Samiksha Singh

Background: The Dakshata program in India aims to improve resources, providers’ competence, and accountability in labour wards of public sector secondary care hospitals. Dakshata is based on the WHO Safe Childbirth Checklist coupled with continuous mentoring. In Rajasthan state, an external technical partner trained, mentored and periodically assessed performance; identified local problems, supported solutions and assisted the state in monitoring implementation. We evaluated effectiveness and factors contributing to success and sustainability. Methods: Using three repeated mixed-methods surveys over an 18-month period, we assessed 24 hospitals that were at different stages of program implementation at evaluation initiation: Group 1, training had started and Group 2, one round of mentoring was complete. Data on recommended evidence-based practices in labour and postnatal wards and in-facility outcomes were collected by directly observing obstetric assessments and childbirth, extracting information from case sheets and registers, and interviewing postnatal women. A theory-driven qualitative assessment covered key domains of efficiency, effectiveness, institutionalization, accountability, sustainability, and scalability. It included in-depth interviews with administrators, mentors, obstetric staff, and officers/mentors from the external partner. Results: Overall, average adherence to evidence-based practices improved: Group 1, 55 to 72%; and Group 2, 69 to 79%, (for both p < 0.001) from baseline to endline. Significant improvement was noted in several practices in the two groups during admission, childbirth, and within 1 hour of birth but less in postpartum pre-discharge care. We noted a dip in several evidence-based practices in 2nd assessment, but they improved later. The stillbirth rate was reduced: Group 1: 1.5/1000 to 0.2; and Group 2: 2.5 to 1.1 (p < 0.001). In-depth interviews revealed that mentoring with periodic assessments was highly acceptable, efficient means of capacity building, and ensured continuity in skills upgradation. Nurses felt empowered, however, the involvement of doctors was low. The state health administration was highly committed and involved in program management; hospital administration supported the program. The competence, consistency, and support from the technical partner were highly appreciated by the service providers. Conclusion: The Dakshata program was successful in improving resources and competencies around childbirth. The states with low capacities will require intensive external support for a head start.

Quality of intrapartum care is essential for improving pregnancy outcomes; several models for improving performance are tested, globally. Dakshata is one such WHO SCC-based national program—improving resources, providers’ competence, and accountability—in public sector secondary care hospitals of India. Andhra Pradesh state devised strategy of mentoring by the handpicked member from within the obstetric team, supported by external technical partner. We evaluated the effectiveness and assessed contextual factors to success of the program. We conducted pre and post mentoring mixed-method surveys to evaluate the change in evidence-based intrapartum and newborn care practices and stillbirth rates, across 23 of 38 eligible hospitals. We directly observed obstetric assessments and childbirth, extracted data from casesheets and registers, interviewed beneficiaries and conducted facility surveys. We in-depth interviewed stakeholders from state, district and facility managers, mentors and obstetric staff, and external managers for theory-driven qualitative assessment. After one year we found, average adherence to practices sustained high during admission (81%, 81%); improved during childbirth (78%, 86%; p = 0.016); moderate within one hour of birth (72%, 71%), and poor postpartum care before discharge (46% to 43%). Stillbirths reduced from 11(95% CI, 9–13) to 4(3–5) per 1000 births (p<0.001). Some practices did not improve even after sustained reinforcement. Commitment from state, engaging district officers, monitoring and feedback by external managers enabled supportive setting. The structured training and mentoring package, and periodic assessments delivered under supervision ensured the standards of mentoring. The mentoring model is acceptable, effective, less costly and scalable; appears sustainable if state commits to institutionalising a long-term mentoring with adequate monitoring. We conclude that the SCC-based mentoring and skill building program showed improvement in practices during childbirth while it sustained high levels of care during admission, but no improvement in postpartum care. The state needs to monitor and ensure continuous mentoring with required infrastructural support.

