Jhpiego Indonesia, Jakarta, Indonesia.
Jhpiego, Baltimore, MD, USA.
Int J Gynaecol Obstet. 2019 Feb;144 Suppl 1:21-29. doi: 10.1002/ijgo.12732.
To assess whether the Expanding Maternal and Neonatal Survival (EMAS) program was associated with improved care provided during hospital-based childbirth.
A quasi-experimental study with two rounds of data collection examined whether EMAS interventions improved facility-based labor and childbirth care. Direct clinical observations were conducted for 1208 deliveries across 13 hospitals in 12 districts. Primary outcome measures included implementation of standard practices to reduce the risk of complications during labor and childbirth for both women and newborns.
Adjusted difference-in-difference analysis compared the mean difference in quality scores between EMAS intervention hospitals and comparison sites and consistently found significantly better performance in EMAS sites: 14 points higher for labor monitoring (β-coefficient 14.1; 95% confidence interval [CI], 7.1-21.0); 38 points higher for newborn resuscitation readiness (β-coefficient 38.1; 95% CI, 31.1-45.2); and 33 points higher for infection prevention practices (β-coefficient 32.6; 95% CI, 28.5-36.8).
EMAS approaches emphasizing facility readiness and adherence to performance standards significantly improved labor monitoring and complication prevention practices during childbirth.
评估扩大母婴生存(EMAS)计划是否与提高基于医院的分娩期间提供的护理相关。
一项具有两轮数据收集的准实验研究,考察了 EMAS 干预措施是否改善了基于设施的分娩护理。在 12 个地区的 13 家医院进行了 1208 次分娩的直接临床观察。主要结局指标包括实施标准实践,以降低产妇和新生儿在分娩期间发生并发症的风险。
调整后的差异-差异分析比较了 EMAS 干预医院和对照点之间的质量评分平均值差异,发现 EMAS 点的表现明显更好:分娩监测高出 14 分(β系数 14.1;95%置信区间[CI],7.1-21.0);新生儿复苏准备高出 38 分(β系数 38.1;95% CI,31.1-45.2);感染预防措施高出 33 分(β系数 32.6;95% CI,28.5-36.8)。
强调设施准备和遵守绩效标准的 EMAS 方法显著改善了分娩期间的分娩监测和并发症预防实践。