Implementing group care in Dutch and Surinamese maternity and child care services: the vital importance of addressing outer context barriers.

BACKGROUND: By addressing physical and psychosocial needs, group care (GC) improves health-related behaviours, peer support, parent-provider interactions and may improve birth outcomes. Hence, global implementation of GC is encouraged. Context analyses prior to implementation are vital to elucidate which local factors may support or hinder implementation. METHODS: Contextual analyses conducted in the Netherlands and Suriname were compared to identify the factors relevant to the implementability of GC as perceived by healthcare professionals (HCPs). 32 semi-structured interviews were conducted with Dutch and Surinamese healthcare professionals. Audio recordings were transcribed verbatim and coded using the Framework approach. The Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research guided the development of the interview guide and of the coding tree. RESULTS: Outer setting: Concerns regarding funding surfaced in both countries. Due to limited health insurance coverage, additional fees would limit accessibility in Suriname. In the Netherlands, midwives dreaded lower revenue due to reimbursement policies that favour one-on-one care. Inner setting: Appropriate space for GC was absent in one Dutch and three Surinamese facilities. Role division regarding GC implementation was clearer in the Netherlands than in Suriname. INNOVATION: HCPs from both countries expected increased social support, health knowledge among women, and continuity of care(r). Individuals/innovation deliverers: Self-efficacy and motivation emerged as intertwined determinants to GC implementation in both countries. Individuals/innovation recipients: Competing demands can potentially lower acceptability of GC in both countries. While Dutch HCPs prioritised an open dialogue with mothers, Surinamese HCPs encouraged the inclusion of partners. PROCESS: Campaigns to raise awareness of GC were proposed. Language barriers were a concern for Dutch but not for Surinamese HCPs. CONCLUSIONS: While the most striking differences between both countries were found in the outer setting, they trickle down and affect all layers of context. Ultimately, at a later stage, the process evaluation will show if those outer setting barriers we identified prior to implementation actually hindered GC implementation. Changes to the health care systems would ensure sustained implementation in both countries, and this conclusion feeds into a more general discussion: how to proceed when contextual analyses reveal barriers that cannot be addressed with the time and resources available.

Anticipated benefits and challenges of implementing group care in Suriname's maternity and child care sector: a contextual analysis.

BACKGROUND: Suriname is a uppermiddle-income country with a relatively high prevalence of preventable pregnancy complications. Access to and usage of high-quality maternity care services are lacking. The implementation of group care (GC) may yield maternal and child health improvements. However, before introducing a complex intervention it is pivotal to develop an understanding of the local context to inform the implementation process. METHODS: A context analysis was conducted to identify local needs toward maternity and postnatal care services, and to assess contextual factor relevant to implementability of GC. During a Rapid Qualitative Inquiry, 63 online and face-to-face semi-structured interviews were held with parents, community members, on-and off-site healthcare professionals, policy makers, and one focus group with parents was conducted. Audio recordings were transcribed in verbatim and analysed using thematic analysis and Framework Method. The Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research served as a base for the coding tree, which was complemented with inductively derived codes. RESULTS: Ten themes related to implementability, one theme related to sustainability, and seven themes related to reaching and participation of the target population in GC were identified. Factors related to health care professionals (e.g., workload, compatibility, ownership, role clarity), to GC, to recipients and to planning impact the implementability of GC, while sustainability is in particular hampered by sparse financial and human resources. Reach affects both implementability and sustainability. Yet, outer setting and attitudinal barriers of health professionals will likely affect reach. CONCLUSIONS: Multi-layered contextual factors impact not only implementability and sustainability of GC, but also reach of parents. We advise future researchers and implementors of GC to investigate not only determinants for implementability and sustainability, but also those factors that may hamper, or facilitate up-take. Practical, attitudinal and cultural barriers to GC participation need to be examined. Themes identified in this study will inspire the development of adaptations and implementation strategies at a later stage.

Professional identification of psychosocial problems among children from ethnic minority groups: room for improvement.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the effectiveness of child health care professionals (CHP) in identifying psychosocial problems among children originating from industrialized and nonindustrialized countries and to assess whether parental concerns enhance CHP problem-identification. STUDY DESIGN: During routine well-child visits data were collected from a sample of children aged 5 to 12 years of Dutch, Moroccan, Turkish, Surinam, and Antillean origin (response: 82%). CHP reported on psychosocial problems that they identified in children. Parents completed the Child Behavior Checklist (CBCL) and a questionnaire on concerns regarding their child's psychosocial development. Interpreter services were used to support parents in filling out questionnaires. RESULTS: Elevated CBCL total and internalizing problem scores were more prevalent among children from nonindustrialized countries (10% and 17%, respectively) than among children from industrialized countries (3% and 5%, respectively). About 30% of the Turkish and Moroccan children with an elevated CBCL score were identified by CHPs compared with 60% of the children from industrialized countries. Parental concerns on their child's psychosocial well-being were related to elevated CBCL scores. Concerns were not related to CHP problem-identification. CONCLUSIONS: Better methods to support parents in disclosure of their concerns regarding the psychosocial development of their children may enhance CHP-identification of problems, especially among groups from nonindustrialized countries.