Background: Dakshata program in India aims to improve resources, providers’ competence and accountability in labour wards of public sector secondary care hospitals. It is based on the WHO Safe Childbirth Checklist coupled with mentoring. In Rajasthan state, an external technical partner trained, mentored and periodically assessed performance; identified local problems and supported solutions; supported state in monitoring. We (a third party) evaluated the effectiveness and factors contributing to success and sustainability.Methods: We conducted three repeat mixed-method surveys across 24 hospitals which were at different stage of program implementation when evaluation initiated: Group 1-trainings started and Group 2-one round of mentoring completed. We followed them over 18 months. Data was collected by directly observing obstetric assessments and childbirth, extracting information from casesheets and registers, and interviewing postnatal women. Theory-driven qualitative assessment included in-depth interviews with administrators, mentors, obstetric staff, and officers/mentors from external partner.Results: Average adherence to practices increased, saw a dip and then again improved. Significant improvement noted in several practices in the two groups—more in pause points 1, 2 and 3 but less in 4. Overall average adherence improved: Group 1, 55% to 72%; and Group 2, 69% to 79% (p The competence, consistency and support from the technical partner were highly appreciated. Conclusion: Dakshata program was successful in improving resources and competencies. The program is sustainable and scalable. The states with low capacities will require intensive external support for a head start.

Background: The COVID-19 pandemic has highlighted that community engagement and health governance are critical for mitigating the impact and enhanced preparedness. This study assesses the knowledge, attitudes, and practices (KAP) among elected Gram panchayat representatives (Sarpanches) and volunteers. The study explores enablers and barriers for community-level management of COVID-19 and vaccination in two states of South India – Andhra Pradesh (AP) and Telangana (TS). In addition, the availability and utilization of COVID-19 related care and other Primary Healthcare services including Non-COVID clinical care, Maternal and Child health services was also studied.Methods: A mixed-method cross-sectional study consisting of 183 semi-structured interviews and 15 in-depth interviews from two districts of AP and TS. In depth interviews were conducted with 10 COVID-19 recovered patients and 20 lactating mothers were conducted. Results: Quantitative findings suggest a significant association between socioeconomic status and educational level with knowledge. 74% of participants practiced wore masks and 59% washed hands whereas 91% were vaccinated. Sarpanches ensured community compliance and supported the COVID-19 control activities. Most of the COVID-19 patients reported being stigmatized even after recovery. Lactating mothers were dissatisfied with services in government hospitals and high expenditures in private hospitals.Conclusion: The study established the crucial role of sarpanches and volunteers in COVID-19 response. It is important to build their capacities further for better community-based preparedness. Primary health care services should be strengthened for uninterrupted access during such pandemics.

Background Quality of intrapartum care is essential for improving pregnancy outcomes; several models for improving performance are tested, globally. Dakshata is one such WHO SCC-based national program—improving resources, providers’ competence, and accountability—in public sector secondary care hospitals of India. Andhra Pradesh state devised strategy of mentoring by the handpicked member from within the obstetric team, supported by external strategic partner. We evaluated the effectiveness and assessed contextual factors to success of the program. Methods We conducted pre and post mentoring mixed-method surveys to evaluate the change in evidence-based intrapartum and newborn care practices and stillbirth rates, across 23 of 38 eligible hospitals. We directly observed obstetric assessments and childbirth, extracted data from casesheets and registers, interviewed beneficiaries and conducted facility surveys. We in-depth interviewed stakeholders from state, district and facility managers, mentors and obstetric staff, and external managers for theory-driven qualitative assessment. Results After one year, average adherence to practices sustained high during admission (81%, 81%); improved during childbirth (78%, 86%; p=0.016); moderate within one hour of birth (72%, 71%), and poor postpartum care before discharge (46–43%). Stillbirths reduced from 11(95% CI, 9-13) to 4(3-5) per 1000 births (p<0.001). Some practices did not improve even after sustained reinforcement. Commitment from state, engaging district officers, monitoring and feedback by external managers enabled supportive setting. The structured training and mentoring package, and periodic assessments delivered under supervision ensured the standards of mentoring. The mentoring model is acceptable, effective, less costly and scalable; appears sustainable if state commits to institutionalising a long-term mentoring with adequate monitoring. Conclusion The SCC-based mentoring and skill building program showed improvement in practices during childbirth while it sustained high levels of care during admission, but no improvement in postpartum care. The state needs to monitor and ensure continuous mentoring with required infrastructural support.

