The development of the WHO Labour Care Guide: an international survey of maternity care providers

Autores
Pingray, María Verónica; Bonetto, Mercedes; Berrueta, Amanda Mabel; Mazzoni, Agustina; Belizán, María; Keil, Netanya; Vogel, Joshua; Althabe, Fernando; Oladapo, Olufemi T.
Año de publicación
2021
Idioma
inglés
Tipo de recurso
artículo
Estado
versión publicada
Descripción
Background: The partograph is the most commonly used labour monitoring tool in the world. However, it has been used incorrectly or inconsistently in many settings. In 2018, a WHO expert group reviewed and revised the design of the partograph in light of emerging evidence, and they developed the first version of the Labour Care Guide (LCG). The objective of this study was to explore opinions of skilled health personnel on the first version of the WHO Labour Care Guide. Methods: Skilled health personnel (including obstetricians, midwives and general practitioners) of any gender from Africa, Asia, Europe and Latin America were identified through a large global research network. Country coordinators from the network invited 5 to 10 mid-level and senior skilled health personnel who had worked in labour wards anytime in the last 5 years. A self-administered, anonymous, structured, online questionnaire including closed and open-ended questions was designed to assess the clarity, relevance, appropriateness of the frequency of recording, and the completeness of the sections and variables on the LCG. Results: A total of 110 participants from 23 countries completed the survey between December 2018 and January 2019. Variables included in the LCG were generally considered clear, relevant and to have been recorded at the appropriate frequency. Most sections of the LCG were considered complete. Participants agreed or strongly agreed with the overall design, structure of the LCG, and the usefulness of reference thresholds to trigger further assessment and actions. They also agreed that LCG could potentially have a positive impact on clinical decision-making and respectful maternity care. Participants disagreed with the value of some variables, including coping, urine, and neonatal status. Conclusions: Future end-users of WHO Labour Care Guide considered the variables to be clear, relevant and appropriate, and, with minor improvements, to have the potential to positively impact clinical decision-making and respectful maternity care.
Fil: Pingray, María Verónica. Instituto de Efectividad Clínica y Sanitaria; Argentina
Fil: Bonetto, Mercedes. Organizacion Mundial de la Salud; Argentina
Fil: Berrueta, Amanda Mabel. Instituto de Efectividad Clínica y Sanitaria; Argentina
Fil: Mazzoni, Agustina. Instituto de Efectividad Clínica y Sanitaria; Argentina
Fil: Belizán, María. Instituto de Efectividad Clínica y Sanitaria; Argentina
Fil: Keil, Netanya. Nyu Abu Dhabi; Emiratos Arabes Unidos
Fil: Vogel, Joshua. Burnet Institute; Australia
Fil: Althabe, Fernando. Organizacion Mundial de la Salud; Argentina. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas. Oficina de Coordinación Administrativa Parque Centenario. Centro de Investigaciones en Epidemiología y Salud Pública. Instituto de Efectividad Clínica y Sanitaria. Centro de Investigaciones en Epidemiología y Salud Pública; Argentina
Fil: Oladapo, Olufemi T.. Organizacion Mundial de la Salud; Argentina
Materia
CHILDBIRTH
INTRAPARTUM CARE
LABOUR
PARTOGRAPH
WHO LABOUR CARE GUIDE
Nivel de accesibilidad
acceso abierto
Condiciones de uso
https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.5/ar/
Repositorio
CONICET Digital (CONICET)
Institución
Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas
OAI Identificador
oai:ri.conicet.gov.ar:11336/175521
Acceder
id CONICETDig_ed56b5c7135bbee25f030247a6295b55
oai_identifier_str oai:ri.conicet.gov.ar:11336/175521
network_acronym_str CONICETDig
repository_id_str 3498
network_name_str CONICET Digital (CONICET)
spelling The development of the WHO Labour Care Guide: an international survey of maternity care providersPingray, María VerónicaBonetto, MercedesBerrueta, Amanda MabelMazzoni, AgustinaBelizán, MaríaKeil, NetanyaVogel, JoshuaAlthabe, FernandoOladapo, Olufemi T.CHILDBIRTHINTRAPARTUM CARELABOURPARTOGRAPHWHO LABOUR CARE GUIDEhttps://purl.org/becyt/ford/3.3https://purl.org/becyt/ford/3Background: The partograph is the most commonly used labour monitoring tool in the world. However, it has been used incorrectly or inconsistently in many settings. In 2018, a WHO expert group reviewed and revised the design of the partograph in light of emerging evidence, and they developed the first version of the Labour Care Guide (LCG). The objective of this study was to explore opinions of skilled health personnel on the first version of the WHO Labour Care Guide. Methods: Skilled health personnel (including obstetricians, midwives and general