Search

This article examines FIMR in relationship to two other maternal and child health mortality reviews-child fatality review (CFR) and maternal mortality review (MMR), and explores how their approaches to reviewing deaths can complement one another. Identifying opportunities for collaboration among these case review methodologies may lead to greater efficiencies at the local and state levels and strengthen the case review approach as a public health tool for improving maternal and child health outcomes. To enable comparative analysis, a table was constructed that identifies the purpose, structure, and process features of each case review approach. This was followed by an examination of two possible ways to improve maternal and child mortality review processes in states: 1) better coordination; and 2) improving each individual process through adapting and adopting promising practices from the others. A discussion is also provided of the state Title V role in facilitating both the coordination of reviews and the process of sharing best practices. Given the similarities that exist among the three MCH mortality reviews, it is important to view each review as one component of a larger system of maternal and child health death reviews. Implementing widely the recommendations generated by these reviews may increase the likelihood of improvements in services and systems on behalf of women and children. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: To motivate prenatal care staff in public and private settings to universally screen for risk of alcohol and drug use and to conduct a brief intervention with follow-up referral when appropriate during a routine office visit. Methods: The ASAP Project methods were engagement of site staff; staff training; self-administered questionnaires embedded with a relational and broad catch screening tool; a brief intervention protocol; unique clinical decision tree/protocols for each site; identification of treatment and referral resources; and ongoing technical assistance and consultation. Sites were located in four regions of the state and included four community health centers, a network of multi-specialty private practices and a teaching hospital. Results: Across 16 sites, 118 prenatal staff were trained on use of the screening tool and 175 staff on the brief intervention. The ASAP Project resulted in 95% of pregnant women being screened for alcohol use and 77% of those screening positive for at least one risk factor receiving a brief intervention during a routine office visit. Conclusions: Screening and brief interventions for alcohol use can be delivered effectively within a routine prenatal care visit by prenatal staff by utilizing and building on existing office systems with practice staff, screening for any use not only at risk use, providing training with skills building sessions and information delivered by physicians, offering easy-to-access community treatment resources, and providing ongoing technical assistance. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]