BACKGROUND Diabetic Retinopathy (DR) is an emerging public health issue. DR may lead to severe visual impairment or blindness. Referral communication and tracking system is helpful to monitor patients flow, timeliness and compliance; ensures a close relationship across health facilities and improves patient’s satisfaction. The aim of the study is to improve timely referral flow and compliance of patients diagnosed with DR. OBJECTIVE Primary objective: To assess the effect of intervention on timely referral compliance Secondary objectives: To assess the determinants and cost effectiveness of the intervention for timely referral compliance. METHODS This is an operational research study using cluster randomized controlled health facility-based trial. A situational analysis was conducted and problem tree was developed to identify different barriers to referral compliance (long waiting time, lack of knowledge about diabetic retinopathy, its impact on vision and different treatment options).Appropriate solutions were identified through comprehensive literature review and addressing individual barriers to improve poor referral and compliance of patients diagnosed with DR from peripheral centres (referring centre). These solutions were systemically arranged in the form of an intervention package, which will be tested using a cluster-based randomized controlled trial. Ten eligible peripheral hospitals out of 19will be randomly selected and allocated (lottery method); five each in intervention and control groups. Structured counselling and referral communication linkage will be implemented to the intervention group. Structured counselling, health educational material, and telephonic follow-up will be provided by a trained counsellor at the referring centre; patients will be told in detail about DR, its impact on eyes and vision, treatment options available and the treatment cost for different procedures. They will be explained process at LEIRC (referral centre) and a contact person shall facilitate their treatment at the referral centre. Patients in Control group will receive ongoing routine counselling and health education material. We collected data on referral and compliance, and their determinants using referral-and DR-registers, and structured questionnaires for 1.demographic and socioeconomic profile of patients, 2.telephonicfollow-up with noncompliant patients,3.Feedback of those referred, and 4.Performa for clinical information. Compliance is considered when the referred participant reports at referral centre within one month of counselling. Referral compliance between the two groups will be compared using appropriate statistical tests. Adjusted analysis will be conducted. RESULTS Due to COVID-19 pandemic the inflow of patients is reduced, thus the duration of the data collection will be increased. In the first 6 months of pilot data collection73 in intervention and 34 in control group were screened for referral; 12(21.82%) and 15(27,2%) already had severe NPDR or PDR at the time of screening. CONCLUSIONS Early stage of DR is asymptomatic and can go unnoticed until it affects vision leading to visual impairment and blindness. This study will assess the feasibility and effectiveness of a referral intervention package for improving early diagnosis and treatment with preservation of vision among DR patients. CLINICALTRIAL Clinicaltrials.gov NCT 04834648

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.

Background: Early childhood development (ECD) refers to the age-appropriate language, cognitive and socio-emotional growth in early years of life. For the very young, 0-3 years of age, parents and caregivers are the main source of stimulus and care. Poor socio-economic conditions may contribute to suboptimal parenting.Methods: We assessed caregivers’ knowledge, attitude and practice (KAP) regarding ECD in underprivileged regions of Telangana, South-India, using a structured survey, and qualitative interviews of frontline workers (FLWs).Results: A large proportion of caregivers had appropriate knowledge and practices regarding nutrition and health: colostrum (>80%), breastfeeding (>94%), growth monitoring (>90%), immunization (99%), and health-seeking for the child (98%). Regarding early stimulation, caregivers knew and believed that reading (91%), playing (94%), storytelling and singing (79%) make the child intelligent; but were unaware that these activities should be initiated before 3 years of age, thus their practice of the same was also low. They expressed their love and affection (99%) well for the child, spent time (46%) and talked to the child (59%), but were not aware this contributes to cognitive and emotional development of the child. Major challenges in effective ECD care as per FLWs included parental attitude, mothers’ agricultural work routine and language barrier.Conclusion: We observed gaps in age-appropriate early stimulation and responsive care. Several good practices are rooted in tradition, but caregivers were not completely aware of the contribution of these practices to their child’s development. Qualitative interviews with FLW show the need of culturally relevant interventions to empower caregivers regarding ECD.

