"Never waste a crisis". A commentary on the COVID-19 pandemic as a driver for innovation in maternity care

To investigate the views and experiences of care in labour and birth of a representative sample of women who gave birth in Victoria, Australia in 1993. Cross-sectional survey mailed to women 6-7 months after giving birth. All women who gave birth in a two week period in Victoria, Australia in September 1993, except those who had a stillbirth or neonatal death. After adjusting for parity, the risk status of the pregnancy, and social and obstetric factors, specific aspects of care with the greatest negative impact on the overall rating of intrapartum care were: caregivers perceived as unhelpful (midwives: adjusted OR 12.03 [95% CI 7.8-18.6], doctors: adjusted OR 6.76 [95% CI 4.4-10.3]); and having an active say in decisions only sometimes, rarely or not at all (adjusted OR 8.90 [95% CI 4.9-16.1]). In a separate regression analysis including parity, risk status, obstetric and social factors, but not specific aspects of care, factors associated with dissatisfaction with intrapartum care included: participation in shared antenatal care programme (adjusted OR 1.89 [95% CI 1.2-3.0]) and being of nonEnglish speaking background (adjusted OR 1.70 [95% CI 1.1-2.6]). The following factors lowered the odds of dissatisfaction: attending a birth centre (adjusted OR 0.34 [95% CI 0.1-1.0]) and knowing the midwives before going into labour (adjusted OR 0.68 [95% CI 0.5-0.9]). The survey demonstrates the potential for 'new' models of care to have either positive or negative effects on women's experiences of care. Evaluation of innovations in perinatal care taking into account women's views is a prerequisite for improvements in maternity care.

The birth center, a relatively recent innovation in maternity care, is an increasingly popular location of birth. The purpose of this integrative literature review is to assess the research on maternal outcomes from birth center care. Using methods by Whittemore and Knafl, we conducted an integrative review of studies of birth centers published in English since 1980. Twenty-three quantitative sources and 9 qualitative sources describing maternal outcomes of birth center care were reviewed and synthesized. Outcomes for women receiving birth care were positive. Spontaneous vaginal birth rates and perineal integrity were higher for women beginning care in a birth center compared to women in hospital care. Rates of cesarean birth were also lower for women planning birth center care. Transfer rates are difficult to compare across studies, but antepartum transfer rates ranged from 13% to 27.2%. Intrapartum transfer rates ranged from 11.6% to 37.4%, and from 11.6% to 16.5% in studies published from 2011 to 2013. Nulliparous women had higher rates of transfer than multiparous women. Few severe maternal outcomes and no maternal deaths were reported in any studies. Women were satisfied with the comprehensive, personalized care that they received from birth centers. Quantitative studies reviewed included more than 84,300 women. The heterogeneity of the studies and variations of practice limit generalization of findings. However, even with multisite studies enrolling a variety of birth centers and practice changes over time, the consistency of positive outcomes supports this model of care. Policy makers in the United States should consider supporting the birth center model as a means of improving maternal outcomes.

Access to safe and dignified pregnancy, childbirth, and postpartum experiences is a fundamental right for all pregnant and postpartum people. In the United States, systemic racism fuels distrust and disengagement in a health care system that continues to dehumanize the Black community. The respectful maternity care literature explains how these systemic, structural, and institutional failings produce maternal health disparities and expose a pattern whereby Black women receive less adequate maternity care. The implementation of trustworthy policies and practices is urgently needed because no single intervention has or will substantially reduce maternal disparities. The purpose of this article is to describe a multicomponent maternity care innovation, Melanated Group Midwifery Care (MGMC). MGMC was codesigned with community partners and is responsive to the needs and desires of Black women, making MGMC a culturally adapted and patient‐centered model. Racial concordance among care providers and patients, group prenatal care, perinatal nurse navigation, and 12 months of in‐home postpartum doula support are 4 evidence‐based interventions that are bundled in MGMC. We posit that a model that restructures maternity care to increase health system accountability and aligns with the needs and desires of Black pregnant and postpartum people will increase trust in the health care system and result in better clinical, physical, emotional, and social outcomes.