practitioners) of any gender from Africa, Asia, Europe and Latin America were identified through a large global research network. Country coordinators from the network invited 5 to 10 mid-level and senior skilled health personnel who had worked in labour wards anytime in the last 5 years. A self-administered, anonymous, structured, online questionnaire including closed and open-ended questions was designed to assess the clarity, relevance, appropriateness of the frequency of recording, and the completeness of the sections and variables on the LCG. Results: A total of 110 participants from 23 countries completed the survey between December 2018 and January 2019. Variables included in the LCG were generally considered clear, relevant and to have been recorded at the appropriate frequency. Most sections of the LCG were considered complete. Participants agreed or strongly agreed with the overall design, structure of the LCG, and the usefulness of reference thresholds to trigger further assessment and actions. They also agreed that LCG could potentially have a positive impact on clinical decision-making and respectful maternity care. Participants disagreed with the value of some variables, including coping, urine, and neonatal status. Conclusions: Future end-users of WHO Labour Care Guide considered the variables to be clear, relevant and appropriate, and, with minor improvements, to have the potential to positively impact clinical decision-making and respectful maternity care.Fil: Pingray, María Verónica. Instituto de Efectividad Clínica y Sanitaria; ArgentinaFil: Bonetto, Mercedes. Organizacion Mundial de la Salud; ArgentinaFil: Berrueta, Amanda Mabel. Instituto de Efectividad Clínica y Sanitaria; ArgentinaFil: Mazzoni, Agustina. Instituto de Efectividad Clínica y Sanitaria; ArgentinaFil: Belizán, María. Instituto de Efectividad Clínica y Sanitaria; ArgentinaFil: Keil, Netanya. Nyu Abu Dhabi; Emiratos Arabes UnidosFil: Vogel, Joshua. Burnet Institute; AustraliaFil: Althabe, Fernando. Organizacion Mundial de la Salud; Argentina. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas. Oficina de Coordinación Administrativa Parque Centenario. Centro de Investigaciones en Epidemiología y Salud Pública. Instituto de Efectividad Clínica y Sanitaria. Centro de Investigaciones en Epidemiología y Salud Pública; ArgentinaFil: Oladapo, Olufemi T.. Organizacion Mundial de la Salud; ArgentinaBioMed Central2021-12info:eu-repo/semantics/articleinfo:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersionhttp://purl.org/coar/resource_type/c_6501info:ar-repo/semantics/articuloapplication/pdfapplication/pdfapplication/pdfhttp://hdl.handle.net/11336/175521Pingray, María Verónica; Bonetto, Mercedes; Berrueta, Amanda Mabel; Mazzoni, Agustina; Belizán, María; et al.; The development of the WHO Labour Care Guide: an international survey of maternity care providers; BioMed Central; Reproductive Health; 18; 1; 12-2021; 1-91742-4755CONICET DigitalCONICETenginfo:eu-repo/semantics/altIdentifier/doi/10.1186/s12978-021-01074-2info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccesshttps://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.5/ar/reponame:CONICET Digital (CONICET)instname:Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas2025-09-29T09:47:55Zoai:ri.conicet.gov.ar:11336/175521instacron:CONICETInstitucionalhttp://ri.conicet.gov.ar/Organismo científico-tecnológicoNo correspondehttp://ri.conicet.gov.ar/oai/requestdasensio@conicet.gov.ar; lcarlino@conicet.gov.arArgentinaNo correspondeNo correspondeNo correspondeopendoar:34982025-09-29 09:47:55.748CONICET Digital (CONICET) - Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicasfalse
dc.title.none.fl_str_mv The development of the WHO Labour Care Guide: an international survey of maternity care providers
title The development of the WHO Labour Care Guide: an international survey of maternity care providers
spellingShingle The development of the WHO Labour Care Guide: an international survey of maternity care providers
Pingray, María Verónica
CHILDBIRTH
INTRAPARTUM CARE
LABOUR
PARTOGRAPH
WHO LABOUR CARE GUIDE
title_short The development of the WHO Labour Care Guide: an international survey of maternity care providers
title_full The development of the WHO Labour Care Guide: an international survey of maternity care providers
title_fullStr The development of the WHO Labour Care Guide: an international survey of maternity care providers
title_full_unstemmed The development of the WHO Labour Care Guide: an international survey of maternity care providers
title_sort The development of the WHO Labour Care Guide: an international survey of maternity care providers
dc.creator.none.fl_str_mv Pingray, María Verónica
Bonetto, Mercedes
Berrueta, Amanda Mabel
Mazzoni, Agustina
Belizán, María
Keil, Netanya
Vogel, Joshua
Althabe, Fernando
Oladapo, Olufemi T.
