Validating the Quality Maternal and Newborn Care Framework Index: A Global Tool for Quality-of-Care Evaluations.

IF 2.8 3区 医学 Q1 NURSING
Andrew Symon, Berit Mortensen, Are Hugo Pripp, Manju Chhugani, Samuel Adjorlolo, Caroline Badzi, Renu Kharb, Elysse Prussing, Alison McFadden, Nicola M Gray, Allison Cummins
{"title":"Validating the Quality Maternal and Newborn Care Framework Index: A Global Tool for Quality-of-Care Evaluations.","authors":"Andrew Symon, Berit Mortensen, Are Hugo Pripp, Manju Chhugani, Samuel Adjorlolo, Caroline Badzi, Renu Kharb, Elysse Prussing, Alison McFadden, Nicola M Gray, Allison Cummins","doi":"10.1111/birt.12895","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Quality maternity care is known to improve a range of maternal and neonatal outcomes. The Lancet Series on Midwifery's Quality Maternal and Newborn Care (QMNC) Framework is a high-level synthesis of the global evidence on quality maternity care. Initial qualitative work demonstrated the Framework's adaptability in evaluating service user and provider perceptions of the quality of maternity care. However, evaluating services at scale requires a survey instrument. This paper reports the validation of the QMNC Framework index (QMNCFi), a five-part survey for the evaluation of maternity care across diverse settings.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>International online English language survey of women who had given birth in the previous year in Australia, Ghana, India and the United Kingdom (UK). It was distributed through service user networks (UK and Australia) and at postnatal clinics (Ghana and India). All forms were completed online. Test-retest was conducted to assess reliability.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Five hundred and forty mothers completed the survey (Australia 136; Ghana 131; India 153; UK 120). Construct validity: Cronbach's α in 12 of the survey's 13 sections ranged from 0.795 to 0.986; for the remaining section the alpha was 0.594. Reliability: 55 participants completed the QMNCFi a second time. Intraclass correlation coefficient results ranged from 0.657 to 0.939 across the 13 sections. Field researchers in Ghana and India reported that the survey was easily understood and completed.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>This survey has shown that, across diverse contexts, the QMNCFi is a valid, reliable, and comprehensive tool for measuring service user perceptions of the quality of care over time.</p>","PeriodicalId":55350,"journal":{"name":"Birth-Issues in Perinatal Care","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.8000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Birth-Issues in Perinatal Care","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1111/birt.12895","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"NURSING","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Quality maternity care is known to improve a range of maternal and neonatal outcomes. The Lancet Series on Midwifery's Quality Maternal and Newborn Care (QMNC) Framework is a high-level synthesis of the global evidence on quality maternity care. Initial qualitative work demonstrated the Framework's adaptability in evaluating service user and provider perceptions of the quality of maternity care. However, evaluating services at scale requires a survey instrument. This paper reports the validation of the QMNC Framework index (QMNCFi), a five-part survey for the evaluation of maternity care across diverse settings.

Methods: International online English language survey of women who had given birth in the previous year in Australia, Ghana, India and the United Kingdom (UK). It was distributed through service user networks (UK and Australia) and at postnatal clinics (Ghana and India). All forms were completed online. Test-retest was conducted to assess reliability.

Results: Five hundred and forty mothers completed the survey (Australia 136; Ghana 131; India 153; UK 120). Construct validity: Cronbach's α in 12 of the survey's 13 sections ranged from 0.795 to 0.986; for the remaining section the alpha was 0.594. Reliability: 55 participants completed the QMNCFi a second time. Intraclass correlation coefficient results ranged from 0.657 to 0.939 across the 13 sections. Field researchers in Ghana and India reported that the survey was easily understood and completed.

Conclusion: This survey has shown that, across diverse contexts, the QMNCFi is a valid, reliable, and comprehensive tool for measuring service user perceptions of the quality of care over time.

验证优质孕产妇和新生儿护理框架指数:全球护理质量评估工具。
背景:众所周知,优质孕产妇护理可改善一系列孕产妇和新生儿预后。柳叶刀助产系列》的优质孕产妇和新生儿护理(QMNC)框架是对全球优质孕产妇护理证据的高度综合。最初的定性工作表明,该框架可用于评估服务使用者和提供者对孕产妇护理质量的看法。然而,对大规模服务进行评估需要一个调查工具。本文报告了 QMNC 框架指数(QMNCFi)的验证情况,该指数由五个部分组成,用于评估不同环境下的孕产妇护理:方法:对上一年在澳大利亚、加纳、印度和英国分娩的妇女进行国际在线英语调查。调查表通过服务用户网络(英国和澳大利亚)和产后诊所(加纳和印度)分发。所有表格均在线填写。进行了重测以评估可靠性:结果:540 位母亲完成了调查(澳大利亚 136 位;加纳 131 位;印度 153 位;英国 120 位)。结构有效性:在调查的 13 个部分中,12 个部分的 Cronbach's α 为 0.795 至 0.986;其余部分的 Cronbach's α 为 0.594。可靠性:55 名参与者第二次完成了 QMNCFi。13 个部分的类内相关系数从 0.657 到 0.939 不等。加纳和印度的实地研究人员报告说,调查很容易理解和完成:这项调查表明,在不同的情况下,QMNCFi 是一种有效、可靠和全面的工具,可用于衡量服务使用者对长期护理质量的看法。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Birth-Issues in Perinatal Care
Birth-Issues in Perinatal Care 医学-妇产科学
CiteScore
4.10
自引率
4.00%
发文量
90
审稿时长
>12 weeks
期刊介绍: Birth: Issues in Perinatal Care is a multidisciplinary, refereed journal devoted to issues and practices in the care of childbearing women, infants, and families. It is written by and for professionals in maternal and neonatal health, nurses, midwives, physicians, public health workers, doulas, social scientists, childbirth educators, lactation counselors, epidemiologists, and other health caregivers and policymakers in perinatal care.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信