This webinar focuses on strategies for implementing evidence-based practices that will make a real difference to improving maternal and neonatal health, which ties in closely with SDG targets 3.1 and 3.2 in particular. We invite you to read related content in the collection on [Implementation of Evidence-Based Practices for Improving Maternal and Neonatal Health](https://www.biomedcentral.com/collections/IEBP), published in [Implementation Science](https://implementationscience.biomedcentral.com/) and [Implementation Science Communications](https://implementationsciencecomms.biomedcentral.com/). The Guest Editors of the collection - Michelle H. Moniz, Rebecca Hamm, and Jennifer Callaghan Koru - are chairing the event, with the Springer Nature SDG3 chair, Fiona Pring, introducing the event. Implementation research priorities for addressing the maternal health crisis in the USA: results from a modified Delphi study among researchers Background: Maternal health outcomes in the USA are far worse than in peer nations. Increasing implementation research in maternity care is critical to addressing quality gaps and unwarranted variations in care. Implementation research priorities have not yet been defined or well represented in the plans for maternal health research investments in the USA. Methods: This descriptive study used a modified Delphi method to solicit and rank research priorities at the intersection of implementation science and maternal health through two sequential web-based surveys. A purposeful, yet broad sample of researchers with relevant subject matter knowledge was identified through searches of published articles and grant databases. The surveys addressed five implementation research areas in maternal health: (1) practices to prioritize for broader implementation, (2) practices to prioritize for de-implementation, (3) research questions about implementation determinants, (4) research questions about implementation strategies, and (5) research questions about methods/measures. Results: Of 160 eligible researchers, 82 (51.2%) agreed to participate. Participants were predominantly female (90%) and White (75%). Sixty completed at least one of two surveys. The practices that participants prioritized for broader implementation were improved postpartum care, perinatal and postpartum mood disorder screening and management, and standardized management of hypertensive disorders of pregnancy. For de-implementation, practices believed to be most impactful if removed from or reduced in maternity care were cesarean delivery for low-risk patients and routine discontinuation of all psychiatric medications during pregnancy. The top methodological priorities of participants were improving the extent to which implementation science frameworks and measures address equity and developing approaches for involving patients in implementation research. Conclusions: Through a web-based Delphi exercise, we identified implementation research priorities that researchers consider to have the greatest potential to improve the quality of maternity care in the USA. This study also demonstrates the feasibility of using modified Delphi approaches to engage researchers in setting implementation research priorities within a clinical area. Group prenatal care successes, challenges, and frameworks for scaling up: a case study in adopting health care innovations Background Group prenatal care enhances quality of care, improves outcomes, and lowers costs. However, this healthcare innovation is not widely available. Using a case-study approach, our objectives were to (1) examine organizational characteristics that support implementation of Expect With Me group prenatal care and (2) identify key factors influencing adoption and sustainability. Methods We studied five clinical sites implementing group prenatal care, collecting qualitative data including focus group discussions with clinicians (n = 4 focus groups, 41 clinicians), key informant interviews (n = 9), and administrative data. We utilized a comparative qualitative case-study approach to characterize clinical sites and explain organizational traits that fostered implementation success. We characterized adopting and non-adopting (unable to sustain group prenatal care) sites in terms of fit for five criteria specified in the Framework for Transformational Change: (1) impetus to transform, (2) leadership commitment to quality, (3) improvement initiatives that engage staff, (4) alignment to achieve organization-wide goals, and (5) integration. Results Two sites were classified as adopters and three as non-adopters based on duration, frequency, and consistency of group prenatal care implementation. Adopters had better fit with the five criteria for transformational change. Adopting organizations were more successful implementing group prenatal care due to alignment between organizational goals and resources, dedicated healthcare providers coordinating group care, space for group prenatal care sessions, and strong commitment from organization leadership. Conclusions Adopting sites were more likely to integrate group prenatal care when stakeholders achieved alignment across staff on organizational change goals, leadership buy-in, and committed institutional support and dedicated resources to sustain it. Trial registration The Expect With Me intervention’s design and hypotheses were preregistered: https://clinicaltrials.gov/study/NCT02169024. Date: June 19, 2014. Evaluating feedback from an implementation advisory board to assess the rollout of a postpartum patient navigation program