↓ Skip to main content

Mitigating disrespect and abuse during childbirth in Tanzania: an exploratory study of the effects of two facility-based interventions in a large public hospital

Overview of attention for article published in Reproductive Health, July 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (87th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (96th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
13 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page
wikipedia
3 Wikipedia pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
88 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
367 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Mitigating disrespect and abuse during childbirth in Tanzania: an exploratory study of the effects of two facility-based interventions in a large public hospital
Published in
Reproductive Health, July 2016
DOI 10.1186/s12978-016-0187-z
Pubmed ID
Authors

Hannah L. Ratcliffe, David Sando, Goodluck Willey Lyatuu, Faida Emil, Mary Mwanyika-Sando, Guerino Chalamilla, Ana Langer, Kathleen P. McDonald

Abstract

There is emerging evidence that disrespect and abuse (D&A) during facility-based childbirth is prevalent in countries throughout the world and a barrier to achieving good maternal health outcomes. However, much work remains in the identification of effective interventions to prevent and eliminate D&A during facility-based childbirth. This paper describes an exploratory study conducted in a large referral hospital in Dar es Salaam, Tanzania that sought to measure D&A, introduce a package of interventions to reduce its incidence, and evaluate their effectiveness. After extensive consultation with critical constituencies, two discrete interventions were implemented: (1) Open Birth Days (OBD), a birth preparedness and antenatal care education program, and (2) a workshop for healthcare providers based on the Health Workers for Change curriculum. Each intervention was designed to increase knowledge of patient rights and birth preparedness; increase and improve patient-provider and provider-administrator communication; and improve women's experience and provider attitudes. The effects of the interventions were assessed using a pre-post design and a range of tools: pre-post questionnaires for OBD participants and pre-post questionnaires for workshop participants; structured interviews with healthcare providers and administrators; structured interviews with women who gave birth at the study facility; and direct observations of patient-provider interactions during labor and delivery. Comparisons before and after the interventions showed an increase in patient and provider knowledge of user rights across multiple dimensions, as well as women's knowledge of the labor and delivery process. Women reported feeling better prepared for delivery and provider attitudes towards them improved, with providers reporting higher levels of empathy for the women they serve and better interpersonal relationships. Patients and providers reported improved communication, which direct observations confirmed. Additionally, women reported feeling more empowered and confident during delivery. Provider job satisfaction increased substantially from baseline levels, as did user reports of satisfaction and perceptions of care quality. Collectively, the outcomes of this study indicate that the tested interventions have the potential to be successful in promoting outcomes that are prerequisite to reducing disrespect and abuse. However, a more rigorous evaluation is needed to determine the full impact of these interventions.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 13 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 367 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Netherlands 1 <1%
Sweden 1 <1%
Congo, The Democratic Republic of the 1 <1%
Brazil 1 <1%
Unknown 363 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 74 20%
Researcher 42 11%
Student > Ph. D. Student 34 9%
Student > Doctoral Student 28 8%
Student > Bachelor 19 5%
Other 78 21%
Unknown 92 25%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Nursing and Health Professions 83 23%
Medicine and Dentistry 77 21%
Social Sciences 43 12%
Unspecified 15 4%
Psychology 10 3%
Other 30 8%
Unknown 109 30%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 14. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 29 January 2024.
All research outputs
#2,603,475
of 25,253,876 outputs
Outputs from Reproductive Health
#272
of 1,558 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#46,359
of 372,893 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Reproductive Health
#2
of 28 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,253,876 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 89th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,558 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 12.9. This one has done well, scoring higher than 82% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 372,893 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 87% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 28 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 96% of its contemporaries.