Purpose: In India, people with diabetes (PwDM) often seek care in the government-approved alternative medicine system, AYUSH (Ayurveda, Yoga and naturopathy, Unani, Siddha and Homeopathy). The purpose of this pilot study was to assess whether health education plus retinal imaging for diabetic retinopathy (DR) within an AYUSH hospital increased the uptake of screening for DR compared with health education and referral. Methods: The study was a nonrandomized pilot conducted in two AYUSH hospitals. Both hospitals received intervention on educating the AYUSH practitioners about DR screening and distributing health education materials to diabetic patients. In one hospital in addition to education, retinal imaging by a trained technician with remote grading by an ophthalmologist was provided, while in another hospital PwDM were referred to nearby eye hospitals for screening. The uptake of screening was assessed through registers and phone calls. Results: At baseline, only 10.7% of 178 PwDM were aware of DR and only 8% had undergone DR screening. After the intervention, in the hospital where screening was provided, all (100%) eligible patients (101) underwent digital imaging, whereas in the other hospital only 25% of 77 eligible patients underwent screening in eye hospitals (P < 0.001). Conclusion: AYUSH hospitals could provide a feasible and acceptable location for providing DR screening services. Further studies are required to assess scale-up of such intervention.

The Indian government supports both public- and private-sector provision of hospital care for neonates: neonatal intensive care is offered in public facilities alongside a rising number of private-for-profit providers. However, there are few published reports about mortality levels and care practices in these facilities. We aimed to assess care practices, causes of admission, and outcomes from neonatal intensive care units (NICUs) in public secondary and private tertiary hospitals and both public and private medical colleges enrolled in a quality improvement collaborative in Telangana and Andhra Pradesh—2 Indian states with a respective population of 35 and 50 million. We conducted a cross-sectional study between 30 May and 26 August 2016 as part of a baseline evaluation in 52 consenting hospitals (26 public secondary hospitals, 5 public medical colleges, 15 private tertiary hospitals, and 6 private medical colleges) offering neonatal intensive care. We assessed the availability of staff and services, adherence to evidence-based practices at admission, and case fatality after admission to the NICU using a range of tools, including facility assessment, observations of admission, and abstraction of registers and telephone interviews after discharge. Our analysis is adjusted for clustering and weighted for caseload at the hospital level and presents findings stratified by type and ownership of hospitals. In total, the NICUs included just over 3,000 admissions per month. Staffing and infrastructure provision were largely according to government guidelines, except that only a mean of 1 but not the recommended 4 paediatricians were working in public secondary NICUs per 10 beds. On admission, all neonates admitted to private hospitals had auscultation (100%, 19 of 19 observations) but only 42% (95% confidence interval [CI] 25%–62%, p-value for difference is 0.361) in public secondary hospitals. The most common single cause of admission was preterm birth (25%) followed by jaundice (23%). Case-fatality rates at age 28 days after admission to a NICU were 4% (95% CI 2%–8%), 15% (9%–24%), 4% (2%–8%) and 2% (1%–5%) (Chi-squared p = 0.001) in public secondary hospitals, public medical colleges, private tertiary hospitals, and private medical colleges, respectively, according to facility registers. Case fatality according to postdischarge telephone interviews found rates of 12% (95% CI 7%–18%) for public secondary hospitals. Roughly 6% of admitted neonates were referred to another facility. Outcome data were missing for 27% and 8% of admissions to private tertiary hospitals and private medical colleges. Our study faced the limitation of missing data due to incomplete documentation. Further generalizability was limited due to the small sample size among private facilities. Our findings suggest differences in quality of neonatal intensive care and 28-day survival between the different types of hospitals, although comparison of outcomes is complicated by differences in the case mix and referral practices between hospitals. Uniform reporting of outcomes and risk factors across the private and public sectors is required to assess the benefits for the population of mixed-care provision.