Improving neonatal health in remote rural areas in China and Vietnam

点击翻译按钮获取中文摘要

Newborn (first 4 weeks of life) health remains a significant problem in China and Vietnam, especially in rural areas where they are 3 to 4 times more likely to die than in more developed areas. Most newborns can be treated with cost-effective interventions at facility and community levels, which do not require high-level training or costly equipment. Achieving high coverage of these interventions in the poorest areas could reduce neonatal deaths by at least 70%. While NH practice guidelines exist in China and Vietnam at national and local levels to guide on appropriate care and treatment, a major problem is ineffective implementation of the guidelines.This development study will assess the feasibility of using a participatory problem-solving intervention with local health managers to improve NH guideline implementation. If feasible, it will inform the design of a full-scale study to evaluate the effectiveness of the intervention. In the full-scale study, the research team would support local health managers through problem-solving and planning workshops, mentoring and capacity development to (1) assess the effectiveness of current guidelines; (2) identify barriers to improved implementation relating to service delivery (e.g. workforce issues, transport, equipment and supplies) and service demand (limited by remote access and traditional beliefs); (3) develop feasible strategies within current resource constraints e.g. re-organising services and the workforce, and using suitable community engagement models to stimulate demand for improved services; and 4) develop appropriate methods to monitor impact and unintended consequences.To assess the intervention's feasibility in remote, rural China and Vietnam the development study must address 4 questions:1. What are the current health service management practices and the degree of freedom for decision-making at different systems levels for improving NH outcomes?2. What are the opportunities for developing or strengthening community actions to support improved NH outcomes?3. What is the potential for monitoring NH outcomes and measuring cost-effectiveness of interventions at different health systems levels?4. What is the feasibility for local managers to use a participatory problem-solving intervention to implement existing practice guidelines for improving NH outcomes covering community, primary and referral levels and what would be the best vehicle for the intervention?We plan to conduct desk-based reviews of NH practice guidelines, challenges of monitoring NH impact in remote areas and NH intervention cost-effectiveness, before holding a 2-day workshop in Beijing to refine our field work plan and data collection tools and conduct 3 national key informant interviews (KIIs). We will then collect data in Guizhou, China using 4 methods: (i) KIIs: community level representatives, local health service managers, frontline health workers and provincial level policy makers and senior health officials; (ii) focus group discussions: recent mothers and community members; (iii) document review of community action agreements and provincial/national policies and plans; (iv) observation of health management information systems (HMIS) and accounting systems. A smaller research team will repeat this data collection protocol in Tay Nguyen, Vietnam, before analysing the two country datasets.This will inform the design the full-scale study and facilitate stakeholder engagement. We will produce 3 outputs on monitoring NH services in remote areas; practicalities of monitoring NH in remote China and Vietnam; and national policy space and local decision making freedom to improve NH services. Three levels of stakeholders will benefit: local (health service managers and staff), national (policy makers in China's MCH centres and Vietnam's NH technical working group) and international (e.g. Unicef, WHO, PMNCH and implementation science groups like WHO-led Implementation Research Platform).