Abstract
Background Despite growing literature, few studies have explored the implementation of policy interventions to reduce maternal and perinatal mortality in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs). Even fewer studies explicitly articulate the theoretical approaches used to understand contextual influences on policy implementation. This under-use of theory may account for the limited understanding of the variations in implementation processes and outcomes. We share findings from a study exploring how a health system-level policy intervention was implemented to improve maternal and child health outcomes in a resource limited LMIC.
Methods Our qualitative multiple case study was informed by the Normalization Process Theory (NPT). It was conducted across eight districts and among ten health facilities in Uganda, with 48 purposively selected participants. These included health care workers located at each of the case sites, policy makers from the Ministry of Health, and from agencies and professional associations. Data were collected using semi-structured, in-depth interviews to understand uptake and use of Uganda’s maternal and perinatal death surveillance and response (MPDSR) policy and were inductively and deductively analyzed using NPT constructs and subconstructs.
Results We identified six broad themes that may explain the observed variations in the implementation of the MPDSR policy. These include: 1) perception of the implementation of the policy, 2) leadership of the implementation process, 3) structural arrangements and coordination, 4) extent of management support and adequacy of resources, 5) variations in appraisal and reconfiguration efforts and 6) variations in barriers to implementation of the policy.
Conclusion and recommendations The variations in sense making and relational efforts, especially perceptions of the implementation process and leadership capacity, had ripple effects across operational and appraisal efforts. Adopting theoretically informed approaches to assessing the implementation of policy interventions is crucial, especially within resource limited settings.
Competing Interest Statement
The authors have declared no competing interest.
Funding Statement
This study was undertaken with no funding.
Author Declarations
I confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.
Yes
The details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:
Ethics approval for this study was sought from the Health Sciences Research Ethics Board (HSREB, IRB 00000940) Delegated Review of the University of Western Ontario. Additional ethical approval was sought from the School of Medicine Research and Ethics Committee, Makerere University College of Health Sciences (REC REF No. 2018-018), the Uganda National Council for Science and Technology (HS 2393) and the Ugandan Ministry of Health (ADM 130/313/05). Participation in the study was completely voluntary and written informed consent was sought at all times. Study participants were assured of privacy and confidentiality and approved the use of information for improving public health, clinical practices and policy implementation. The manuscript does not include details, images, or videos relating to individual participants.
I confirm that all necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived, and that any patient/participant/sample identifiers included were not known to anyone (e.g., hospital staff, patients or participants themselves) outside the research group so cannot be used to identify individuals.
Yes
I understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).
Yes
I have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines, such as any relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material, if applicable.
Yes
Data Availability
The datasets generated and/or analysed during the current study are not publicly available because it was a qualitative study but are available from the corresponding author on reasonable request.
