Perspectives of stakeholders on emergency obstetric care training in Kenya: a qualitative study.
emergency obstetric care
low- and middle-income country
perspectives
qualitative study
stakeholder
training
Journal
International health
ISSN: 1876-3405
Titre abrégé: Int Health
Pays: England
ID NLM: 101517095
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
01 01 2020
01 01 2020
Historique:
received:
26
07
2018
revised:
17
01
2019
accepted:
22
01
2019
pubmed:
27
2
2019
medline:
18
4
2020
entrez:
27
2
2019
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
This study explores stakeholders' perceptions of emergency obstetric care (EmOC) 'skills-and-drills'-type training including the outcomes, strengths, weaknesses, opportunities and threats of the intervention in Kenya. Stakeholders who either benefited from or contributed to EmOC training were purposively sampled. Semi-structured topic guides were used for key informant interviews and focus group discussions. Following verbatim transcriptions of recordings, the thematic approach was used for data analysis. Sixty-nine trained healthcare providers (HCPs), 114 women who received EmOC and their relatives, 30 master trainers and training organizers, and six EmOC facility/Ministry of Health staff were recruited. Following training, deemed valuable for its 'hands-on' approach and content by HCPs, women reported that they experienced improvements in the quality of care provided. HCPs reported that training led to improved knowledge, skills and attitudes, with improved care outcomes. However, they also reported an increased workload. Implementing stakeholders stressed the need to explore strategies that help to maximize and sustain training outcomes. The value of EmOC training in improving the capacity of HCPs and outcomes for mothers and newborns is not just ascribed but felt by beneficiaries. However, unintended outcomes such as increased workload may occur and need to be systematically addressed to maximize training gains.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
This study explores stakeholders' perceptions of emergency obstetric care (EmOC) 'skills-and-drills'-type training including the outcomes, strengths, weaknesses, opportunities and threats of the intervention in Kenya.
METHODS
Stakeholders who either benefited from or contributed to EmOC training were purposively sampled. Semi-structured topic guides were used for key informant interviews and focus group discussions. Following verbatim transcriptions of recordings, the thematic approach was used for data analysis.
RESULTS
Sixty-nine trained healthcare providers (HCPs), 114 women who received EmOC and their relatives, 30 master trainers and training organizers, and six EmOC facility/Ministry of Health staff were recruited. Following training, deemed valuable for its 'hands-on' approach and content by HCPs, women reported that they experienced improvements in the quality of care provided. HCPs reported that training led to improved knowledge, skills and attitudes, with improved care outcomes. However, they also reported an increased workload. Implementing stakeholders stressed the need to explore strategies that help to maximize and sustain training outcomes.
CONCLUSIONS
The value of EmOC training in improving the capacity of HCPs and outcomes for mothers and newborns is not just ascribed but felt by beneficiaries. However, unintended outcomes such as increased workload may occur and need to be systematically addressed to maximize training gains.
Identifiants
pubmed: 30806665
pii: 5365392
doi: 10.1093/inthealth/ihz007
pmc: PMC6964219
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
11-18Commentaires et corrections
Type : ErratumIn
Informations de copyright
© The Author(s) 2019. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of Royal Society of Tropical Medicine and Hygiene.
Références
Educ Health (Abingdon). 2014 May-Aug;27(2):170-6
pubmed: 25420980
BMC Pregnancy Childbirth. 2015 Mar 21;15:65
pubmed: 25880644
East Afr J Public Health. 2010 Jun;7(2):109-13
pubmed: 21413586
PLoS Med. 2015 Jun 30;12(6):e1001847; discussion e1001847
pubmed: 26126110
Pan Afr Med J. 2015 Dec 16;22:375
pubmed: 27047616
Med Teach. 2010;32(10):812-5
pubmed: 20854156
Acad Med. 2011 Jun;86(6):706-11
pubmed: 21512370
BJOG. 2015 Jan;122(2):174-82
pubmed: 25546037
BMC Pregnancy Childbirth. 2017 Dec 04;17(1):403
pubmed: 29202731
Int J Gynaecol Obstet. 2012 Jun;117(3):283-7
pubmed: 22445951
PLoS One. 2012;7(12):e49938
pubmed: 23236357
BMC Med Educ. 2014 Sep 24;14:201
pubmed: 25248410
Best Pract Res Clin Obstet Gynaecol. 2015 Nov;29(8):1077-91
pubmed: 25911056
Health Care Women Int. 2017 Jun;38(6):527-543
pubmed: 27611812
BJOG. 2010 Jun;117(7):777-87
pubmed: 20406229
Best Pract Res Clin Obstet Gynaecol. 2015 Nov;29(8):1028-43
pubmed: 25937554
Health Serv Res. 2007 Aug;42(4):1758-72
pubmed: 17286625
BMC Public Health. 2011 Apr 13;11 Suppl 3:S7
pubmed: 21501458