10
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Input, process, and output factors contributing to quality of antenatal care services: a scoping review of evidence

      research-article

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Background

          High-quality antenatal care (ANC) provides a lifesaving opportunity for women and their newborns through providing health promotion, disease prevention, and early diagnosis and treatment of pregnancy-related health issues. However, systematically synthesised evidence on factors influencing the quality of ANC services is lacking. This scoping review aims to systematically synthesize the factors influencing in provision and utilisation of quality ANC services.

          Methods

          We conducted a scoping review of published evidence on the quality of ANC services. We searched records on four databases (PubMed, Scopus, Embase, and Google scholar) and grey literature from 1 to 2011 to 30 August 2021. We analysed data using Braun and Clarke’s thematic analysis approach. We followed Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for Scoping Reviews (PRISMA-ScR) guideline for the review. We explained themes using the Donabedian healthcare quality assessment model (input-process-output).

          Results

          Several inputs- and process-related factors contributed to suboptimal quality of ANC in many low and lower- or middle-income countries. Input factors included facility readiness (e.g., lack of infrastructure, provision of commodities and supplies, health workforce, structural and intermediary characteristics of pregnant women, and service delivery approaches). Processes-related factors included technical quality of care (e.g., lack of skilled adequate and timely care, and poor adherence to the guidelines) and social quality (lack of effective communication and poor client satisfaction). These input and process factors have also contributed to equity gaps in utilisation of quality ANC services.

          Conclusion

          Several input and process factors influenced the provision and utilization of optimum quality ANC services. Better health system inputs (e.g., availability of trained workforces, commodities, guidelines, context-specific programs) are essential to creating enabling facility environment for quality ANC services. Care processes can be improved by ensuring capacity-building activities for workforces (training, technical support visits), and mentoring staff working at peripheral facilities. Identifying coverage of quality ANC services among disadvantaged groups could be the initial step in designing and implementing targeted program approaches.

          Supplementary Information

          The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12884-022-05331-5.

          Related collections

          Most cited references129

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: not found
          • Article: not found

          Using thematic analysis in psychology

            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: found
            Is Open Access

            Systematic review or scoping review? Guidance for authors when choosing between a systematic or scoping review approach

            Background Scoping reviews are a relatively new approach to evidence synthesis and currently there exists little guidance regarding the decision to choose between a systematic review or scoping review approach when synthesising evidence. The purpose of this article is to clearly describe the differences in indications between scoping reviews and systematic reviews and to provide guidance for when a scoping review is (and is not) appropriate. Results Researchers may conduct scoping reviews instead of systematic reviews where the purpose of the review is to identify knowledge gaps, scope a body of literature, clarify concepts or to investigate research conduct. While useful in their own right, scoping reviews may also be helpful precursors to systematic reviews and can be used to confirm the relevance of inclusion criteria and potential questions. Conclusions Scoping reviews are a useful tool in the ever increasing arsenal of evidence synthesis approaches. Although conducted for different purposes compared to systematic reviews, scoping reviews still require rigorous and transparent methods in their conduct to ensure that the results are trustworthy. Our hope is that with clear guidance available regarding whether to conduct a scoping review or a systematic review, there will be less scoping reviews being performed for inappropriate indications better served by a systematic review, and vice-versa.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found
              Is Open Access

              Global causes of maternal death: a WHO systematic analysis.

              Data for the causes of maternal deaths are needed to inform policies to improve maternal health. We developed and analysed global, regional, and subregional estimates of the causes of maternal death during 2003-09, with a novel method, updating the previous WHO systematic review. We searched specialised and general bibliographic databases for articles published between between Jan 1, 2003, and Dec 31, 2012, for research data, with no language restrictions, and the WHO mortality database for vital registration data. On the basis of prespecified inclusion criteria, we analysed causes of maternal death from datasets. We aggregated country level estimates to report estimates of causes of death by Millennium Development Goal regions and worldwide, for main and subcauses of death categories with a Bayesian hierarchical model. We identified 23 eligible studies (published 2003-12). We included 417 datasets from 115 countries comprising 60 799 deaths in the analysis. About 73% (1 771 000 of 2 443 000) of all maternal deaths between 2003 and 2009 were due to direct obstetric causes and deaths due to indirect causes accounted for 27·5% (672 000, 95% UI 19·7-37·5) of all deaths. Haemorrhage accounted for 27·1% (661 000, 19·9-36·2), hypertensive disorders 14·0% (343 000, 11·1-17·4), and sepsis 10·7% (261 000, 5·9-18·6) of maternal deaths. The rest of deaths were due to abortion (7·9% [193 000], 4·7-13·2), embolism (3·2% [78 000], 1·8-5·5), and all other direct causes of death (9·6% [235 000], 6·5-14·3). Regional estimates varied substantially. Between 2003 and 2009, haemorrhage, hypertensive disorders, and sepsis were responsible for more than half of maternal deaths worldwide. More than a quarter of deaths were attributable to indirect causes. These analyses should inform the prioritisation of health policies, programmes, and funding to reduce maternal deaths at regional and global levels. Further efforts are needed to improve the availability and quality of data related to maternal mortality. © 2014 World Health Organization; licensee Elsevier. This is an Open Access article published without any waiver of WHO's privileges and immunities under international law, convention, or agreement. This article should not be reproduced for use in association with the promotion of commercial products, services, or any legal entity. There should be no suggestion that WHO endorses any specific organisation or products. The use of the WHO logo is not permitted. This notice should be preserved along with the article's original URL.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                rkchettri@gmail.com
                Journal
                BMC Pregnancy Childbirth
                BMC Pregnancy Childbirth
                BMC Pregnancy and Childbirth
                BioMed Central (London )
                1471-2393
                28 December 2022
                28 December 2022
                2022
                : 22
                : 977
                Affiliations
                [1 ]GRID grid.1003.2, ISNI 0000 0000 9320 7537, School of Public Health, , the University of Queensland, ; Brisbane, Australia
                [2 ]Health Social Science and Development Research Institute, Kathmandu, Nepal
                [3 ]GRID grid.442845.b, ISNI 0000 0004 0439 5951, College of Medicine and Health Sciences, School of Public Health, , Bahir Dar University, ; Bahir Dar, Ethiopia
                Author information
                http://orcid.org/0000-0001-5216-606X
                http://orcid.org/0000-0001-8276-5143
                http://orcid.org/0000-0003-2393-1492
                Article
                5331
                10.1186/s12884-022-05331-5
                9795647
                36577961
                bfe194a3-6695-4d76-b6a5-c98095152d4e
                © The Author(s) 2022

                Open AccessThis article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver ( http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data.

                History
                : 29 October 2022
                : 22 December 2022
                Categories
                Research
                Custom metadata
                © The Author(s) 2022

                Obstetrics & Gynecology
                antenatal care,quality,health systems,inputs,processes,outputs
                Obstetrics & Gynecology
                antenatal care, quality, health systems, inputs, processes, outputs

                Comments

                Comment on this article