Stakeholder analysis for a maternal and newborn health project in Eastern Uganda

详细信息    查看全文

• 作者：Gertrude Namazzi (1) (2)
  Kiwanuka Suzanne N (1)
  Waiswa Peter (1) (2) (4)
  Bua John (1)
  Okui Olico (1)
  Allen Katharine A (3)
  Hyder Adnan A (3)
  Ekirapa Kiracho Elizabeth (1) (2)
  
• 关键词：Stakeholder analysis ; Maternal and newborn health ; Eastern Uganda ; Future health systems
• 刊名：BMC Pregnancy and Childbirth
• 出版年：2013
• 出版时间：December 2013
• 年：2013
• 卷：13
• 期：1
• 全文大小：262KB
• 参考文献：1. Black RE CS, Johnson HL, Lawn JE, Rudan I, Bassani DG, Jha P, Campbell H, Walker CF, Cibulskis R: Global, regional, and national causes of child mortality in 2008: a systematic analysis. / Lancet 2010,375(9730):1969-987. CrossRef
  2. Hogan MC FK, Naghavi M, Ahn SY, Wang M, Makela SM, Lopez AD, Lozano R, Murray CJ: Maternal mortality for 181 countries, 1980-008: a systematic analysis of progress towards millennium development goal 5. / Lancet 2010,375(9726):1609-623. CrossRef
  3. MOH: / Health Sector Strategic & Investment Plan: Promoting People’s Health to Enhance Socio-economic Development. Ministry of Health, Kampala, Uganda; 2010.
  4. UBOS: / Uganda Demographic And Health Survey. Calverton, Maryland, USA: Orc UBOS UAM; 2006.
  5. UBOS: / Uganda Demographic Health Survey, 2011. Calverton, Maryland: Uganda Bureau of Statistics (UBOS), Kampala, Uganda and ICF International Inc; 2011.
  6. Mbonye AK, Asimwe JB, Kabarangira J, Nandad G, Orinda V: Emergency obstetric care as the priority intervention to reduce maternal mortality in Uganda. / Int J Gynecol Obstet 96:220-25.
  7. MOF: / Uganda National Budget 2012/2013. Kampala, Uganda: Ministry of Finance; 2012.
  8. MOF: / Ministry of finance: Millennium Development Goals report for Uganda 2010; Special theme: Accelerating progress towards improving maternal health. Kampala, Uganda: Ministry of finance; 2010.
  9. Muwonge MAAS, Martha S, Mona H, Baale S, Matthias B: / Health Budgeting in Uganda- A Reality Check. Kampala, Uganda: German Foundation for World Population (DSW) in partnership with Reproductive Health Uganda (RHU); 2010.
  10. Orem JN, Mafigiri DK, Marchal B, Ssengooba F, Macq J, Criel B: Research, evidence and policymaking: the perspectives of policy actors on improving uptake of evidence in health policy development and implementation in Uganda. / BMC Publ Health 2012, 12:109. CrossRef
  11. Meyer: / The impact of vouchers on the use and quality of health goods and services in developing countries: a systematic review. London: EPPI-Centre, Social Science Research Unit, Institute of Education, University of London; 2011.
  12. Bellows: The use of vouchers for reproductive health services in developing countries: systematic review. / Trop Med Int Health 2011,16(1):84-6. CrossRef
  13. Hanney SRG-BM, Buxton MJ, Kogan M: The utilisation of health research in policy-making: concepts, examples and methods of assessment. / Health Res Policy Syst 2003,1(1):2. CrossRef
  14. Ekirapa-Kiracho EWP, Rahman M, Makumbi F, Kiwanuka N, Okui O, Rutebemberwa E, Bua J, Mutebi A, Nalwadda G: Increasing access to institutional deliveries using demand and supply side incentives: early results from a quasi-experimental study. / BMC Int Health Hum Rights 2011,11(Suppl 1):S11. CrossRef
  15. Waiswa PaP S: / Annual Report 2011 Improving Newborn Health and Survival in Uganda through a community-based Intervention linked to health facilities (The UNEST-Uganda Newborn Survival Study). Kampala: Makerere University School of Public Health; 2011.
  16. Jamison DT, World Bank: / Disease Control Priorities In Developing Countries. New York: Oxford University Press; 2006.
  17. Syed SB, Hyder AA, Bloom G, Sundaram S, Bhuiya A, Zhenzhong Z, Kanjilal B, Oladepo O, Pariyo G, Peters DH: Exploring evidence-policy linkages in health research plans: a case study from six countries. / Health Res Policy Syst 2008, 6:4. CrossRef
