Putting co-creation into practice: lessons learned from developing a midwife-led quality improvement intervention.

BACKGROUND: Integrating evidence-based midwifery practices improves healthcare quality for women and newborns, but an evidence-to-practice gap exists. Co-created quality improvement initiatives led by midwives could bridge this gap, prevent resource waste and ensure intervention relevance. However, how to co-create a midwife-led quality improvement intervention has not been scientifically explored. OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study is to describe the co-creation process and explore the needs and determinants of a midwife-led quality improvement targeting evidence-based midwifery practices. METHODS: A qualitative deductive approach using the Consolidated Framework for Advancing Implementation Science was employed. An analysis matrix based on the framework was developed, and the data were coded according to categories. Data were gathered from interviews, focus group discussions, observations and workshops. New mothers and birth companions (n = 19) were included through convenience sampling. Midwives (n = 26), professional association representatives, educators, policymakers, managers, and doctors (n = 7) were purposely sampled. RESULTS: The co-creation process of the midwife-led Quality Improvement intervention took place in four stages. Firstly, core elements of the intervention were established, featuring a group of midwife champions leading a quality improvement initiative using a train-the-trainers approach. Secondly, the intervention needs, context and determinants were explored, which showed knowledge and skills gaps, a lack of shared goals among staff, and limited resources. However, there was clear relevance, compatibility, and mission alignment for a midwife-led quality improvement at all levels. Thirdly, during co-creation workshops with new mothers and companions, the consensus was to prioritise improved intrapartum support, while workshops with midwives identified enhancing the use of birth positions and perineal protection as key focus areas for the forthcoming Quality Improvement intervention. Lastly, the findings guided intervention strategies, including peer-assisted learning, using existing structures, developing educational material, and building stakeholder relationships. CONCLUSIONS: This study provides a practical example of a co-creation process for a midwife-led quality improvement intervention, which can be relevant in different maternity care settings.

Costs and intermediate outcomes for the implementation of evidence-based practices of midwifery under a MIDWIZE framework in an urban health facility in Nairobi, Kenya.

BACKGROUND: Three evidence-based midwife-led care practices: dynamic birth positions (DBP), immediate skin-to-skin contact (SSC) with zero separation between mother and newborn, and delayed cord clamping (DCC), were implemented in four sub-Saharan African countries after an internet-based capacity building program for midwifery leadership in quality improvement (QI). Knowledge on costs of this QI initiative can inform resource mobilization for scale up and sustainability. METHODS: We estimated the costs and intermediate outcomes from the implementation of the three evidence-based practices under the midwife-led care (MIDWIZE) framework in a single facility in Kenya through a pre- and post-test implementation design. Daily observations for the level of practice on DBP, SSC and DCC was done at baseline for 1 week and continued during the 11 weeks of the training intervention. Three cost scenarios from the health facility perspective included: scenario 1; staff participation time costs ($515 USD), scenario 2; staff participation time costs plus hired trainer time costs, training material and logistical costs ($1318 USD) and scenario 3; staff participation time costs plus total program costs for the head trainer as the QI leader from the capacity building midwifery program ($8548 USD). RESULTS: At baseline, the level of DBP and SSC practices per the guidelines was at 0 % while that of DCC was at 80 %. After 11 weeks, we observed an adoption of DBP practice of 36 % (N = 111 births), SSC practice of 79 % (N = 241 births), and no change in DCC practice. Major cost driver(s) were midwives' participation time costs (56 %) for scenario 1 (collaborative), trainers' material and logistic costs (55 %) in scenario 2(collaborative) and capacity building program costs for the trainer (QI lead) (94 %) in scenario 3 (programmatic). Costs per intermediate outcome were $2.3 USD per birth and $0.5 USD per birth adopting DBP and SSC respectively in Scenario 1; $6.0 USD per birth adopting DBP and $1.4 USD per birth adopting SSC in Scenario 2; $38.5 USD per birth adopting DBP and $8.8 USD per birth adopting SSC in scenario 3. The average hourly wage of the facility midwife was $4.7 USD. CONCLUSION: Improving adoption of DBP and SSC practices can be done at reasonable facility costs under a collaborative MIDWIZE QI approach. In a programmatic approach, higher facility costs would be needed. This can inform resource mobilization for future QI in similar resource-constrained settings.

Maternal health leaders' perceptions of barriers to midwife-led care in Ethiopia, Kenya, Malawi, Somalia, and Uganda.

OBJECTIVE: To identify and examine barriers to midwife-led care in Eastern Africa and how these barriers can be reduced DESIGN: A qualitative inductive study with online focus group discussions and semi-structured interviews using content analysis SETTING: The study examines midwife-led care in Ethiopia, Malawi, Kenya, Somalia, and Uganda -five African countries with an unmet need for midwives and a need to improve maternal and neonatal health outcomes. PARTICIPANTS: Twenty-five participants with a health care profession background and current position as a maternal and child health leader from one of the five study countries. FINDINGS: The findings demonstrate barriers to midwife-led care connected to organisational structures, traditional hierarchies, gender disparities, and inadequate leadership. Societal and gendered norms, organisational traditions, and differences in power and authority between professions are some factors explaining why the barriers persist. A focus on intra- and multisectoral collaborations, the inclusion of midwife leaders, and providing midwives with role models to leverage their empowerment are examples of how to reduce the barriers. KEY CONCLUSIONS: This study provides new knowledge on midwife-led care from the perspectives of health leaders in five African countries. Transforming outdated structures to ensure midwives are empowered to deliver midwife-led care at all healthcare system levels is crucial to moving forward. IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTISE: This knowledge is important as enhancing the midwife-led care provision is associated with substantially improved maternal and neonatal health outcomes, higher satisfaction of care, and enhanced utilisation of health system resources. Nevertheless, the model of care is not adequately integrated into the five countries' health systems. Future studies are warranted to further explore how reducing barriers to midwife-led care can be adapted at a broader level.