BackgroundWHO developed a list of standards for improving maternal and newborn hospital care. However, there is little experience on their use, and no precise guidance on their implementation. This study aimed at documenting the use of the WHO standards for improving the quality of maternal and neonatal care (QMNC) in a tertiary hospital, Northeast Italy.MethodsThe study was conducted between May 2016 and May 2018, in three phases: phase I—sensitisation and training of health professionals; phase II—data collection on the WHO standards through a survey among service users and providers; phase III—based on the findings of phase II, development of recommendations for improving the QMNC.ResultsOverall, 101 health professionals were successfully trained. 1050 mothers and 105 hospital staff participated in the survey. Key indicators of QMNC (and related prevalence) from the mothers survey included: caesarean section (23.1%); episiotomy (18.3%); restrictions to free movements during labour (46.5%), lithotomy position for staff choice (69.3%); skin to skin (80.8%); early breast feeding (67.2%); information on newborn danger signs (47.2%); high satisfaction with QMNC (68.8%). Only 1.2% and 0.7% of women respectively reported discrimination or abuse. Key indicators (and prevalence) reported from staff included: availability of clinical protocols (37%); regular training (14%); health information system used for quality improvement (16.3%); training on effective communication (9.7%) and on emotional support (19.6%); protocols to prevent mistreatment and abuse (6.9%). On several indicators, the opinions of mothers on QMNC was better than those of staff. Overall, 55 quality improvement recommendations were agreed.ConclusionsInformation on the WHO standards can be collected from both services users and providers and can be proactively used for planning improvements on QMNC.

ObjectivesA comprehensive WHO standards-based tool to measure women’s perceived quality of maternal and newborn care (QMNC) in health facilities is needed to allow for comparisons of data across settings and over time. This paper describes the development of such a tool, and its validation in Italy.DesignA multiphase, mixed-methods study involving qualitative and quantitative research methods.SettingNine health facilities in Italy.MethodsThe questionnaire was developed in six phases: (1) Defining the scope, characteristics and a potential list of measures for the tool; (2) initial content and construct validation; (3) first field testing to assess acceptability and perceived utility for end-users (1244 women, 35 decision makers) and further explore construct validity; (4) content optimisation and score development; (5) assessment of face validity, intrarater reliability and internal consistency and (6) second field testing in nine maternity hospitals (4295 women, 78 decision-makers).ResultsThe final version of the tool included 116 questions accounting for 99 out of the 350 of the extended lists of WHO Quality Measures. Observed face validity was very good, with 100% agreement for 101 (87%) questions and Kappa exceeding 0.60 for remaining ones. Reliability was good, with either high agreement or Kappa exceeding 0.60 for all items. Cronbach alpha values ranged from 0.84 to 0.88, indicating very good internal consistency. Acceptability across seven hospitals was good (mean response rate: 57.4%, 95% CI 44.4% to 70.5%). The questionnaire proved to be useful, driving the development of actions plan to improve the QMNC in each facility.ConclusionsStudy findings suggest that the tool has good content, construct, face validity, intrarater reliability and internal consistency, while being acceptable and useful. Therefore, it could be used in health facilities in Italy and similar context. More research should investigate how effectively use the tool in different countries for improving the QMNC.

Background: A recent systematic review identified very few studies on women's views on how to improve the quality of maternal and newborn care (QMNC). This study aimed at exploring the suggestions provided by women, after hospital delivery in Italy, on how to improve the QMNC. Methods: A questionnaire, containing open questions to capture suggestions on how to improve QMNC, was used to collect suggestions of mothers who gave birth a tertiary care referral hospital in Northeast Italy, between December 2016 and September 2018. Two authors independently used thematic analysis to analyse women's comments, using the WHO Standards for improving the QMNC as framework for the analysis. Results: Overall 392 mothers provided a total of 966 comments on how to improve the QMNC. Overall 45 (11.5%) women made suggestions pertinent to "provision of care", 222 (56.6%) to the "experience of care", 217 (55.4%) to "physical or to human resources". The top five suggestions were: 1) increase presence of a companion during the whole hospitalization (28.3% of women); 2) improve bathrooms and showers (18.4%); 3) improve effective communication from staff (14.0%); 4) improve staff professionalism, empathy, and kindness (13.5%); 5) increase support and information on how to provide care to the newborn (11.2%). Overall, 158 (16.4%) suggestions could not be classified in any WHO Standards, and among these most (72.1%) were related to physical structures, such as: decrease the number of patients per room; create areas for visitors; avoid case mixing in the same room; reduce rooming-in/ better support the mother. Overall 62 (15.8%) women expressed appreciations. Conclusions: Collecting the women's views on how to improve the QMNC after hospital delivery highlighted critical inputs on aspects of care that should be improved in the opinion of service-users. More investments should be made for establishing routine systems for monitoring patients experience of care. Data collected should be used to improve QMNC. WHO Standards may be further optimized by adding items emerging as relevant for women in high-income countries.

ObjectivesThis study aimed to explore the association between maternal satisfaction and other indicators of quality of care (QoC) at childbirth, as defined by WHO standards.DesignCross-sectional study.SettingReferral hospital in Northeast Italy.Participants1244 consecutive mothers giving birth in the hospital participated in a survey.Data collection and analysisUnivariate analyses were performed to evaluate the association between maternal satisfaction and 61 variables, including measures of ‘provision of care’, ‘experience of care’, ‘availability of resources’ and other maternal characteristics. Exploratory factor analysis was performed to create groups of correlated variables, which were used in multivariate analysis.ResultsOverall, 509 (40.9%) of women were >35 years of age, about half (52.7%) were highly educated, most (95.2%) were married/living with partner and employed (79.3%) and about half (52.9%) were primiparous. Overall, 189 (15.2%) were not born in Italy and 111 (8.9%) did not have Italian citizenship. Most women (84.2%) were highly satisfied (score ≥7/10) with the care received. Among the 61 variables explored, 46 (75.4%) were significantly associated with women’s satisfaction, 33 with higher satisfaction and 13 with lower satisfaction. Multivariate analysis largely confirmed univariate findings, with six out of eight groups of correlated variables being statistically significantly associated with women’s satisfaction. Factors most strongly associated with women’s satisfaction were ‘effective communication, involvement, listening to women’s needs, respectful and timely care’ (OR 16.84, 95% CI 9.90 to 28.61, p<0.001) and ‘physical structure’ (OR 6.51, 95% CI 4.08 to 10.40, p<0.001). Additionally, ‘victim of abuse, discrimination, aggressiveness’ was inversely associated with the wish to return to the facility or to recommend it to a friend (OR 0.35, 95% CI 0.17 to 0.70, p<0.003).ConclusionThis study suggested that many variables are strongly associated with women’s satisfaction with care during childbirth and support the use of multiple measures to monitor the QoC at childbirth.

Purpose -The academic libraries of the University of Bologna situated in Cesena, Forlì, Ravenna and Rimini carried out two surveys about users' satisfaction, in order to improve services. This paper aims to present the results of these surveys. Design/methodology/approach -Two surveys were carried out: in 2007 and in 2010. The second one aimed to verify whether the actions adopted following the 2007 questionnaire had been appreciated. The 2007 survey adopted the interviewer-assisted administration technique, the 2010 was online. Findings -The 2010 questionnaire gave information about users' expectations and actions to be taken: the number of students unaware of advanced services is high. Librarians will work to broaden the use of them.Research limitations/implications -The online questionnaire was adopted because in 2007 many professors could not come to the library during the two-weeks survey. The result was that a higher number of professors answered the questionnaire, but fewer students. That was probably due to the fact that most students do not use the institutional e-address. The authors aim to move to a double questionnaire giving in 2013: interviewer-assisted administration and online. Practical implications -The number of students unaware of advanced services is high; librarians need to work to broaden the use of them. Social implications -The survey was an opportunity to focus on the importance of the collaboration between faculty and librarians. The best results are achieved by working together: they share the same mission. If they join their different competencies, they can be integrated. Originality/value -The paper has a double approach: quantitative and qualitative. Moreover, during the same week of the survey a focus group is carried out, to focus on the critical areas of the questionnaire and offer support for actions.