author Pingray, María Verónica
author_facet Pingray, María Verónica
Bonetto, Mercedes
Berrueta, Amanda Mabel
Mazzoni, Agustina
Belizán, María
Keil, Netanya
Vogel, Joshua
Althabe, Fernando
Oladapo, Olufemi T.
author_role author
author2 Bonetto, Mercedes
Berrueta, Amanda Mabel
Mazzoni, Agustina
Belizán, María
Keil, Netanya
Vogel, Joshua
Althabe, Fernando
Oladapo, Olufemi T.
author2_role author
author
author
author
author
author
author
author
dc.subject.none.fl_str_mv CHILDBIRTH
INTRAPARTUM CARE
LABOUR
PARTOGRAPH
WHO LABOUR CARE GUIDE
topic CHILDBIRTH
INTRAPARTUM CARE
LABOUR
PARTOGRAPH
WHO LABOUR CARE GUIDE
purl_subject.fl_str_mv https://purl.org/becyt/ford/3.3
https://purl.org/becyt/ford/3
dc.description.none.fl_txt_mv Background: The partograph is the most commonly used labour monitoring tool in the world. However, it has been used incorrectly or inconsistently in many settings. In 2018, a WHO expert group reviewed and revised the design of the partograph in light of emerging evidence, and they developed the first version of the Labour Care Guide (LCG). The objective of this study was to explore opinions of skilled health personnel on the first version of the WHO Labour Care Guide. Methods: Skilled health personnel (including obstetricians, midwives and general practitioners) of any gender from Africa, Asia, Europe and Latin America were identified through a large global research network. Country coordinators from the network invited 5 to 10 mid-level and senior skilled health personnel who had worked in labour wards anytime in the last 5 years. A self-administered, anonymous, structured, online questionnaire including closed and open-ended questions was designed to assess the clarity, relevance, appropriateness of the frequency of recording, and the completeness of the sections and variables on the LCG. Results: A total of 110 participants from 23 countries completed the survey between December 2018 and January 2019. Variables included in the LCG were generally considered clear, relevant and to have been recorded at the appropriate frequency. Most sections of the LCG were considered complete. Participants agreed or strongly agreed with the overall design, structure of the LCG, and the usefulness of reference thresholds to trigger further assessment and actions. They also agreed that LCG could potentially have a positive impact on clinical decision-making and respectful maternity care. Participants disagreed with the value of some variables, including coping, urine, and neonatal status. Conclusions: Future end-users of WHO Labour Care Guide considered the variables to be clear, relevant and appropriate, and, with minor improvements, to have the potential to positively impact clinical decision-making and respectful maternity care.