  18. Brugha R, Varvasovsky Z: Stakeholder analysis: a review. / Health Policy Plan 2000,15(3):239-46. CrossRef
  19. Kumar Y, Nabarun RC, Navinx V: / Stakeholder Analysis: The Women’s and Children’s Health Project in India. Bethesda, Maryland: Abt. Associates Inc; 1997.
  20. Bernhart MH: / Strategic management of population programs. The World Bank: Population Policy and Advisory Service, Population and Human Resources Department; 1992.
  21. Hyder SS, Puvanachandra P, Bloom G, Sundaram S, Mahmood S, Iqbal M, Hongwen Z, Ravichandran N, Oladepo O: Stakeholder analysis for health research: case studies from low- and middle-income countries. / Public Health 2010,124(3):159-66. CrossRef
  22. Zsuzsa Varvasovszky RB: How to or not to do a stakeholder analysis. / Health Policy Plan 2000,15(3):338-45. CrossRef
  23. van Teijlingen E, Simkhada B, Porter M, Simkhada P, Pitchforth E, Bhatta P: Qualitative research and its place in health research in Nepal. / Kathmandu Univ Med J 2011,36(4):301-05.
  24. van Teijlingen ER, Pitchforth E: Focus group research in family planning and reproductive health care. / J Fam Plann Reprod Health Care 2006,32(1):30-2. CrossRef
  25. Baral YR, Lyons K, Skinner J, van Teijlingen ER: Determinants of skilled birth attendants for delivery in Nepal. / Kathmandu Univ Med J 2010,8(31):325-32.
  26. Simkhada B: Factors affecting the utilisation of antenatal care in developing countries: a systematic review of the literature. / J Adv Nurs 2008,61(3):244-60. CrossRef
  27. Hyder AA, Bloom G, Leach M, Syed SB, Peters DH: Exploring health systems research and its influence on policy processes in low income countries. / BMC Publ Health 2007, 7:309002E. CrossRef
  28. Forrest Keenan KVTE, Pitchforth E: The analysis of qualitative research data in family planning and reproductive health care. / J Fam Plann Reprod Health Care 2005,31(1):40-3. CrossRef
  29. Graneheim UHLB: Qualitative content analysis in nursing research: concepts, procedures and measures to achieve trustworthiness. / Nurse Educ Today 2004,24(2):105-12. CrossRef
  30. Montgomery JD: / Technology and civic life. Making and implementing development decisions. Cambridge, Mass, London: M.I.T. Press; 1974.
  31. Brinkerhoff DW: / Improving development program performance: guidelines for managers. Boulder, Colo, London: Rienner; 1991.
  32. Uganda Bureau of Statistics (UBOS) MII: / Uganda Demographic and Health Survey 2006. Calverton, Maryland, USA: UBOS and Macro International Inc; 2006.
  33. Waiswa P, Kemigisa M, Kiguli J, Naikoba S, Pariyo GW, Peterson S: Acceptability of evidence-based neonatal care practices in rural Uganda - implications for programming. / BMC Pregnancy Childbirth 2008, 8:21. CrossRef
  34. Ekirapa-Kiracho E, Waiswa P, Rahman M, Makumbi F, Kiwanuka N, Okui O, Rutebemberwa E, Bua J, Mutebi A, Nalwadda G: Increasing access to institutional deliveries using demand and supply side incentives: early results from a quasi-experimental study. / BMC Int Health Hum Rights 2011,11(Suppl 1):S11. CrossRef
  35. Fitzpatrick JAY: Empowering the initiation of a preventive strategy to combat malaria in Papua New Guinea. / Rural Remote Heal 2007,7(online):693.
  36. Choi BC, Pang T, Lin V, Puska P, Sherman G, Goddard M, Ackland MJ, Sainsbury P, Stachenko S, Morrison H: Can scientists and policy makers work together? / J Epidemiol Community Health 2005,59(8):632-37. CrossRef
  37. Brownson RC, Royer C, Ewing R, McBride TD: Researchers and policymakers: travelers in parallel universes. / Am J Prev Med 2006,30(2):164-72. CrossRef
  38. Nuyens Y, Lansang MA: Knowledge translation: linking the past to the future. / Bull World Health Organ 2006,84(8):590. CrossRef
  39. The pre-publication history for this paper can be accessed here:http://www.biomedcentral.com/1471-2393/13/58/prepub
  
