Dataset Information

Group antenatal care models in low- and middle-income countries: a systematic evidence synthesis.

ABSTRACT: In high-income countries, group antenatal care (ANC) offers an alternative to individual care and is associated with improved attendance, client satisfaction, and health outcomes for pregnant women and newborns. In low- and middle-income country (LMIC) settings, this model could be adapted to address low antenatal care uptake and improve quality. However, evidence on key attributes of a group care model for low-resource settings remains scant. We conducted a systematic review of the published literature on models of group antenatal care in LMICs to identify attributes that may increase the relevance, acceptability and effectiveness of group ANC in such settings. We systematically searched five databases and conducted hand and reference searches. We also conducted key informant interviews with researchers and program implementers who have introduced group antenatal care models in LMICs. Using a pre-defined evidence summary template, we extracted evidence on key attributes-like session content and frequency, and group composition and organization-of group care models introduced across LMIC settings. Our systematic literature review identified nine unique descriptions of group antenatal care models. We supplemented this information with evidence from 10 key informant interviews. We synthesized evidence from these 19 data sources to identify attributes of group care models for pregnant women that appeared consistently across all of them. We considered these components that are fundamental to the delivery of group antenatal care. We also identified attributes that need to be tailored to the context in which they are implemented to meet local standards for comprehensive ANC, for example, the number of sessions and the session content. We compiled these attributes to codify a composite "generic" model of group antenatal care for adaptation and implementation in LMIC settings. With this combination of standard and flexible components, group antenatal care, a service delivery alternative that has been successfully introduced and implemented in high-income country settings, can be adapted for improving provision and experiences of care for pregnant women in LMIC. Any conclusions about the benefits of this model for women, babies, and health systems in LMICs, however, must be based on robust evaluations of group antenatal care programs in those settings.

SUBMITTER: Sharma J

PROVIDER: S-EPMC5836451 | biostudies-literature | 2018 Mar

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Group antenatal care models in low- and middle-income countries: a systematic evidence synthesis.

Sharma Jigyasa J O'Connor Meaghan M Rima Jolivet R R

Reproductive health 20180305 1

In high-income countries, group antenatal care (ANC) offers an alternative to individual care and is associated with improved attendance, client satisfaction, and health outcomes for pregnant women and newborns. In low- and middle-income country (LMIC) settings, this model could be adapted to address low antenatal care uptake and improve quality. However, evidence on key attributes of a group care model for low-resource settings remains scant. We conducted a systematic review of the published li ...[more]

PMID: 29506531

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundPatients with multiple long-term conditions requires understanding the existing care models to address their complex and multifaceted health needs. However, current literature lacks a comprehensive overview of the essential components, impacts, challenges, and facilitators of these care models, prompting this scoping review.MethodsA scoping review was conducted in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-analysis Extension for Scoping Reviews guideline. Our search encompassed articles from PubMed, Web of Science, EMBASE, SCOPUS, and Google Scholar. The World Health Organization's health system framework was utilized to synthesis the findings. This framework comprises six building blocks (service delivery, health workforce, health information systems, access to essential medicines, financing, and leadership/governance) and eight key characteristics of good service delivery models (access, coverage, quality, safety, improved health, responsiveness, social and financial risk protection, and improved efficiency). Findings were synthesized qualitatively to identify components, impacts, barriers, and facilitators of care models.ResultsA care model represents various collective interventions in the healthcare delivery aimed at achieving desired outcomes. The names of these care models are derived from core activities or major responsibilities, involved healthcare teams, diseases conditions, eligible clients, purposes, and care settings. Notable care models include the Integrated, Collaborative, Integrated-Collaborative, Guided, Nurse-led, Geriatric, and Chronic care models, as well as All-inclusive Care Model for the Elderly, IMPACT clinic, and Geriatric Patient-Aligned Care Teams (GeriPACT). Other care models (include Care Management Plus, Value Stream Mapping, Preventive Home Visits, Transition Care, Self-Management, and Care Coordination) have supplemented the main ones. Care models improved quality of care (such as access, patient-centeredness, timeliness, safety, efficiency), cost of care, and quality of life for patients that were facilitated by presence of shared mission, system and function integration, availability of resources, and supportive tools.ConclusionsCare models were implemented for the purpose of enhancing quality of care, health outcomes, cost efficiency, and patient satisfaction by considering careful recruitment of eligible clients, appropriate selection of service delivery settings, and robust organizational arrangements involving leadership roles, healthcare teams, financial support, and health information systems. The distinct team compositions and their roles in service provision processes differentiate care models.

