Impact evaluation of a digital health platform empowering Kenyan women across the pregnancy-postpartum care continuum: A cluster randomized controlled trial.

IF 9.9 1区 医学 Q1 Medicine PLoS Medicine Pub Date : 2025-02-03 eCollection Date: 2025-02-01 DOI:10.1371/journal.pmed.1004527
Rajet Vatsa, Wei Chang, Sharon Akinyi, Sarah Little, Catherine Gakii, John Mungai, Cynthia Kahumbura, Anneka Wickramanayake, Sathyanath Rajasekharan, Jessica Cohen, Margaret McConnell
{"title":"Impact evaluation of a digital health platform empowering Kenyan women across the pregnancy-postpartum care continuum: A cluster randomized controlled trial.","authors":"Rajet Vatsa, Wei Chang, Sharon Akinyi, Sarah Little, Catherine Gakii, John Mungai, Cynthia Kahumbura, Anneka Wickramanayake, Sathyanath Rajasekharan, Jessica Cohen, Margaret McConnell","doi":"10.1371/journal.pmed.1004527","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Accelerating improvements in maternal and newborn health (MNH) care is a major public health priority in Kenya. While use of formal health care has increased, many pregnant and postpartum women do not receive the recommended number of maternal care visits. Even when they do, visits are often short with many providers not offering important elements of evaluation and counseling, leaving gaps in women's knowledge and preparedness. Digital health tools have been proposed as a complement to care that is provided by maternity care facilities, but there is limited evidence of the impact of digital health tools at scale on women's knowledge, preparedness, and the content of care they receive. We evaluated a digital health platform (PROMPTS (Promoting Mothers in Pregnancy and Postpartum Through SMS)) composed of informational messages, appointment reminders, and a two-way clinical helpdesk, which had enrolled over 750,000 women across Kenya at the time of our study, on 6 domains across the pregnancy-postpartum care continuum.</p><p><strong>Methods and findings: </strong>We conducted an unmasked, 1:1 parallel arm cluster randomized controlled trial in 40 health facilities (clusters) across 8 counties in Kenya. A total of 6,139 pregnant individuals were consented at baseline and followed through pregnancy and postpartum. Individuals recruited from treatment facilities were invited to enroll in the PROMPTS platform, with roughly 85% (1,453/1,700) reporting take-up. Our outcomes were derived from phone surveys conducted with participants at 36 to 42 weeks of gestation and 7 to 8 weeks post-childbirth. Among eligible participants, 3,399/3,678 women completed antenatal follow-up and 5,509/6,128 women completed postpartum follow-up, with response rates of 92% and 90%, respectively. Outcomes were organized into 6 domains: knowledge, birth preparedness, routine care seeking, danger sign care seeking, newborn care, and postpartum care content. We generated standardized summary indices to account for multiple hypothesis testing but also analyzed individual index components. Intention-to-treat analyses were conducted for all outcomes at the individual level, with standard errors clustered by facility. Participants recruited from treatment facilities had a 0.08 standard deviation (SD) (95% CI [0.03, 0.12]; p = 0.002) higher knowledge index, a 0.08 SD (95% CI [0.02, 0.13]; p = 0.018) higher birth preparedness index, a 0.07 SD (95% CI [0.03, 0.11]; p = 0.003) higher routine care seeking index, a 0.09 SD (95% CI [0.07, 0.12]; p < 0.001) higher newborn care index, and a 0.06 SD (95% CI [0.01, 0.12]; p = 0.043) higher postpartum care content index than those recruited from control facilities. No significant effect on the danger sign care seeking index was found (95% CI [-0.01, 0.08]; p = 0.096). A limitation of our study was that outcomes were self-reported, and the study was not powered to detect effects on health outcomes.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Digital health tools indicate promise in addressing shortcomings in pregnant and postpartum women's health care, amidst systems that do not reliably deliver a minimally adequate standard of care. Through providing women with critical information and empowering them to seek recommended care, such tools can improve individuals' preparation for safe childbirth and receipt of more comprehensive postpartum care. Future work is needed to ascertain the impact of at-scale digital platforms like PROMPTS on health outcomes.