Department of Public Health, College of Health Sciences, Debre Markos University, PO Box 269, Debre Markos, Ethiopia.
School of Public Health, University of Technology Sydney, PO Box 123, Broadway NSW 2007, Sydney, Australia.
Health Policy Plan. 2022 Aug 3;37(7):895-914. doi: 10.1093/heapol/czac034.
Conventionally used coverage measures do not reflect the quality of care. Effective coverage (EC) assesses the extent to which health care services deliver potential health gains to the population by integrating concepts of utilization, need and quality. We aimed to conduct a systematic review of studies evaluating EC of maternal and child health services, quality measurement strategies and disparities across wealth quantiles. A systematic search was performed in six electronic databases [MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cumulative Index of Nursing and Allied Health (CINAHL), Scopus, Web of Science and Maternity and Infant Care] and grey literature. We also undertook a hand search of references. We developed search terms having no restrictions based on publication period, country or language. We included studies which reported EC estimates based on the World Health Organization framework of measuring EC. Twenty-seven studies, all from low- and middle-income settings (49 countries), met the criteria and were included in the narrative synthesis of the results. Maternal and child health intervention(s) and programme(s) were assessed either at an individual level or as an aggregated measure of health system performance or both. The EC ranged from 0% for post-partum care to 95% for breastfeeding. When crude coverage measures were adjusted to account for the quality of care, the EC values turned lower. The gap between crude coverage and EC was as high as 86%, and it signified a low quality of care. The assessment of the quality of care addressed structural, process and outcome domains individually or combined. The wealthiest 20% had higher EC of services than the poorest 20%, an inequitable distribution of coverage. More efforts are needed to improve the quality of maternal and child health services and to eliminate the disparities. Moreover, considering multiple dimensions of quality and the use of standard measurements are recommended to monitor coverage effectively.
传统的覆盖范围衡量指标并不能反映医疗服务质量。有效覆盖(EC)通过整合利用、需求和质量的概念,评估医疗保健服务为人群带来潜在健康收益的程度。我们旨在对评估母婴健康服务的 EC、质量测量策略以及财富阶层之间差异的研究进行系统评价。在六个电子数据库[MEDLINE、EMBASE、护理与健康相关领域综合索引(CINAHL)、Scopus、Web of Science 和母婴保健]和灰色文献中进行了系统搜索。我们还对手头的参考文献进行了搜索。我们制定了没有基于发布时间、国家或语言限制的搜索词。我们纳入了根据世界卫生组织衡量 EC 的框架报告 EC 估计值的研究。27 项研究均来自中低收入国家(49 个国家),符合标准,并纳入了结果的叙述性综合分析。母婴健康干预措施和方案在个体层面或作为卫生系统绩效的综合衡量标准进行评估。EC 从产后护理的 0%到母乳喂养的 95%不等。当对粗覆盖率措施进行调整以考虑到护理质量时,EC 值就会降低。粗覆盖率和 EC 之间的差距高达 86%,这表明护理质量低。护理质量评估分别或综合考虑了结构、过程和结果领域。最富有的 20%人群比最贫穷的 20%人群享有更高的服务 EC,这是一种覆盖范围的不平等分配。需要做出更多努力来提高母婴健康服务的质量并消除差异。此外,建议考虑质量的多个维度并使用标准测量来有效监测覆盖范围。