ObjectiveTo evaluate the quality of essential care during normal labour and childbirth in maternity facilities in Uttar Pradesh, India.MethodsBetween 26 May and 8 July 2015, we used clinical observations to assess care provision for 275 mother–neonate pairs at 26 hospitals. Data on 42 items of care were collected, summarized into 17 clinical practices and three aggregate scores and then weighted to obtain population-based estimates. We examined unadjusted differences in quality between the public and private facilities. Multilevel linear mixed-effects models were used to adjust for birth attendant, facility and maternal characteristics.FindingsThe quality of care we observed was generally poor in both private and public facilities; the mean percentage of essential clinical care practices completed for each woman was 35.7%. Weighted estimates indicate that unqualified personnel provided care for 73.0% and 27.0% of the mother–neonate pairs in public and private facilities, respectively. Obstetric, neonatal and overall care at birth appeared better in the private facilities than in the public ones. In the adjusted analysis, the score for overall quality of care in private facilities was found to be six percentage points higher than the corresponding score for public facilities.ConclusionIn 2015, the personnel providing labour and childbirth care in maternity facilities were often unqualified and adherence to care protocols was generally poor. Initiatives to measure and improve the quality of care during labour and childbirth need to be developed in the private and public facilities in Uttar Pradesh.

Merck Sharp and Dohme Limited.

Objective To evaluate the quality of essential care during normal labour and childbirth in maternity facilities in Uttar Pradesh, India. Methods Between 26 May and 8 July 2015, we used clinical observations to assess care provision for 275 mother-neonate pairs at 26 hospitals. Data on 42 items of care were collected, summarized into 17 clinical practices and three aggregate scores and then weighted to obtain population-based estimates. We examined unadjusted differences in quality between the public and private facilities. Multilevel linear mixed-effects models were used to adjust for birth attendant, facility and maternal characteristics. Findings The quality of care we observed was generally poor in both private and public facilities; the mean percentage of essential clinical care practices completed for each woman was 35.7%. Weighted estimates indicate that unqualified personnel provided care for 73.0% and 27.0% of the mother-neonate pairs in public and private facilities, respectively. Obstetric, neonatal and overall care at birth appeared better in the private facilities than in the public ones. In the adjusted analysis, the score for overall quality of care in private facilities was found to be six percentage points higher than the corresponding score for public facilities. Conclusion In 2015, the personnel providing labour and childbirth care in maternity facilities were often unqualified and adherence to care protocols was generally poor. Initiatives to measure and improve the quality of care during labour and childbirth need to be developed in the private and public facilities in Uttar Pradesh.

Maternal depression is an important public health concern. We investigated whether a national-scale initiative that provides cash transfers to women giving birth in government health facilities, the Janani Suraksha Yojana (JSY), reduced maternal depression in India's largest state, Uttar Pradesh. Using primary data on 1695 women collected in early 2015, our quasi-experimental design exploited the fact that some women did not receive the JSY cash due to administrative problems in its disbursement - reasons that are unlikely to be correlated with determinants of maternal depression. We found that receipt of the cash was associated with an 8.5% reduction in the continuous measure of maternal depression and a 36% reduction in moderate depression. There was no evidence of an association with measures of emotional well-being, namely happiness and worry. The results suggest that the JSY had a clinically meaningful effect in reducing the burden of maternal depression, possibly by lessening the financial strain of delivery care. They contribute to the evidence that financial incentive schemes may have public health benefits beyond improving uptake of targeted health services.

BackgroundSocial franchising is the fastest growing market-based approach to organising and improving the quality of care in the private sector of low- and middle-income countries, but there is limited evidence on its impact and cost-effectiveness. The “Sky” social franchise model was introduced in the Indian state of Uttar Pradesh in late 2013.Methods/designDifference-in-difference methods will be used to estimate the impact of the social franchise programme on the quality and coverage of health services along the continuum of care for reproductive, maternal and newborn health. Comparison clusters will be selected to be as similar as possible to intervention clusters using nearest neighbour matching methods. Two rounds of data will be collected from a household survey of 3600 women with a birth in the last 2 years and a survey of 450 health providers in the same localities. To capture the full range of effects, 59 study outcomes have been specified and then grouped into conceptually similar domains. Methods to account for multiple inferences will be used based on the pre-specified grouping of outcomes. A process evaluation will seek to understand the scale of the social franchise network, the extent to which various components of the programme are implemented and how impacts are achieved. An economic evaluation will measure the costs of setting up, maintaining and running the social franchise as well as the cost-effectiveness and financial sustainability of the programme.DiscussionThere is a dearth of evidence demonstrating whether market-based approaches such as social franchising can improve care in the private sector. This evaluation will provide rigorous evidence on whether an innovative model of social franchising can contribute to better population health in a low-income setting.Electronic supplementary materialThe online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s13012-015-0269-2) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.