</p><p><strong>Trial registration: </strong>ClinicalTrials.gov ID: NCT05110521; AEA RCT Registry ID: R-0008449.</p>","PeriodicalId":49008,"journal":{"name":"PLoS Medicine","volume":"22 2","pages":"e1004527"},"PeriodicalIF":9.9000,"publicationDate":"2025-02-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11835334/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"PLoS Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pmed.1004527","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/2/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"Medicine","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Accelerating improvements in maternal and newborn health (MNH) care is a major public health priority in Kenya. While use of formal health care has increased, many pregnant and postpartum women do not receive the recommended number of maternal care visits. Even when they do, visits are often short with many providers not offering important elements of evaluation and counseling, leaving gaps in women's knowledge and preparedness. Digital health tools have been proposed as a complement to care that is provided by maternity care facilities, but there is limited evidence of the impact of digital health tools at scale on women's knowledge, preparedness, and the content of care they receive. We evaluated a digital health platform (PROMPTS (Promoting Mothers in Pregnancy and Postpartum Through SMS)) composed of informational messages, appointment reminders, and a two-way clinical helpdesk, which had enrolled over 750,000 women across Kenya at the time of our study, on 6 domains across the pregnancy-postpartum care continuum.

Methods and findings: We conducted an unmasked, 1:1 parallel arm cluster randomized controlled trial in 40 health facilities (clusters) across 8 counties in Kenya. A total of 6,139 pregnant individuals were consented at baseline and followed through pregnancy and postpartum. Individuals recruited from treatment facilities were invited to enroll in the PROMPTS platform, with roughly 85% (1,453/1,700) reporting take-up. Our outcomes were derived from phone surveys conducted with participants at 36 to 42 weeks of gestation and 7 to 8 weeks post-childbirth. Among eligible participants, 3,399/3,678 women completed antenatal follow-up and 5,509/6,128 women completed postpartum follow-up, with response rates of 92% and 90%, respectively. Outcomes were organized into 6 domains: knowledge, birth preparedness, routine care seeking, danger sign care seeking, newborn care, and postpartum care content. We generated standardized summary indices to account for multiple hypothesis testing but also analyzed individual index components. Intention-to-treat analyses were conducted for all outcomes at the individual level, with standard errors clustered by facility. Participants recruited from treatment facilities had a 0.08 standard deviation (SD) (95% CI [0.03, 0.12]; p = 0.002) higher knowledge index, a 0.08 SD (95% CI [0.02, 0.13]; p = 0.018) higher birth preparedness index, a 0.07 SD (95% CI [0.03, 0.11]; p = 0.003) higher routine care seeking index, a 0.09 SD (95% CI [0.07, 0.12]; p < 0.001) higher newborn care index, and a 0.06 SD (95% CI [0.01, 0.12]; p = 0.043) higher postpartum care content index than those recruited from control facilities. No significant effect on the danger sign care seeking index was found (95% CI [-0.01, 0.08]; p = 0.096). A limitation of our study was that outcomes were self-reported, and the study was not powered to detect effects on health outcomes.

Conclusions: Digital health tools indicate promise in addressing shortcomings in pregnant and postpartum women's health care, amidst systems that do not reliably deliver a minimally adequate standard of care. Through providing women with critical information and empowering them to seek recommended care, such tools can improve individuals' preparation for safe childbirth and receipt of more comprehensive postpartum care. Future work is needed to ascertain the impact of at-scale digital platforms like PROMPTS on health outcomes.

Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov ID: NCT05110521; AEA RCT Registry ID: R-0008449.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
数字健康平台对肯尼亚妇女在妊娠-产后护理连续体中赋权的影响评估:一项集群随机对照试验。
背景:加快改善孕产妇和新生儿保健是肯尼亚的一项主要公共卫生优先事项。虽然使用正规保健的人数有所增加,但许多孕妇和产后妇女没有得到建议的产妇保健次数。即使她们这样做了,就诊时间也往往很短,许多提供者不提供重要的评估和咨询,在妇女的知识和准备方面留下了空白。数字卫生工具已被提议作为对孕产妇保健设施提供的护理的补充,但关于数字卫生工具对妇女的知识、准备和她们接受的护理内容的大规模影响的证据有限。我们评估了一个数字健康平台(提示(通过短信促进怀孕和产后母亲)),该平台由信息信息、预约提醒和双向临床帮助台组成,在我们的研究期间,该平台在怀孕-产后护理连续的6个领域招募了肯尼亚超过75万名妇女。方法和发现:我们在肯尼亚8个县的40个卫生机构(群)中进行了一项公开的1:1平行臂群随机对照试验。共有6139名孕妇在基线时同意,并在怀孕和产后进行了随访。从治疗机构招募的个人被邀请加入提示平台,大约85%(1453 / 1700)报告接受。我们的结果来自于对怀孕36至42周和分娩后7至8周的参与者进行的电话调查。在符合条件的参与者中,3399 / 3678名妇女完成了产前随访,5509 / 6128名妇女完成了产后随访,有效率分别为92%和90%。结果分为6个领域:知识、分娩准备、常规护理寻求、危险标志护理寻求、新生儿护理和产后护理内容。我们生成了标准化的汇总指数来解释多重假设检验,但也分析了单个指数成分。在个体水平上对所有结果进行意向治疗分析,标准误差按设施聚类。从治疗机构招募的参与者的标准差为0.08 (95% CI [0.03, 0.12];p = 0.002)知识指数较高,标准差为0.08 (95% CI [0.02, 0.13];p = 0.018)出生准备指数较高,SD = 0.07 (95% CI [0.03, 0.11];p = 0.003)常规就诊指数较高,SD = 0.09 (95% CI [0.07, 0.12];p < 0.001)新生儿护理指数较高,SD值为0.06 (95% CI [0.01, 0.12];P = 0.043),产后护理内容指数高于对照组。对危险体征求医指数无显著影响(95% CI [-0.01, 0.08];P = 0.096)。我们研究的一个局限性是结果是自我报告的,研究没有能力检测对健康结果的影响。结论:数字卫生工具表明,在不能可靠地提供最低限度适当护理标准的系统中,有望解决孕妇和产后妇女卫生保健的缺点。通过向妇女提供关键信息并使她们能够寻求建议的护理,这些工具可以改善个人对安全分娩的准备,并获得更全面的产后护理。未来的工作需要确定像prompt这样的大规模数字平台对健康结果的影响。试验注册:ClinicalTrials.gov ID: NCT05110521;AEA RCT注册编号:R-0008449。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
PLoS Medicine
PLoS Medicine MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL-
CiteScore
17.60
自引率
0.60%
发文量
227
审稿时长
4-8 weeks
期刊介绍: PLOS Medicine is a prominent platform for discussing and researching global health challenges. The journal covers a wide range of topics, including biomedical, environmental, social, and political factors affecting health. It prioritizes articles that contribute to clinical practice, health policy, or a better understanding of pathophysiology, ultimately aiming to improve health outcomes across different settings. The journal is unwavering in its commitment to uphold the highest ethical standards in medical publishing. This includes actively managing and disclosing any conflicts of interest related to reporting, reviewing, and publishing. PLOS Medicine promotes transparency in the entire review and publication process. The journal also encourages data sharing and encourages the reuse of published work. Additionally, authors retain copyright for their work, and the publication is made accessible through Open Access with no restrictions on availability and dissemination. PLOS Medicine takes measures to avoid conflicts of interest associated with advertising drugs and medical devices or engaging in the exclusive sale of reprints.
期刊最新文献
Interpreting circulating microbiome-related metabolites in coronary heart disease. Colonization amplification despite limited in-hospital transmission: A modeling study. Correction: Quantify unmet medical need across the disease landscape - A large language model-based methodology. Prenatal exposure to per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) and incidence of asthma and wheeze in childhood: A register-based cohort study in Ronneby, Sweden. Spatial omics and AI for clinically actionable cancer biomarkers.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1