• 作者单位：Gertrude Namazzi (1) (2)
  Kiwanuka Suzanne N (1)
  Waiswa Peter (1) (2) (4)
  Bua John (1)
  Okui Olico (1)
  Allen Katharine A (3)
  Hyder Adnan A (3)
  Ekirapa Kiracho Elizabeth (1) (2)
  
  1. Makerere University School of Public Health, Kampala, Uganda
  2. Iganga/Mayuge Demographic Surveillance Site, Iganga/Mayuge, Uganda
  4. Division of Global Health, Karolinska Institutet, Kragujevac, Sweden
  3. Department of International Health, Johns Hopkins University Bloomberg School of Public Health, Baltimore, MD, USA
  

文摘

Background Based on the realization that Uganda is not on track to achieving Millennium Development Goals 4 and 5, Makerere University School of Public Health in collaboration with other partners proposed to conduct two community based maternal/newborn care interventions aimed at increasing access to health facility care through transport vouchers and use of community health workers to promote ideal family care practices. Prior to the implementation, a stakeholder analysis was undertaken to assess and map stakeholders-interests, influence/power and position in relation to the interventions; their views regarding the success and sustainability; and how this research can influence policy formulation in the country. Methods A stakeholder analysis was carried out in March 2011 at national level and in four districts of Eastern Uganda where the proposed interventions would be conducted. At the national level, four key informant interviews were conducted with the ministry of health representative, Member of Parliament, and development partners. District health team members were interviewed and also engaged in a workshop; and at community level, twelve focus group discussions were conducted among women, men and motorcycle transporters. Results This analysis revealed that district and community level stakeholders were high level supporters of the proposed interventions but not drivers. At community level the mothers, their spouses and transporters were of low influence due to the limited funds they possessed. National level and district stakeholders believed that the intervention is costly and cannot be affordably scaled up. They advised the study team to mobilize and sensitize the communities to contribute financially from the start in order to enhance sustainability beyond the study period. Stakeholders believed that the proposed interventions will influence policy through modeling on how to improve the quality of maternal/newborn health services, male involvement, and improved accessibility of services. Conclusion Most of the stakeholders interviewed were supporters of the proposed maternal and newborn care intervention because of the positive benefits of the intervention. The analysis highlighted stakeholder concerns that will be included in the final project design and that could also be useful in countries of similar setting that are planning to set up programmes geared at increasing access to maternal and new born interventions. Key among these concerns was the need to use both human and financial resources that are locally available in the community, to address supply side barriers that influence access to maternal and child healthcare. Research to policy translation, therefore, will require mutual trust, continued dialogue and engagement of the researchers, implementers and policy makers to enable scale up.