Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34588235›Full record

ArticleBMJ open2021

Lay and healthcare providers' experiences to inform future of respectful maternal and newborn care in Tanzania and Malawi: an Appreciative Inquiry.

Paschal Mdoe, Tracey A Mills, Robert Chasweka, Livuka Nsemwa, Chisomo Petross, Rose Laisser, Angela Chimwaza, Tina Lavender

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMJ open, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
12citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
3.3field-weighted citation impact, top 8% of its field
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

12 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 24 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. 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

8 authors at 4 institutions in 4 countries.

Paschal MdoeObstetrics and Gynecology, Haydom Lutheran Hospital, Mbulu, Tanzania pfmdoe@gmail.com.ORCID 0000-0002-1449-4019
Tracey A MillsDepartment of International Public Heath, Liverpool School of Tropical Medicine, Liverpool, UK.
Robert ChaswekaDepartment of Nursing and Midwifery, Kamuzu College of Nursing, University of Malawi, Lilongwe, Malawi.
Livuka NsemwaDepartment of Nursing and Midwifery, Catholic University of Health and Allied Sciences, Mwanza, Tanzania.
Chisomo PetrossDepartment of Nursing and Midwifery, Kamuzu College of Nursing, University of Malawi, Lilongwe, Malawi.
Rose LaisserDepartment of Nursing and Midwifery, Catholic University of Health and Allied Sciences, Mwanza, Tanzania.
Angela ChimwazaDepartment of Nursing and Midwifery, Kamuzu College of Nursing, University of Malawi, Lilongwe, Malawi.
Tina LavenderDepartment of International Public Heath, Liverpool School of Tropical Medicine, Liverpool, UK.ORCID 0000-0003-1473-4956
University of Malawi · MWCatholic University of Health and Allied Sciences · TZLiverpool School of Tropical Medicine · GBHaydom Lutheran Hospital · TZ

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesDisrespectful care, which remains prevalent in low and middle-income countries (LMICs), acts as a barrier to women accessing skilled birth attendance, compromising care when services are available. Building on what was positive in facilities, we aimed to explore lay and healthcare providers' experience of respectful care to inform future interventions.

settingFive maternity facilities in Mwanza Tanzania and Lilongwe Malawi.

participants94 participants in Malawi (N=46) and Tanzania (N=48) including 24 women birthing live baby within the previous 12 months; 22 family members and 48 healthcare providers who regularly provided maternity care in the included facilities

designThe study was guided by Appreciative Inquiry (AI). Semistructured, one-to-one interviews were conducted between January and December 2019. Interviews were audio-recorded, translated where necessary, transcribed verbatim, and analysed using the framework approach.

resultsFour main themes describing participants positive experience and their vision of respectful care were identified: (1) empathic healthcare provider-woman interactions including friendly welcome and courteous language, well-timed appropriate care and information sharing, (2) an enabling environment, characterised by improvement of physical environment, the use of screens, curtains and wall partitions for privacy, availability of equipment and provision of incentives to staff, (3) supportive leadership demonstrated by the commitment of the government and facility leaders to provision of respectful care, ensuring availability of guidelines and policies, supportive supervision, reflective discussion and paying staff salaries timely, (4) providers' attitudes and behaviours characterised by professional values through readiness, compassionate communication and commitment.

conclusionThe positive experiences of service users, families and healthcare providers provided insight into key drivers of respectful care in facilities in Tanzania and Malawi. Interventions targeting improved environment and privacy, healthcare provider communication and developing positive leadership structures in facilities could provide the basis for sustained improvement in respectful and dignified maternal and newborn care in LMICs.

Indexed as

CommunicationMaternal Health ServicesAttitude of Health PersonnelEmpathyFamilyFemaleHealth PersonnelHumansInfant, NewbornMalawiPregnancyQuality of Health CareTanzaniahealth policymaternal medicinequality in health care

Identifiers

PMID34588235
PMCPMC8483042
OpenAlexW3202567733

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.