Can an integrated intervention package including peer support increase the proportion of health facility births? A cluster randomised controlled trial in Northern Uganda

Simple item page
dc.contributor.authorNankabirwa, Victoria
dc.contributor.authorMukunya, David
dc.contributor.authorNdeezi, Grace
dc.contributor.authorOdongkara, Beatrice
dc.contributor.authorArach, Agnes A
dc.contributor.authorAchora, Vicentina
dc.contributor.authorMugenyi, Levi
dc.contributor.authorSebit, Mohammad Boy
dc.contributor.authorWandabwa, Julius N
dc.contributor.authorWaako, Paul
dc.contributor.authorTylleskär, Thorkild
dc.contributor.authorTumwine, James K
dc.date.accessioned2024-02-14T10:53:09Z
dc.date.available2024-02-14T10:53:09Z
dc.date.issued2024-02
dc.description.abstractAbstract ObjectiveTo assess the effect of an integrated intervention package compared with routine government health services on the frequency of health facility births.SettingThree subcounties of Lira district in Northern Uganda.DesignA cluster randomised controlled trial where a total of 30 clusters were randomised in a ratio of 1:1 to intervention or standard of care.ParticipantsPregnant women at ≥28 weeks of gestation.InterventionsParticipants in the intervention arm received an integrated intervention package of peer support, mobile phone messaging and birthing kits during pregnancy while those in the control arm received routine government health services (‘standard of care’).Primary and secondary outcome measuresThe primary outcome was the proportion of women giving birth at a health facility in the intervention arm compared with the control arm. Secondary outcomes were perinatal and neonatal deaths.ResultsIn 2018–2019, 995 pregnant women were included in 15 intervention clusters and 882 in 15 control clusters. The primary outcome was ascertained for all except one participant who died before childbirth. In the intervention arm, 754/994 participants (76%) gave birth at a health facility compared with 500/882 (57%) in the control arm. Participants in the intervention arm were 35% more likely to give birth at a health facility compared with participants in the control arm, (risk ratio 1.35 (95% CI 1.20 to 1.51)) and (risk difference 0.20 (95% CI 0.13 to 0.27)). Adjusting for baseline differences generated similar results. There was no difference in secondary outcomes (perinatal or neonatal mortality or number of postnatal visits) between arms. Conclusion The intervention was successful in increasing the proportion of facility-based births but did not reduce perinatal or neonatal mortality.Trial registration numberNCT02605369en_US
dc.identifier.citationNankabirwa, Victoria, David Mukunya, Grace Ndeezi, et al. 'Can an Integrated Intervention Package Including Peer Support Increase the Proportion of Health Facility Births? A Cluster Randomised Controlled Trial in Northern Uganda', BMJ Open, vol. 14/no. 2, (2024), pp. e070798-e070798.en_US
dc.identifier.urihttps://nru.uncst.go.ug/handle/123456789/9408
dc.language.isoenen_US
dc.publisherBritish Medical Journal Publishing Groupen_US
dc.subjecte effect of an integrated intervention package; government health services; frequency of health facility births.en_US
dc.titleCan an integrated intervention package including peer support increase the proportion of health facility births? A cluster randomised controlled trial in Northern Ugandaen_US
dc.typeArticleen_US
Files
Original bundle
Now showing 1 - 1 of 1
Thumbnail Image
Name:
e070798.full.pdf
Size:
558.71 KB
Format:
Adobe Portable Document Format
Description:
Download
License bundle
Now showing 1 - 1 of 1
No Thumbnail Available
Name:
license.txt
Size:
1.71 KB
Format:
Item-specific license agreed upon to submission
Description:
Download
Collections
Medical and Health Sciences