Background Patient navigation is an individualized intervention to facilitate comprehensive care which has not yet been fully implemented in obstetric or postpartum care. Methods We aimed to develop and evaluate a mechanism to incorporate feedback regarding implementation of postpartum patient navigation for low-income birthing individuals at an urban academic medical center. This study analyzed the role of an Implementation Advisory Board (IAB) in supporting an ongoing randomized trial of postpartum navigation. Over the first 24 months of the trial, the IAB included 11 rotating obstetricians, one clinic resource coordinator, one administrative leader, two obstetric nurses, one primary care physician, one social worker, and one medical assistant. Members completed serial surveys regarding program implementation, effects on patient care, and areas for improvement. Quarterly IAB meetings offered opportunities for additional feedback. Survey responses and meeting notes were analyzed using the constant comparative method and further interpreted within the Exploration, Preparation, Implementation, Sustainment (EPIS) Framework. Results Members of the IAB returned 37 surveys and participated in five meetings over 24 months. Survey analysis revealed four themes among the inner context: reduced clinician burden, connection of care teams, communication strategies, and clinic workflow. Bridging factors included improved patient access to care, improved follow-up, and adding social context to care. Innovation factors included availability of navigators, importance of consistent communication, and adaptation over time. Meeting notes highlighted the importance of bidirectional feedback regarding implementation, and members expressed positive opinions regarding navigators’ effects on patient care, integration into clinic workflow, and responsiveness to feedback. IAB members initially suggested changes to improve implementation; later survey responses demonstrated successful program adaptations. Conclusions Members of an implementation advisory board provided key insights into the implementation of postpartum patient navigation that may be useful to promote dissemination of navigation and establish avenues for the engagement of implementing partners in other innovations. Trial registration ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03922334. Registered April 19, 2019. The results here do not present the results of the primary trial, which is ongoing. IMplementation of the Preterm Birth Surveillance PAthway: a RealisT evaluation (The IMPART Study) Background In the UK, 7.6% of babies are born preterm, which the Department of Health aims to decrease to 6% by 2025. To advance this, NHS England released Saving Babies Lives Care Bundle Version 2 Element 5, recommending the Preterm Birth Pathway for women at risk of preterm birth. The success of this new pathway depends on its implementation. The IMPART (IMplementation of the Preterm Birth Surveillance PAthway: a RealisT evaluation) study aimed to research how, why, for whom, to what extent and in what contexts the prediction and prevention aspects of Preterm Birth Surveillance Pathway is implemented through a realist evaluation. Realist implementation studies are growing in popularity. Methods Initial programme theories were developed through a realist informed literature scope, interviews with developers of the NHS England guidance, and a national questionnaire of current practice. Implementation theory was utilised in developing the programme theories. Data (interviews and observations with staff and women) were undertaken in 3 case sites in England to ‘test’ the programme theories. Substantive theory was utilised during data analysis to interpret and refine the theories on how implementation could be improved. Results Three explanatory areas were developed: risk assessing and referral; the preterm birth surveillance clinic; and women centred care. Explanatory area 1 dealt with the problems in correct risk assessment and referral to a preterm clinic. Explanatory area 2 focused on how once a correct referral has been made to a preterm clinic, knowledgeable and supported clinicians can deliver a well-functioning clinic. Explanatory area 3 concentrated on how the pathway delivers appropriate care to women. Conclusions The IMPART study provides several areas where implementation could be improved. These include educating clinicians on knowledge of risk factors and the purpose of the preterm clinic, having a multidisciplinary preterm team (including a preterm midwife) with specialist preterm knowledge and skills (including transvaginal cervical scanning skills), and sites actively working with their local network. This multidisciplinary preterm team are placed to deliver continuity of care for women at high-risk of preterm birth, being attentive to their history but also ensuring they are not defined by their risk status. Trial registration ISRCTN57127874. Using an experience-based co-design approach to develop strategies for implementing an intravenous iron intervention to treat moderate and severe anemia in pregnancy in Malawi Background In low- and middle-income countries, women experiencing anemia during pregnancy are recommended to take 30 mg to 60 mg of oral iron daily throughout pregnancy. However, oral iron tablets are often poorly tolerated and slow in correcting anemia, resulting in low adherence, prolonged anemia, and increased risk of adverse maternal and fetal outcomes. An alternative to oral iron is intravenous (IV) iron, commonly used in high-income