4.5 Article

Can the process indicators for emergency obstetric care assess the progress of maternal mortality reduction programs? An examination of UNFPA Projects 2000-2004

Journal

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF GYNECOLOGY & OBSTETRICS
Volume 93, Issue 3, Pages 308-316

Publisher

WILEY
DOI: 10.1016/j.ijgo.2006.01.031

Keywords

maternal mortality; emergency obstetric care; process indicators; safe motherhood; AMDD; UNFPA; Morocco; India; Mozambique; Nicaragua

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Background: In view of the disappointing progress made in the last 20years in reducing maternal mortality in tow-income countries and before going to scale in implementing the new evidence-based strategies, it is crucial to review and assess the progress made in pilot countries where maternal mortality reduction programs focused on emergency obstetric care. Objective: To review the process indicators recommended for monitoring emergency obstetric care and their application in field situations, examining the conditions under which they can be used to assess the progress of maternal mortality reduction programs. Methods: Five of the six UN recommended process indicators were monitored annually for 5years in selected districts of Morocco, Mozambique, India and Nicaragua. Trends are presented and discussed. Results: With specific variations due to different local situations in the four countries and in spite of variations in quality of data collection, at( indicators showed a consistent positive trend, in response to the inputs of the programs. Conclusions: The UN process indicators for emergency obstetric care should continue to be promoted, but with two important conditions: (1) data collection is carefully checked for quality and coverage; (2) efforts are made to match process and outcome indicators (maternal and perinatal mortality, incidence of complications). (c) 2006 International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics. Published by Elsevier Ireland Ltd. All rights reserved.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available