A process evaluation plan for assessing a complex community-based maternal health intervention in Ogun State, Nigeria

Sumedha Sharma, Olalekan O Adetoro, Marianne Vidler, Sharla Drebit, Beth A Payne, David O Akeju, Akinmade Adepoju, Ebunoluwa Jaiyesimi, John Sotunsa, Zulfiqar A Bhutta, Laura A Magee, Peter von Dadelszen, Olukayode Dada, Sumedha Sharma, Olalekan O Adetoro, Marianne Vidler, Sharla Drebit, Beth A Payne, David O Akeju, Akinmade Adepoju, Ebunoluwa Jaiyesimi, John Sotunsa, Zulfiqar A Bhutta, Laura A Magee, Peter von Dadelszen, Olukayode Dada

Abstract

Background: Despite increased investment in community-level maternal health interventions, process evaluations of such interventions are uncommon, and can be instrumental in understanding mediating factors leading to outcomes. In Nigeria, where an unacceptably number of maternal deaths occur (maternal mortality ratio of 814/100,000 livebirths), the Community Level Interventions for Pre-eclampsia (CLIP) study (NCT01911494) aimed to reduce maternal and neonatal mortality and morbidity with a complex intervention of five interrelated components. Building from previous frameworks, we illustrate a methodology to evaluate implementation processes of the complex CLIP intervention, assess mechanisms of impact and identify emerging unintended causal pathways.

Methods: The study was conducted from 2013-2016 in five Local Government Areas in Ogun State, Nigeria. A six-step approach was developed to evaluate key constructs of context (external factors related to intervention), implementation (fidelity, dose, reach, and adaption) and mechanisms of impact (unintended outcomes and mediating pathways). The steps are: 1) describing the intervention by a logic model, 2) defining acceptable delivery, 3) formulating questions, 4) determining methodology, 5) planning resources in context, lastly, step 6) finalising the plan in consideration with relevant stakeholders.

Results: Quantitative data were collected from 32,785 antenatal and postnatal visits at the primary health care level, from 66 community engagement sessions, training assessments of community health workers, and standard health facility questionnaires. Forty-three focus group discussions, 38 in-depth interviews, and 23 structured observations were conducted to capture qualitative data. A total of 103 community engagement reports and 182 suspected pre-eclampsia case reports were purposively collected. Timing of data collection was staggered to understand feedback mechanisms that may have resulted from the delivery of the intervention. Data will be analysed using R and NVivo. Diffusions of innovations and realist evaluation theories will underpin analysis of the interaction between context, mechanisms and outcomes.

Conclusion: This comprehensive approach can serve as a guide for researchers and policy makers to plan the evaluation of similar complex health interventions in resource-constrained settings, and to aid in measuring 'effectiveness' of interventions and not just 'efficacy'.

Trial registration: This research is a part of the Community Level Interventions for Pre-eclampsia Study, NCT01911494. The trial is registered in Clinicaltrials.gov, the URL is https://ichgcp.net/clinical-trials-registry/NCT01911494 The trial was registered on June 28, 2013 and the first participant was enrolled for intervention on March 1, 2014.

Keywords: Complex interventions; Implementation research; Maternal health; Nigeria; Ogun; Process evaluation.

Figures

Fig. 1
Fig. 1
Logic model of the CLIP intervention in Ogun, Nigeria
Fig. 2
Fig. 2
Constructs of process evaluation for the CLIP intervention in Ogun State: The key functions assessed will be implementation (the infrastructure through which intervention is delivered, how it is delivered and the ‘what’ ‘quantity and quality’ of intervention), mechanisms of impact (how interaction between intervention activities and participants effect outcomes), and context (evaluating external factors which shape or may be shaped by intervention). As evident, these functions are non-linear and mutually-informative

References

    1. WHO, UNICEF, UNFPA . The World Bank Group, United Nations Population Division. Trends in maternal mortality: 1990 to 2015. Geneva: World Health Organization; 2010.
    1. National Population Commission (NPC) [Nigeria], ICF International . Nigeria Demographic and Health Survey 2013. Abuja, Nigeria, and Rockville, Maryland, USA: NPC and ICF International; 2014.
    1. Thaddeus S, Maine D. Too far to walk: maternal mortality in context. Soc Sci Med. 1994;38(8):1091–1110. doi: 10.1016/0277-9536(94)90226-7.
    1. Payne B, von Dadelszen P, Bhutta Z, Magee L, Adetoro O, Sotunsa J, et al. Protocol 13PRT/9313: The Community Level Interventions for Pre-eclampsia (CLIP) Trials: four prospective cluster randomised controlled trials comparing a package of interventions directed towards improving maternal and perinatal outcomes related to pre-eclampsia with current standards of care (NCT01911494). Lancet. [cited 2016 Jan 18]. Available from: .
    1. Moore G, Audrey S, Barker M, Bond L, Bonell C, Hardeman W, et al. Process evaluation of complex interventions. MRC Population Health Science Research Network London 2014.
    1. Bonell C, Oakley A, Hargreaves J, Strange V, Rees R. Research methodology: Assessment of generalisability in trials of health interventions: suggested framework and systematic review. Brit Med J. 2006;333(7563):346–349. doi: 10.1136/bmj.333.7563.346.
    1. Glasgow RE, Klesges LM, Dzewaltowski DA, Estabrooks PA, Vogt TM. Evaluating the impact of health promotion programs: using the RE-AIM framework to form summary measures for decision making involving complex issues. Health Educ Res. 2006;21(5):688–694. doi: 10.1093/her/cyl081.
    1. Craig P, Dieppe P, Macintyre S, Michie S. Developing and evaluating complex interventions: The new Medical Research Council guidance. Int J Nurs Stud. 2013;50(5):587–592. doi: 10.1016/j.ijnurstu.2012.09.010.
    1. Pawson R, Tilley N. Realistic evaluation. Thousand Oaks, Calif, London: Sage; 1997.
    1. Saunders RP, Evans MH, Joshi P. Developing a Process-Evaluation Plan for Assessing Health Promotion Program Implementation: A How-To Guide. Health Promot Pract. 2005;6(2):134–147. doi: 10.1177/1524839904273387.
    1. Khowaja AR. [205-POS]: Methodology for assessing the feasibility of community level interventions for pre-eclampsia in South Asian and African contexts. Pregnancy Hypertens. 2015;5(1):103.
    1. W.K. Kellogg Foundation. Using Logic Models to Bring Together Planning, Evaluation, and Action: Logic Model Development Guide. 2004 [cited 2016 Jan 18]. Available from: .
    1. Craig P, Cooper C, Gunnell D, Haw S, Lawson K, Macintyre S, et al. Using natural experiments to evaluate population health interventions: new Medical Research Council guidance. J Epidemiol Community Health. 2012;66(12):1182–1186. doi: 10.1136/jech-2011-200375.
    1. Steckler AB, Linnan L. Process evaluation for public health interventions and research. 1. San Francisco, Calif: Jossey-Bass; 2002.
    1. May C. Towards a general theory of implementation. Implement Sci. 2013;8(1):18. doi: 10.1186/1748-5908-8-18.
    1. Lewin S, Glenton C, Oxman AD. Use of qualitative methods alongside randomised controlled trials of complex healthcare interventions: methodological study. Brit Med J. 2009;339:b3496. doi: 10.1136/bmj.b3496.
    1. Byng R, Norman I, Redfern S. Using Realistic Evaluation to Evaluate a Practice-level Intervention to Improve Primary Healthcare for Patients with Long-term Mental Illness. Evaluation. 2005;11(1):69–93. doi: 10.1177/1356389005053198.
    1. Rogers EM. Diffusion of innovations. 4. New York: Free Press; 1995.
    1. Greenlagh T, Robert G, MacFarlene F, Bate P, Kyriakidou O. Diffusion of Innovations in Service Organizations: Systematic Review and Recommendations. Milbank Q. 2004;82(4):581–629. doi: 10.1111/j.0887-378X.2004.00325.x.
    1. Nathan HL, de Greeff A, Hezelgrave NL, Chappell LC, Shennan AH. An accurate semiautomated oscillometric blood pressure device for use in pregnancy (including pre-eclampsia) in a low-income and middle-income country population: the Microlife 3AS1-2. Blood Press Monit. 2015;20(1):52–55. doi: 10.1097/MBP.0000000000000086.
    1. Dunsmuir DT, Payne BA, Cloete G, Petersen CL, Gorges M, Lim J, et al. Development of mHealth Applications for Pre-Eclampsia Triage. IEEE J Biomed Health Inform. 2014;18(6):1857–1864. doi: 10.1109/JBHI.2014.2301156.
    1. Payne BA, Hutcheon JA, Ansermino JM, Hall DR, Bhutta ZA, Bhutta SZ, et al. A risk prediction model for the assessment and triage of women with hypertensive disorders of pregnancy in low-resourced settings: the miniPIERS (Pre-eclampsia Integrated Estimate of RiSk) multi-country prospective cohort study. PLoS Med. 2014;11(1):e1001589. doi: 10.1371/journal.pmed.1001589.
    1. Blackwood B, O'Halloran P, Porter S. On the problems of mixing RCTs with qualitative research: the case of the MRC framework for the evaluation of complex healthcare interventions. J Res Nurs. 2010;15(6):511–521. doi: 10.1177/1744987110373860.
    1. Jansen YJFM, Foets MME, de Bont AA. The contribution of qualitative research to the development of tailor-made community-based interventions in primary care: a review. Eur J Public Health. 2010;20(2):220–226. doi: 10.1093/eurpub/ckp085.
    1. Bonell C, Fletcher A, Morton M, Lorenc T. Realist randomised controlled trials: a new approach to evaluating complex public health interventions. Soc Sci Med. 2012;75(12):2299. doi: 10.1016/j.socscimed.2012.08.032.
    1. Marchal B, Bruno M, Gill W, Geoff W, Sara Van B. Realist RCTs of complex interventions - An oxymoron. Soc Sci Med. 2013;94:124. doi: 10.1016/j.socscimed.2013.06.025.
    1. Hawe P, Shiell A, Riley T. Complex interventions: how “out of control” can a randomised controlled trial be? Brit Med J. 2004;328(7455):1561–1563. doi: 10.1136/bmj.328.7455.1561.
    1. Bonell CP, Hargreaves J, Cousens S, Ross D, Hayes R, Petticrew M, et al. Alternatives to randomisation in the evaluation of public health interventions: design challenges and solutions. J Epidemiol Community Health. 2011;65(7):582–587. doi: 10.1136/jech.2008.082602.

Source: PubMed

3
구독하다