Search

Aim: To describe the development and testing of a monitoring model with quantitative indicators or progress markers that could measure the progress of individual hospitals in the implementation of kangaroo mother care (KMC)., Methods: Three qualitative data sets in the larger research programme on the implementation of KMC of the MRC Research Unit for Maternal and Infant Health Care Strategies in South Africa were used to develop a progress-monitoring model and an accompanying instrument., Results: The model was conceptualized around three phases (pre-implementation, implementation and institutionalization) and six constructs depicting progress (awareness, adopting the concept, mobilization of resources, evidence of practice, evidence of routine and integration, sustainable practice). For each construct, indicators were developed for which data could be collected by means of the monitoring instrument used in a walk-through visit to a hospital. The instrument has been tested in 65 hospitals., Conclusion: The progress-monitoring model enables the quantification of individual hospitals' progress in the process of implementing KMC and an objective measurement of the effectiveness of different outreach strategies. The model also has potential to be adapted for measuring progress in other innovative healthcare interventions on a large scale.

Aim: To test whether a well-designed educational package on the implementation of kangaroo mother care (KMC) used on its own can be as effective in implementing KMC in a healthcare facility as the combination of a visiting facilitator used in conjunction with the package., Setting: Thirty-four hospitals in KwaZulu-Natal Province, South Africa., Method: The hospitals were paired with respect to their geographical location and annual number of births at the facility. One hospital in each pair was randomly allocated to receive either the implementation package alone (group A) or the implementation package and visits from a facilitator (group B). Hospitals in group B received three facilitation visits. All hospitals were evaluated by a site visit 8 mo after launching the process and were scored by means of a progress-monitoring tool., Outcomes: Successful implementation was regarded as demonstrating evidence of practice (score>10) during the site visit., Results: Group B scored significantly better than group A (p<0.05). All 17 hospitals in group B demonstrated evidence of practice, with the median score of the group being 15.44 (range 10.29-22.94). Twelve of the hospitals in group A demonstrated evidence of practice and the median score was 11.33 (range 1.08-21.13)., Conclusion: Successful implementation was achieved in most of the hospitals irrespective of the strategy used. However, facilitation with an implementation package was clearly superior to using a package alone. Some sites do not need facilitation for successful implementation.