Project description:BackgroundThe 2016 World Health Organization (WHO) guidelines for antenatal care (ANC) shift the recommended minimum number of ANC contacts from four to eight, specifying the first contact to occur within the first trimester of pregnancy. We quantify the likelihood of meeting this recommendation in 54 Countdown to 2030 priority countries and identify the characteristics of women being left behind.MethodsUsing 54 Demographic and Health Surveys (DHS) and Multiple Indicator Cluster Surveys (MICS) since 2012, we reported the proportion of women with timely ANC initiation and those who received 8-10 contacts by coverage levels of ANC4+ and by Sustainable Development Goal (SDG) regions. We identified demographic, socio-economic and health systems characteristics of timely ANC initiation and achievement of ANC8+. We ran four multiple regression models to quantify the associations between timing of first ANC and the number and content of ANC received.ResultsOverall, 49.9% of women with ANC1+ and 44.3% of all women had timely ANC initiation; 11.3% achieved ANC8+ and 11.2% received no ANC. Women with timely ANC initiation had 5.2 (95% confidence interval (CI) = 5.0-5.5) and 4.7 (95% CI = 4.4-5.0) times higher odds of receiving four and eight ANC contacts, respectively (P < 0.001), and were more likely to receive a higher content of ANC than women with delayed ANC initiation. Regionally, women in Central and Southern Asia had the best performance of timely ANC initiation; Latin America and Caribbean had the highest proportion of women achieving ANC8+. Women who did not initiate ANC in the first trimester or did not achieve 8 contacts were generally poor, single women, with low education, living in rural areas, larger households, having short birth intervals, higher parity, and not giving birth in a health facility nor with a skilled attendant.ConclusionsTimely ANC initiation is likely to be a major driving force towards meeting the 2016 WHO guidelines for a positive pregnancy experience.

Project description:BackgroundThe timing of antenatal care (ANC) visits directly affect health intervention coverage and impact, especially for those interventions requiring strict gestational age windows for administration, such as maternal respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) vaccine. Existing nationally representative population-based surveys do not record the timing of ANC visits beyond the first, limiting the availability of reliable data around timing of subsequent ANC visits in most low- and middle-income countries (LMICs). Here, we describe a model that estimates the timing of ANC visits by gestational age using publicly available multi-country survey data.Methods and findingsWe used the Demographic and Health Surveys (DHS) data from 69 LMICs. We used several factors to estimate the timing of subsequent ANC visits by gestation age: the timing of the first ANC visit (ANC1) in a given pregnancy, derived from the DHS; the country's reported average ANC coverage at each ANC visit (ANC1 through the fourth ANC visit [ANC4]); and the World Health Organization's guidance on recommended ANC visit. We then used the timing of ANC visit by gestation age to predict the coverage of a potential maternal RSV vaccine administered at 24-36 weeks of gestation. We calculated the maternal immunization coverage by summing the number of eligible women vaccinated at any ANC visit divided by the total number of pregnant women. We find, in general, countries with higher ANC1 coverage were predicted to have higher vaccination coverage. In 82% of countries, the modeled vaccine coverage is less than ANC4 coverage.ConclusionsThe methods illustrated in this paper have implications on the precision of estimating impact and programmatic feasibility of time-critical interventions, especially for pregnant women. The methods can be easily adapted to vaccine demand forecasts models, vaccine impact assessments, and cost-effectiveness analyses and can be adapted to other maternal interventions that have administration timing restrictions.

Dataset Information

Group antenatal care models in low- and middle-income countries: a systematic evidence synthesis.

Publications

Group antenatal care models in low- and middle-income countries: a systematic evidence synthesis.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets