BackgroundAs part of a larger study examining the effectiveness of the Maternal Newborn Dashboard, an electronic audit and feedback system to improve maternal-newborn care practices and outcomes, the purpose of this study was to increase our understanding of factors explaining variability in performance after implementation of the Dashboard in Ontario, Canada.MethodsA collective case study. A maximum variation sampling approach was used to invite hospitals reflecting different criteria to participate in a 1-day to 2-day site visit by the research team. The visits included: (1) semistructured interviews and focus groups with healthcare providers, leaders and personnel involved in clinical change processes; (2) observations and document review. Interviews and focus groups were audio-recorded and transcribed verbatim. Qualitative content analysis was used to code and categorise the data.ResultsBetween June and November 2016, we visited 14 maternal-newborn hospitals. Hospitals were grouped into four quadrants based on their key indicator performance and level of engagement with the Dashboard. Findings revealed four overarching themes that contribute to the varying success of sites in achieving practice change on the Dashboard key performance indicators, namely, interdisciplinary collaboration and accountability, application of formal change strategies, team trust and use of evidence and data, as well as alignment with organisational priorities and support.ConclusionThe diversity of facilitators and barriers across the 14 hospitals highlights the need to go beyond a ‘one size fits all’ approach when implementing audit and feedback systems. Future work to identify tools to assess barriers to practice change and to evaluate the effects of cointerventions to optimise audit and feedback systems for clinical practice change is needed.

The aim of this study was to develop and validate an electronic questionnaire, the Electronic Maternal Health Survey (EMat Health Survey), related to women’s knowledge and perceptions of the current gestational weight gain guidelines (GWG), as well as pregnancy-related health behaviours. Constructs addressed within the questionnaire include self-efficacy, locus of control, perceived barriers, and facilitators of physical activity and diet, outcome expectations, social environment and health practices. Content validity was examined using an expert panel (n = 7) and pilot testing items in a small sample (n = 5) of pregnant women and recent mothers (target population). Test re-test reliability was assessed among a sample (n = 71) of the target population. Reliability scores were calculated for all constructs (r and intra-class correlation coefficients (ICC)), those with a score of >0.5 were considered acceptable. The content validity of the questionnaire reflects the degree to which all relevant components of excessive GWG risk in women are included. Strong test-retest reliability was found in the current study, indicating that responses to the questionnaire were reliable in this population. The EMat Health Survey adds to the growing body of literature on maternal health and gestational weight gain by providing the first comprehensive questionnaire that can be self-administered and remotely accessed. The questionnaire can be completed in 15–25 min and collects useful data on various social determinants of health and GWG as well as associated health behaviours. This online tool may assist researchers by providing them with a platform to collect useful information in developing and tailoring interventions to better support women in achieving recommended weight gain targets in pregnancy.

BackgroundA significant proportion of women exceeds or does not meet the Institute of Medicine’s gestational weight gain (GWG) guidelines. Inadequate, excessive GWG or weight loss during pregnancy is associated with an increased risk of negative maternal and fetal outcomes. Among the many determinants of GWG identified in the 2009 Institute of Medicine guidelines, culture was named as one of the few whose influence has not been fully explored. Some cultural beliefs may erroneously promote overeating as “eating for two” and discourage physical activity during pregnancy, but there is lack of empirical evidence on how culture affects GWG. The purpose of this systematic review is to examine the effects of culture on GWG.Methods/designTen electronic databases will be searched to identify studies reporting on the effects of culture on GWG. Grey literature, published conference abstracts, websites of relevant organizations and reference lists of included studies will also be searched. Studies that report on effects of culture, acculturation, ethnicity, race, nationality, ancestry and identity on GWG in adult women will be included. Quality of evidence will be evaluated using the grading of recommendations, assessment, development and evaluations (GRADE) approach to rating evidence. Study selection, data extraction and risk of bias assessment will be conducted by two independent reviewers, with disagreements being resolved by consensus or third party adjudication as needed. Formal meta-analyses will be conducted among included studies that are sufficiently statistically and clinically homogeneous.DiscussionThis review will provide a comprehensive assessment and synthesis of current evidence and will draw attention to potential gaps where future research on the effects of culture on guideline discordant gestational weight gain remains to be conducted.Systematic review registrationPROSPERO CRD42015023399