Can a simulation-based training program impact the use of evidence based routine practices at birth? Results of a hospital-based cluster randomized trial in Mexico

Jimena Fritz, Dilys M Walker, Susanna Cohen, Gustavo Angeles, Hector Lamadrid-Figueroa, Jimena Fritz, Dilys M Walker, Susanna Cohen, Gustavo Angeles, Hector Lamadrid-Figueroa

Abstract

Background: In Mexico, although the majority of births are attended in hospitals, reports have emerged of obstetric violence, use of unsafe practices, and failure to employ evidence-based practices (EBP). Recent attention has refocused global efforts towards provision of quality care that is both patient-centered and evidence-based. Scaling up of local interventions should rely on strong evidence of effectiveness.

Objective: To perform a secondary analysis to evaluate the impact of a simulation and team-training program (PRONTO) on the performance of EBP in normal births.

Methods: A pair-matched cluster randomized controlled trial of the intervention was designed to measure the impact of the program (PRONTO intervention) on a sample of 24 hospitals (12 hospitals received the PRONTO training and 12 served as controls) in the states of Chiapas, Guerrero, and Mexico. We estimated the impact of receiving the intervention on the probability of birth practices performance in a sample of 641 observed births of which 318 occurred in the treated hospitals and 323 occurred in control hospitals. Data was collected at 4 time points (baseline, 4th, 8th and 12th months after the training). Women were blinded to treatment allocation but observers and providers were not. Estimates were obtained by fitting difference-in-differences logistic regression models considering confounding variables. The trial is registered at clinicaltrials.gov: # NCT01477554.

Results: Significant changes were found following the intervention. At 4 months post-intervention an increase of 20 percentage points (p.p.) for complete Active Management of Third Stage of Labor (AMTSL) (p = 0.044), and 16 p.p. increase for Skin-to-Skin Contact (p = 0.067); at 12 months a 25 p.p. increase of the 1st step of AMTSL (p = 0.026) and a 42 p.p. increase of Delayed Cord Clamping (p = 0.004); at 4 months a 30 (p = 0.001) and at 8 months a 22 (p = 0.010) p.p. decrease for Uterine Sweeping.

Conclusions: The intervention has an impact on adopting EBP at birth, contributing to an increased quality of care. Long lasting impacts on these practices are possible if there were to be a widespread adoption of the training techniques including simulation, team-training and facilitated discussions regarding routine care.

Conflict of interest statement

Competing Interests: Dilys Walker and Susanna Cohen are on the Board of Directors of PRONTO International, a recently formed NGO that offers PRONTO trainings. This does not alter our adherence to PLOS ONE policies on sharing data and materials. The other authors have no disclosure of interests to report.

Figures

Fig 1. Flow chart for the selection…
Fig 1. Flow chart for the selection of the sample.
Fig 2. Estimated percentage of births in…
Fig 2. Estimated percentage of births in which a complete Active Management of the Third Step of Labor was performed, by treatment (PRONTO training) group.
Fig 3. Estimated percentage of births in…
Fig 3. Estimated percentage of births in which the 1st step of the Active Management of the Third Step of Labor was performed, by treatment (PRONTO training) group.
Fig 4. Estimated percentage of births in…
Fig 4. Estimated percentage of births in which Skin-to-Skin Contact was performed, by treatment (PRONTO training) group.
Fig 5. Estimated percentage of births in…
Fig 5. Estimated percentage of births in which Uterine Sweeping was performed, by treatment (PRONTO training) group.

