclusion
Despite careful planning and substantial resources, the intervention was not feasible for implementation on a large scale. Greater focus is required on strategies to engage leadership. Quality improvement may need to be accompanied by clinical training. Further research is also needed on quality improvement using a health systems perspective.
“…SQCI helped the districts to advocate for their requirements like increase in the bed allocation, procurement of drugs, instruments and equipment like C-PAP machines. Our implementation addressed gaps identified by the SNCU evaluation [ 18 ]. Independent use of the tool through this mechanism by state, district and SNCU managers will lead to sustained improvement over time.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Human resource shortage in neonatal units is stark with only 53% having an appropriate number of physicians and less than half having a requisite number of nurses [ 15 ]. Although evidence-based guidelines are available, compliance to them varies at the point of care [ 18 ]. The admission and treatment of so many babies generates a plethora of data ranging from demographic information, anthropometric and vital statistics, admission criteria, treatment profiles, outcome status, bed occupancy and others.…”
Lack of quality care is associated with newborn mortality and stillbirth. India launched the Special newborn care unit (SNCU) Quality of Care Index (SQCI) for measuring quality indicators in SNCU. The USAID Vriddhi project provided support to the use of SQCI in 19 SNCU across aspirational districts of Jharkhand, Uttarakhand, Himachal Pradesh, Punjab and Haryana. The objective was to provide holistic support to quality care processes by generating analyzed quarterly reports for action with the goal toward sustainability by capacitating SNCU personnel and program officers to use SQCI, over a 1period from April 2019 to June 2020. The composite index has seven indicators and converts them into indices, each having a range from 0.1 to 1, to measure performance of SNCU.7 of the 18 SNCU improved their composite scores from the first to the last quarter. Rational use of antibiotics showed improvement in 12 SNCU. Survival in newborns >2500 g and <2500, low birth weight admission and optimal bed utilization had the most variations between and within facilities. Based on quarterly data analysis, all facilities introduced KMC, 10 facilities improved equipment and drug supply, 9 facilities launched in-house capacity building to improve asphyxia management. The SQCI implementation helped to show a process of using SQCI data for identifying bottlenecks and addressing quality concerns. The project has transitioned to complete responsibility of SQCI usage by the district and facility teams. Use of an existing mechanism of quality monitoring without any major external support makes the SQCI usable and doable.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