countries to restore the body’s iron stores rapidly. A randomized controlled trial was conducted to investigate the effectiveness and safety of IV iron compared to standard-of-care oral iron supplementation for pregnant women with moderate and severe anemia in the third trimester in Malawi (REVAMP-TT). Using an experience-based co-design approach, our study aimed to identify barriers and facilitators to IV iron use to treat anemia in pregnancy in the primary healthcare system of Malawi, and develop mitigating strategies for the successful implementation of REVAMP-TT. Methodology The co-design process involved two phases: i) We conducted an information-gathering exercise to identify barriers and facilitators to IV iron use to treat anemia in pregnancy in the primary healthcare system of Malawi. We interviewed key informants (n = 53) including the policymakers, government partners, healthcare managers, and healthcare providers. We also gathered previous research findings from a formative qualitative study on the perceptions and experiences of IV iron treatment for pregnant women experiencing anemia in Malawi (n = 29). ii) We conducted two co-design workshops with end-users (n = 20) and healthcare providers (n = 20) to confirm and identify the key barriers and facilitators and developed mitigating strategies to inform the successful implementation of the REVAMP-TT trial. We mapped the emerging barriers to the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research 2.0 (CFIR 2.0) and matched the mitigating strategies to the corresponding Expert Recommendations for Implementing Change (ERIC) compilation. Results The following were identified as key barriers to IV iron use to treat anemia in pregnancy in the primary healthcare system of Malawi: the cost of IV iron, the lack of available resources and knowledge, local attitudes including myths and misconceptions about IV iron and keeping pregnancy a secret, local conditions, the lack of political will and buy-in from high-level leaders, the lack of capability of healthcare providers to deliver IV iron, and the lack of male involvement to support pregnant women's access to antenatal care. The proposed strategies to mitigate the barriers for the successful implementation of the REVAMP TT trial included providing financial strategy, developing stakeholder relationships, training and educating stakeholders, supporting clinicians, and engaging end-users. Conclusion The use of the experience-based co-design approach in our study provided a valuable method to expose the potential barriers and facilitators to IV iron use and develop mitigating strategies to successfully implement the REVAMP-TT trial. Engaging both the key informants and end users promoted ownership and consensus among stakeholders and ensured a collaborative environment for sharing deeply rooted real-world experiences and insights. Not only do these findings address the needs of this study, but they also, lay a groundwork for the possible integration of IV iron into routine care in Malawi and provide knowledge for policymakers to make informed decisions on the management of anemia in the primary healthcare systems of Malawi.

BackgroundHypertensive disorders of pregnancy (HDP) are the leading cause of maternal mortality in sub-Saharan Africa (SSA), accounting for 70% of the global maternal death burden. Despite international guidelines, the management of these conditions, particularly preeclampsia, is hindered by significant structural, clinical, and sociocultural challenges in low-income countries. This narrative review critically analyzes the challenges in the prevention, diagnosis, and management of HDP in resource-constrained settings in SSA, and identifies contextually appropriate solutions to improve maternal outcomes.MethodsA literature search of studies published between 2014 and 2024 was conducted using the PubMed, Scopus, Google Scholar, and African Journal Online databases. This review synthesizes evidence from qualitative, quantitative, and mixed-method studies and systematic reviews focusing on the epidemiological, organizational, and community dimensions of care for hypertensive disorders across SSA countries. Studies were selected on the basis of their relevance to HDP care challenges and innovations in SSA. The Scale for the Assessment of Narrative Review Articles (SANRA) guided the rigor and reporting of this review, with six core criteria systematically applied: justification of article selection, comprehensive literature search, quality assessment, evidence synthesis, transparent reporting, and methodological transparency.ResultsKey challenges identified included fragmented health systems, poor adherence to clinical protocols, shortages of essential medicines and equipment, inadequate healthcare worker training, delayed care-seeking due to low health literacy and cultural beliefs, and insufficient epidemiological data. Promising strategies include strengthening antenatal care and screening, maternal education, task-sharing with community health workers, providing targeted training for healthcare workers, implementing simplified protocols, utilizing task sharing with community health workers, and enhancing interdisciplinary coordination.ConclusionReducing maternal mortality due to HDP in SSA requires an integrated approach that combines strengthening health systems, community engagement, targeted training, and context-adapted guidelines. Sustained investment in local research, data sharing, and policy reform is essential for achieving sustainable improvements in maternal health care.