Fil: Pingray, María Verónica. Instituto de Efectividad Clínica y Sanitaria; Argentina
Fil: Bonetto, Mercedes. Organizacion Mundial de la Salud; Argentina
Fil: Berrueta, Amanda Mabel. Instituto de Efectividad Clínica y Sanitaria; Argentina
Fil: Mazzoni, Agustina. Instituto de Efectividad Clínica y Sanitaria; Argentina
Fil: Belizán, María. Instituto de Efectividad Clínica y Sanitaria; Argentina
Fil: Keil, Netanya. Nyu Abu Dhabi; Emiratos Arabes Unidos
Fil: Vogel, Joshua. Burnet Institute; Australia
Fil: Althabe, Fernando. Organizacion Mundial de la Salud; Argentina. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas. Oficina de Coordinación Administrativa Parque Centenario. Centro de Investigaciones en Epidemiología y Salud Pública. Instituto de Efectividad Clínica y Sanitaria. Centro de Investigaciones en Epidemiología y Salud Pública; Argentina
Fil: Oladapo, Olufemi T.. Organizacion Mundial de la Salud; Argentina
description Background: The partograph is the most commonly used labour monitoring tool in the world. However, it has been used incorrectly or inconsistently in many settings. In 2018, a WHO expert group reviewed and revised the design of the partograph in light of emerging evidence, and they developed the first version of the Labour Care Guide (LCG). The objective of this study was to explore opinions of skilled health personnel on the first version of the WHO Labour Care Guide. Methods: Skilled health personnel (including obstetricians, midwives and general practitioners) of any gender from Africa, Asia, Europe and Latin America were identified through a large global research network. Country coordinators from the network invited 5 to 10 mid-level and senior skilled health personnel who had worked in labour wards anytime in the last 5 years. A self-administered, anonymous, structured, online questionnaire including closed and open-ended questions was designed to assess the clarity, relevance, appropriateness of the frequency of recording, and the completeness of the sections and variables on the LCG. Results: A total of 110 participants from 23 countries completed the survey between December 2018 and January 2019. Variables included in the LCG were generally considered clear, relevant and to have been recorded at the appropriate frequency. Most sections of the LCG were considered complete. Participants agreed or strongly agreed with the overall design, structure of the LCG, and the usefulness of reference thresholds to trigger further assessment and actions. They also agreed that LCG could potentially have a positive impact on clinical decision-making and respectful maternity care. Participants disagreed with the value of some variables, including coping, urine, and neonatal status. Conclusions: Future end-users of WHO Labour Care Guide considered the variables to be clear, relevant and appropriate, and, with minor improvements, to have the potential to positively impact clinical decision-making and respectful maternity care.
publishDate 2021
dc.date.none.fl_str_mv 2021-12
dc.type.none.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/article
info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion
http://purl.org/coar/resource_type/c_6501
info:ar-repo/semantics/articulo
format article
status_str publishedVersion
dc.identifier.none.fl_str_mv http://hdl.handle.net/11336/175521
Pingray, María Verónica; Bonetto, Mercedes; Berrueta, Amanda Mabel; Mazzoni, Agustina; Belizán, María; et al.; The development of the WHO Labour Care Guide: an international survey of maternity care providers; BioMed Central; Reproductive Health; 18; 1; 12-2021; 1-9
1742-4755
CONICET Digital
CONICET
url http://hdl.handle.net/11336/175521
identifier_str_mv Pingray, María Verónica; Bonetto, Mercedes; Berrueta, Amanda Mabel; Mazzoni, Agustina; Belizán, María; et al.; The development of the WHO Labour Care Guide: an international survey of maternity care providers; BioMed Central; Reproductive Health; 18; 1; 12-2021; 1-9
1742-4755
CONICET Digital
CONICET
dc.language.none.fl_str_mv eng
language eng
dc.relation.none.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/altIdentifier/doi/10.1186/s12978-021-01074-2
dc.rights.none.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess
https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.5/ar/
eu_rights_str_mv openAccess
rights_invalid_str_mv https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.5/ar/
dc.format.none.fl_str_mv application/pdf
application/pdf
application/pdf
dc.publisher.none.fl_str_mv BioMed Central
publisher.none.fl_str_mv BioMed Central
dc.source.none.fl_str_mv reponame:CONICET Digital (CONICET)
instname:Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas
reponame_str CONICET Digital (CONICET)
collection CONICET Digital (CONICET)
instname_str Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas
repository.name.fl_str_mv CONICET Digital (CONICET) - Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas
repository.mail.fl_str_mv dasensio@conicet.gov.ar; lcarlino@conicet.gov.ar
_version_ 1844613491707609088
score 13.070432

Publicaciones similares