IntroductionDevolution reforms in Indonesia and Kenya have brought extensive changes to governance structures and mechanisms for financing and delivering healthcare. Community health approaches can contribute towards attaining many of devolution’s objectives, including community participation, responsiveness, accountability and improved equity. We set out to examine governance in two countries at different stages in the devolution journey: Indonesia at 15 years postdevolution and Kenya at 3 years.MethodsWe collected qualitative data across multiple levels of the health system in one district in Indonesia and ten counties in Kenya, through 80 interviews and six focus group discussions (FGD) in Indonesia and 269 interviews and 14 FGDs in Kenya. Qualitative data were digitally recorded, transcribed and coded before thematic framework analysis. Common themes between contexts were identified inductively and deductively, and similarities and differences critically analysed during an inter-country analysis workshop.ResultsFollowing devolution both Indonesia and Kenya experienced similar challenges ensuring good governance for health. Devolution reforms transformed power relationships, increasing responsibilities at subnational levels and introducing opportunities for citizen participation. In both contexts, the impact of these mechanisms has been undermined by insufficiently clear guidance; failure to address pre-existing negative contextual norms and practices varied decision-maker values, limited priority-setting capacity and limited genuine community accountability. As a consequence, priorities in both contexts are too often placed on curative rather than preventive health services.ConclusionWe recommend consideration of increased intersectoral actions that address social determinants of health, challenge negative norms and practices and place emphasis on community-based primary health services.

Background: Adverse pregnancy outcomes can be prevented through the early detection and treatment of anaemia, HIV and syphilis during the antenatal period. Rates of testing for anaemia, HIV and syphilis among women attending antenatal services in Indonesia are low, despite its mandate in national guidelines and international policy. Methods: Midwife-held antenatal care records for 2015 from 8 villages in 2 sub-districts within Cianjur district were reviewed, alongside the available sub-district Puskesmas (Community Health Centre) maternity and laboratory records. We conducted four focus group discussions with kaders (community health workers) (n = 16) and midwives (n = 9), and 13 semi-structured interviews with laboratory and counselling, public sector maternity and HIV management and relevant non-governmental organisation staff. Participants were recruited from village, subdistrict, district and national level as relevant to role. Results: We were unable to find a single recorded result of antenatal testing for HIV, syphilis or anaemia in the village (566 women) or Puskesmas records (2816 women) for 2015. Laboratory records did not specifically identify antenatal women. Participants described conducting and reporting testing in a largely ad hoc manner; relying on referral to health facilities based on clinical suspicion or separate non-maternity voluntary counselling and testing programs. Participants recognized significant systematic challenges with key differences between the more acceptable (and reportedly more often implemented) haemoglobin testing and the less acceptable (and barely implemented) HIV and syphilis testing. However, a clear need for leadership and accountability emerged as an important factor for prioritizing antenatal testing and addressing these testing gaps. Conclusions: Practical solutions such as revised registers, availability of point-of-care tests and capacity building of field staff will therefore need to be accompanied by both funding and political will to coordinate, prioritize and be accountable for testing in pregnancy.

BackgroundIndonesia has been shifting from ensuring access to health services towards improving service quality. Accreditation has been used as quality assurance (QA) mechanism, first in hospitals and subsequently in primary health care facilities, including Puskesmas (community health centres). QA provides measures of whether services meet quality targets, but quality improvement (QI) is needed to make change and achieve improvements. QI is a cyclical process with cycles of problem identification, solution testing and observation. We investigated the factors which influenced the process of QI based on experience of maternal health QI teams in three Puskesmas in Cianjur district, West Java province, Indonesia.MethodsQualitative data were collected using 28 in-depth interviews at two points of time: pre- (April 2016) and post- QI intervention (April 2017), involving national, provincial, district and Puskesmas managers; and Puskesmas QI team members. Thematic analysis of transcripts was conducted.ResultsWe found four main factors contributed to the process of QI: 1) leadership, including awareness and attitude of leader(s) towards QI, involvement of leader(s) in the QI process and decision-making in budget allocation for QI; 2) staff enthusiasm and multidisciplinary collaboration; 3) a culture where QI is integrated in existing responsibilities; and 4) the ongoing Puskesmas accreditation process, which increased the value of QI to the organisation.ConclusionMaking QI a success in the decentralised Indonesian system requires action at four levels. At individual level, leadership attributes can create an internal quality environment and drive organisational cultural change. At team level, staff enthusiasm and collaboration can be triggered through engaging and tasking everyone in the QI process and having a shared vision of what quality should look like. At organisational level, QI should be integrated in planned activities, ensuring financial and human resources. Lastly, QI can be encouraged when it is implemented by the wider health system as part of national accreditation programmes.

Maternal health promotion is a defined activity in the community integrated posts (Posyandu) in Indonesia. However, it is often neglected due to limited knowledge and skills of the community health workers (kader). We conducted health promotion training for the kader and village midwives in four villages in Cianjur district. This study describes the use of "most significant change" (MSC) technique to evaluate impact of health promotion to the beneficiaries and community at large. The MSC uses stories as raw data. Through interviews focused on perception of change, stories were collected from four pregnant women, eight kader and three village midwives. A Panel consisting of policy and programme managers and implementers read all the stories. The story by a pregnant woman who routinely attended Posyandu was selected as the story with most significant change. Her story highlighted changes in kader's knowledge and communication of health messages and attitude towards pregnant women. She expressed these changes impacted community awareness about health and to seek help from kader.The MSC technique enabled stakeholders to view raw data and evaluate the impact of health promotion from the beneficiary's perspective. At the same time, recipients of health promotion contributed to the decision process of evaluation through their stories. The different perspectives on the MSC reflected individual's objectives of the health promotion. The application of this technique is limited in maternal health promotion programme in Indonesia, and none have been published in peer reviewed journals.

Background The global emergence of antimicrobial resistance is driven by antibiotic misuse and overuse. However, systematic data in Indonesian hospitals to adequately inform policy are scarce. Objectives To evaluate patterns and quality indicators of antibiotic prescribing in six general hospitals in Jakarta, Indonesia. Methods We conducted a hospital-wide point prevalence survey (PPS) between March and August 2019, using Global-PPS and WHO-PPS protocols. The analysis focused on antibacterials (antibiotics) for systemic use. Results Of 1602 inpatients, 993 (62.0%) received ≥1 antimicrobial. Of 1666 antimicrobial prescriptions, 1273 (76.4%) were antibiotics. Indications comprised community-acquired infections (42.6%), surgical prophylaxis (22.6%), hospital-acquired infections (18.5%), medical prophylaxis (9.6%), unknown (4.6%) and other (2.1%). The most common reasons for antibiotic prescribing were pneumonia (27.7%), skin and soft tissue infections (8.3%), and gastrointestinal prophylaxis (7.9%). The most prescribed antibiotic classes were third-generation cephalosporins (44.3%), fluoroquinolones (13.5%), carbapenems (7.4%), and penicillins with β-lactamase inhibitor (6.8%). According to the WHO AWaRe classification, Watch antibiotics accounted for 67.4%, followed by 28.0% Access and 2.4% Reserve. Hospital antibiotic guidelines were not available for 28.1% of prescriptions, and, where available, guideline compliance was 52.2%. Reason for the antibiotic prescription, stop/review date and planned duration were poorly documented. Culture-guided prescriptions comprised 8.1% of community-acquired infections and 26.8% of hospital-acquired infections. Conclusions Our data indicate a high rate of empirical use of broad-spectrum antibiotics in Indonesian hospitals, coupled with poor documentation and guideline adherence. The findings suggest important areas for antimicrobial stewardship interventions.