References

    1. Renfrew MJ, McFadden A, Bastos MH, Campbell J, Channon AA, Cheung NF, et al. Midwifery and quality care: findings from a new evidence-informed framework for maternal and newborn care. Lancet. 2014. Published online: 10.1016/S0140-6736(14)60789-3
    1. Women Deliver. Focus on 5. Women's Health and the MDGs 2009. Published online:
    1. Kassebaum NJ, Bertozzi-Villa A, Coggeshall MS, Shackelford KA, Steiner C, Heuton KR, et al. Global, regional, and national levels and causes of maternal mortality during 1990–2013: a systematic analysis for the Global Burden of Disease Study 2013. The Lancet. 2014: 1–25. Published online: 10.1016/S0140-6736(14)60696-6
    1. Freyermuth G, Luna M. Observatorio de Mortalidad Materna en México (OMM), Numeralia 2012 Centro de Investigaciones y Estudios Superiores en Antropología Social (CIESAS). México, 2014.
    1. The prevention and elimination of disrespect and abuse during facility-based childbirth, World Health Organization 2014. Published online:
    1. Gutierrez JP, Rivera-Dommarco J, Shamah-Levy T, Villalpando-Hernandez S, Franco A, Cuevas-Nasu L, et al. Encuesta Nacional de Salud y Nutricion 2012. Resultados Nacionales. Cuernavaca, Mexico: Instituto Nacional de Salud Publica (MX), 2012.
    1. World Bank, 2015. Published online:
    1. Stanton C, Armbruster D, Knight R, Ariawan I, Gbangbade S, Getachew A, et al. Use of active management of the third stage of labour in seven developing countries. Bull World Health Organ. 2009; 87 (3): 207–15. 10.2471/BLT.08.052597
    1. Faveau V, Bernis L. “Good obstetrics” revisited: Too many evidence-based practices and devices are not used. International Journal of Gynecology and Obstetrics. 2006; 94: 179–184. 10.1016/j.ijgo.2006.05.020
    1. World Health Organization. Standards for Maternal and Neonatal Care, 2006. Published online:
    1. Guía de Práctica Clínica: Vigilancia y manejo del trabajo de parto en embarazo de bajo riesgo. México: Secretaría de Salud; 2014. Published online:
    1. Menget A, Mougey C, Thiriez G, Riethmuller D. Advantage of delayed umbilical cord clamping in newborn infant. Arch Pediatr. 2013; 20 (9): 1022–7.
    1. Suzuki S. Effect of early skin-to-skin contact on breast-feeding. J Obstet Gynaecol. 2013; 33 (7): 695–6. 10.3109/01443615.2013.819843
    1. Sachse-Aguilera M, Sesia PM, García-Rojas M. Calidad de la atención durante el parto normal en establecimientos públicos de salud en el estado de Oaxaca. Revista de Investigación médica de Oaxaca. 2013; 1 (1): 17–36.
    1. Valdez-Santiago R, Hidalgo-Solórzano E, Mojarro-Iñiguez M, Arenas-Monreal LM. Nueva evidencia a un viejo problema: El abuso de las mujeres en las salas de parto Revista CONAMED 2013, 18(1):14–20.
    1. Walker D, DeMaria LM, Suarez L, Cragin L. Skilled Birth Attendants in Mexico: How Does Care During Normal Birth by General Physicians, Obstetric Nurses, and Professional Midwives Compare with World Health Organization Evidence-Based Practice Guidelines? Journal of Midwifery & Women’s Health 2012, 57 (1): 18–27.
    1. Carroli G, Mignini L. Episiotomy for vaginal birth. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews 2009, Issue 1. Art. No.: CD000081.
    1. Mathai M, Sanghvi H, Guidotti RJ. Managing Complications in Pregnancy and Childbirth: A guide for midwives and doctors Reproductive Health and Research, World Health Organization; 2000. pp. 98, 354.
    1. Sartore A, De Seta F, Maso G, Ricci G, Alberico S, Borelli M, et al. The effects of uterine fundal pressure (Kristeller maneuver) on pelvic floor function after vaginal delivery. Arch Gynecol Obstet. 2012. November; 286(5):1135–9. 10.1007/s00404-012-2444-x
    1. Matsubara S, Mita F, Kikkawa I, Suzuki M. Maternal rib fracture after manual uterine fundal pressure. Rural Remote Health. 2012; 12: 2062
    1. Camacho-Villarreal AL, Pérez-López JC. Revisión de cavidad uterina instrumentada gentil frente a la revisión manual y su relación con la hemorragia posparto. Enfermería Universitaria. Elsevier México. 2013; 10(1): 21–26.
    1. Gutiérrez-Alba G, González-Block MA, Reyes-Morales H. Desafíos en la implantación de guías de práctica clínica en instituciones públicas de México: estudio de casos múltiple. Salud Publica Mex 2015;57:547–554.
    1. Banja J. The normalization of deviance in healthcare delivery. Bus Horiz. 2010; 53(2): 139 10.1016/j.bushor.2009.10.006
    1. King HB, Battles J, Baker DP, Alonso A, Salas E, Webster J, et al. TeamSTEPPS(™): Team Strategies and Tools to Enhance Performance and Patient Safety In: Henriksen K, Battles JB, Keyes MA, Grady ML, editors. Advances in Patient Safety: New Directions and Alternative Approaches (Vol. 3: Performance and Tools). Rockville (MD): Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (US); 2008. August.
    1. Merién AE, van de Ven J, Mol BW, Houterman S, Oei SG. Multidisciplinary team training in a simulation setting for acute obstetric emergencies: a systematic review. Obstet Gynecol. 2010. May;115(5):1021–31. 10.1097/AOG.0b013e3181d9f4cd
    1. Walker DM, Cohen SR, Fritz J, Olvera-García M, Zelek ST, Fahey JO, et al. Impact Evaluation of PRONTO Mexico: A Simulation-Based Program in Obstetric and Neonatal Emergencies and Team Training. Simul Healthc. 2015. August 26. [Epub ahead of print]
    1. Walker DM, Cohen SR, Estrada F, Monterroso ME, Jenny A, Fritz J, et al. PRONTO training for obstetric and neonatal emergencies in Mexico. International Journal of Gynecology and Obstetrics. 2012;116: 128–133. 10.1016/j.ijgo.2011.09.021
    1. Walker DM, Cohen SR, Fritz J, Olvera M, Lamadrid-Figueroa H, Cowan JG, et al. Team training in obstetric and neonatal emergencies using highly realistic simulation in Mexico: impact on process indicators. BMC Pregnancy and Childbirth. 2014;14:367 10.1186/s12884-014-0367-1
    1. Dimick JB, Ryan AM. Methods for evaluating changes in health care policy: the difference-in-differences approach. JAMA. 2014;312(22):2401–2 10.1001/jama.2014.16153
    1. Rogers, Everett M. (1962). Diffusion of Innovations. Free Press of Glencoe, Macmillan Company.
    1. Kromann C.B., Bohnstedt C., Jensen M. L. The testing effect on skills learning might last 6 months. Adv in Health Sci Educ. 2010; 15:395–401.
    1. Tuncalp O, Souza JP, Hindin MJ, Santos CA, Oliveira TH, Vogel JP, et al. , on behalf of the WHO Multicountry Survey on Maternal and Newborn Health Research Network. Education and severe maternal outcomes in developing countries: a multicountry cross-sectional survey. BJOG 2014; 121 (Suppl. 1): 57–65.

Source: PubMed

3
Subscribe