Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33863306›Full record

ArticleBMC pregnancy and childbirth2021

Birth companionship in a government health system: a pilot study in Kigoma, Tanzania.

Paul Chaote, Nguke Mwakatundu, Sunday Dominico, Alex Mputa, Agnes Mbanza, Magdalena Metta, Samantha Lobis, Michelle Dynes, Selemani Mbuyita, Shanon McNab and 2 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC pregnancy and childbirth, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 23 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
23citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

23 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Promoting respectful maternity care with the WHO labor care guide and the checklist mnemonic "COPE": A quality improvement project.International journal of gynaecology and obstetrics: the official organ of the International Federation of Gynaecology and Obstetrics · 2025
    Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

12 authors.

Paul ChaotePresident's Office - Regional Administration and Local Government, Dodoma, Tanzania.
Nguke MwakatunduThamini Uhai, Dar es Salaam, Tanzania.
Sunday DominicoThamini Uhai, Dar es Salaam, Tanzania. sdominico@thaminiuhai.or.tz.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-7416-9632
Alex MputaThamini Uhai, Dar es Salaam, Tanzania.
Agnes MbanzaThamini Uhai, Dar es Salaam, Tanzania.
Magdalena MettaThamini Uhai, Dar es Salaam, Tanzania.
Samantha LobisVital Strategies, New York City, USA.
Michelle DynesU.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Division of Reproductive Health, Atlanta, USA.
Selemani MbuyitaICAP, Dar es Salaam, Tanzania.
Shanon McNabAverting Maternal Death and Disability Program, Mailman School of Public Health, Columbia University, New York City, USA.
Karen SchmidtVital Strategies, New York City, USA.
Florina SerbanescuU.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Division of Reproductive Health, Atlanta, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundHaving a companion of choice throughout childbirth is an important component of good quality and respectful maternity care for women and has become standard in many countries. However, there are only a few examples of birth companionship being implemented in government health systems in low-income countries. To learn if birth companionship was feasible, acceptable and led to improved quality of care in these settings, we implemented a pilot project using 9 intervention and 6 comparison sites (all government health facilities) in a rural region of Tanzania.

methodsThe pilot was developed and implemented in Kigoma, Tanzania between July 2016 and December 2018. Women delivering at intervention sites were given the choice of having a birth companion with them during childbirth. We evaluated the pilot with: (a) project data; (b) focus group discussions; (c) structured and semi-structured interviews; and (d) service statistics.

resultsMore than 80% of women delivering at intervention sites had a birth companion who provided support during childbirth, including comforting women and staying by their side. Most women interviewed at intervention sites were very satisfied with having a companion during childbirth (96-99%). Most women at the intervention sites also reported that the presence of a companion improved their labor, delivery and postpartum experience (82-97%). Health providers also found companions very helpful because they assisted with their workload, alerted the provider about changes in the woman's status, and provided emotional support to the woman. When comparing intervention and comparison sites, providers at intervention sites were significantly more likely to: respond to women who called for help (p = 0.003), interact in a friendly way (p < 0.001), greet women respectfully (p < 0.001), and try to make them more comfortable (p = 0.003). Higher proportions of women who gave birth at intervention sites reported being "very satisfied" with the care they received (p < 0.001), and that the staff were "very kind" (p < 0.001) and "very encouraging" (p < 0.001).

conclusionBirth companionship was feasible and well accepted by health providers, government officials and most importantly, women who delivered at intervention facilities. The introduction of birth companionship improved women's experience of birth and the maternity ward environment overall.

Indexed as

AdolescentAdultDelivery, ObstetricFemaleFriendsHealth FacilitiesHumansInterpersonal RelationsLabor, ObstetricMaternal Health ServicesMiddle AgedParturitionPilot ProjectsPregnancyQuality of Health CareTanzaniaBirth companionshipMaternal and newborn healthQuality of careRespectful care

Identifiers

PMID33863306
PMCPMC8052747

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.