Towards a universal implementation of labor companionship: a synthesis of the policy and facility environment of eight low-and-middle income countries.

IF 2.7 Q3 HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES
Frontiers in health services Pub Date : 2025-07-23 eCollection Date: 2025-01-01 DOI:10.3389/frhs.2025.1550473
Soha El-Halabi, Andrea Barnabas Pembe, Alexandre Dumont, Ana Pilar Betrán, Charles Kaboré, Effie Chipeta, Guillermo Carroli, Helle Mölsted Alvesson, Hussein Kidanto, Jean-Paul Dossou, Kristi Sidney Annerstedt, Lenka Beňová, Mechthild M Gross, Peter Waiswa, Pisake Lumbiganon, Quoc Nhu Hung Mac, Meghan A Bohren, Claudia Hanson
{"title":"Towards a universal implementation of labor companionship: a synthesis of the policy and facility environment of eight low-and-middle income countries.","authors":"Soha El-Halabi, Andrea Barnabas Pembe, Alexandre Dumont, Ana Pilar Betrán, Charles Kaboré, Effie Chipeta, Guillermo Carroli, Helle Mölsted Alvesson, Hussein Kidanto, Jean-Paul Dossou, Kristi Sidney Annerstedt, Lenka Beňová, Mechthild M Gross, Peter Waiswa, Pisake Lumbiganon, Quoc Nhu Hung Mac, Meghan A Bohren, Claudia Hanson","doi":"10.3389/frhs.2025.1550473","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Labor companionship, the presence of a woman's person of choice during childbirth, has benefits to both woman and baby and is recommended by the World Health Organization since 2012. However, implementation remains sub-optimal, especially in low-and-middle-income countries (LMICs). This study aimed to understand the maturity of labor companionship implementation in eight low-and-middle income countries with focus on the policy and facility environment.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This was a multi-country study nested in two hospital-based implementation research studies: Action Leveraging Evidence to Reduce perinatal mortality and morbidity in Sub-Saharan Africa (ALERT) study and the QUALIty DECision-making by women and providers for appropriate use of caesarean section (QUALI-DEC) study. We included 48 hospitals from eight countries: Argentina, Burkina Faso, Thailand and Viet Nam (QUALI-DEC) and four from each of Benin, Malawi, Tanzania and Uganda (ALERT). We used data from (i) a document review, including national policy documents and (ii) health facility readiness assessment, including physical layouts of maternity wards, all collected between December 2019 and April 2021. Our analysis included two steps, (1) a structured data abstraction with coding to pre-defined categories to analyse the national polices and available resources on a facility level which informed the (2) categorization of implementation maturity in three implementation phases modelled by the framework by Bergh et al. and the logic model developed by Bohren et al.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Three of the eight countries lacked any national-level companionship policies, four had some mentioning and only one had detailed guidance on roles of labor companions and implementation guidelines. The physical outlines of maternity wards varied greatly, and lack of space was one of the main implementation barriers to all countries except Argentina. We classified Benin, Thailand and Viet Nam in the pre-implementation phase because of missing guidelines and limited implementation; Burkina Faso, Malawi, Uganda and Tanzania in the early implementation phase; and Argentina in the institutionalization phase where policies and facility resources were conducive.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Successful implementation was supported by concrete and contextualized implementation guidance. To move to high implementation levels, supporting policies, guidelines and structural changes in the maternity wards are needed.</p>","PeriodicalId":73088,"journal":{"name":"Frontiers in health services","volume":"5 ","pages":"1550473"},"PeriodicalIF":2.7000,"publicationDate":"2025-07-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12325283/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Frontiers in health services","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3389/frhs.2025.1550473","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Labor companionship, the presence of a woman's person of choice during childbirth, has benefits to both woman and baby and is recommended by the World Health Organization since 2012. However, implementation remains sub-optimal, especially in low-and-middle-income countries (LMICs). This study aimed to understand the maturity of labor companionship implementation in eight low-and-middle income countries with focus on the policy and facility environment.

Methods: This was a multi-country study nested in two hospital-based implementation research studies: Action Leveraging Evidence to Reduce perinatal mortality and morbidity in Sub-Saharan Africa (ALERT) study and the QUALIty DECision-making by women and providers for appropriate use of caesarean section (QUALI-DEC) study. We included 48 hospitals from eight countries: Argentina, Burkina Faso, Thailand and Viet Nam (QUALI-DEC) and four from each of Benin, Malawi, Tanzania and Uganda (ALERT). We used data from (i) a document review, including national policy documents and (ii) health facility readiness assessment, including physical layouts of maternity wards, all collected between December 2019 and April 2021. Our analysis included two steps, (1) a structured data abstraction with coding to pre-defined categories to analyse the national polices and available resources on a facility level which informed the (2) categorization of implementation maturity in three implementation phases modelled by the framework by Bergh et al. and the logic model developed by Bohren et al.

Results: Three of the eight countries lacked any national-level companionship policies, four had some mentioning and only one had detailed guidance on roles of labor companions and implementation guidelines. The physical outlines of maternity wards varied greatly, and lack of space was one of the main implementation barriers to all countries except Argentina. We classified Benin, Thailand and Viet Nam in the pre-implementation phase because of missing guidelines and limited implementation; Burkina Faso, Malawi, Uganda and Tanzania in the early implementation phase; and Argentina in the institutionalization phase where policies and facility resources were conducive.

Conclusion: Successful implementation was supported by concrete and contextualized implementation guidance. To move to high implementation levels, supporting policies, guidelines and structural changes in the maternity wards are needed.

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

迈向普遍实施劳动陪伴:八个中低收入国家政策与设施环境综合分析。
背景:分娩陪伴,即妇女选择的人在分娩时在场,对妇女和婴儿都有好处,自2012年以来被世界卫生组织推荐。然而,实施情况仍然不够理想,特别是在低收入和中等收入国家。本研究旨在了解8个中低收入国家劳工陪伴实施的成熟度,重点关注政策和设施环境。方法:这是一项基于两项医院实施性研究的多国研究:利用证据降低撒哈拉以南非洲围产期死亡率和发病率的行动(ALERT)研究和妇女和提供者对适当使用剖腹产的质量决策(QUALIty - dec)研究。我们纳入了来自8个国家的48家医院:阿根廷、布基纳法索、泰国和越南(quality - dec),以及贝宁、马拉维、坦桑尼亚和乌干达(ALERT)各4家医院。我们使用的数据来自(i)文件审查,包括国家政策文件和(ii)卫生设施准备情况评估,包括产科病房的物理布局,这些数据都是在2019年12月至2021年4月期间收集的。我们的分析包括两个步骤,(1)对预定义类别进行编码的结构化数据抽象,以分析国家政策和设施级别的可用资源,从而为(2)在三个实施阶段对实施成熟度进行分类,这些阶段由Bergh等人的框架和Bohren等人开发的逻辑模型建模。8个国家中有3个国家没有任何国家级的陪伴政策,4个国家提到了一些,只有一个国家对劳动伴侣的角色和实施指南有详细的指导。产房的实际轮廓差别很大,空间不足是除阿根廷外所有国家的主要执行障碍之一。由于缺乏指导方针和实施有限,我们将贝宁、泰国和越南列为实施前阶段;布基纳法索、马拉维、乌干达和坦桑尼亚处于早期执行阶段;阿根廷处于制度化阶段,政策和设施资源有利。结论:具体的、情境化的实施指导为成功实施提供了支持。要提高执行水平,就需要在产房实施配套政策、指导方针和结构改革。
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
CiteScore
1.00
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信