Tools
Tools
Smith, Helen 
ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6252-3793, Asfaw, Atnafu Getachew, Aung, Kyaw Myint, Chikoti, Lastone, Mgawadere, Florence ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3341-9118, DAquino, Luigi ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5457-4016 and van den Broek, Nynke ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8523-2684
(2017)
'Implementing the WHO integrated tool to assess quality of care for mothers, newborns and children: results and lessons learnt from five districts in Malawi.'. BMC Pregnancy and Childbirth, Vol 17, Issue 1, e271.
|
Text
BMC_Preg&Childcare_2017_17_27.pdf - Published Version Available under License Creative Commons Attribution. Download (720kB) | Preview |
Abstract
In 2014 the World Health Organization (WHO) developed a new tool to be used to assess the quality of care for mothers, newborns and children provided at healthcare facility level. This paper reports on the feasibility of using the tool, its limitations and strengths. Across 5 districts in Malawi, 35 healthcare facilities were assessed. The WHO tool includes checklists, interviews and observation of case management by which care is assessed against agreed standards using a Likert scale (1 lowest: not meeting standard, 5 highest: compliant with standard). Descriptive statistics were used to provide summary scores for each standard. A 'dashboard' system was developed to display the results. For maternal care three areas met standards; 1) supportive care for admitted patients (71% of healthcare facilities scored 4 or 5); 2) prevention and management of infections during pregnancy (71% scored 4 or 5); and 3) management of unsatisfactory progress of labour (84% scored 4 or 5). Availability of essential equipment and supplies was noted to be a critical barrier to achieving satisfactory standards of paediatric care (mean score; standard deviation: 2.9; SD 0.95) and child care (2.7; SD 1.1). Infection control is inadequate across all districts for maternal, newborn and paediatric care. Quality of care varies across districts with a mean (SD) score for all standards combined of 3 (SD 0.19) for the worst performing district and 4 (SD 0.27) for the best. The best performing district has an average score of 4 (SD 0.27). Hospitals had good scores for overall infrastructure, essential drugs, organisation of care and management of preterm labour. However, health centres were better at case management of HIV/AIDS patients and follow-up of sick children. There is a need to develop an expanded framework of standards which is inclusive of all areas of care. In addition, it is important to ensure structure, process and outcomes of health care are reflected.
Statistics
Actions (login required)
 |
Edit Item |