Background: Postnatal care is among the major recommended interventions to reduce maternal deaths. To improve the low postnatal care utilization in Ethiopia, the framework developed for this purpose in Kenya was contextualized and adapted for implementation in the Ethiopian context. Objectives: The objectives of this article are to share the process followed to contextualize Chelagat’s framework for improving postnatal care, for the implementation in Ethiopia as well as the finalized contextualized framework. Methods: A quantitative descriptive research design was adapted. A self-administered questionnaire was used to gather data during November 2018 from 422 postnatal care providers and coordinators, using stratified random sampling. The AGREE II was utilized to assess adaptability and applicability and an open-ended question allowed to assess the challenges and opportunities for utilizing the framework. The data were analyzed using SPSS computer software, Version 23. Results: The findings revealed that the framework from Chelagat was adaptable to use for the improvement of postnatal care in the Ethiopian context. The results from the analysis of the data using AGREE II indicated an average domain score of 92%, for contextualization possibility. Conclusion: The framework originally developed by Chelagat was contextualized and refined to be implemented in Ethiopia to improve postnatal care.
A quantitative descriptive cross-sectional study design was employed to assess, adapt, and contextualize the framework developed for the Kenyan context for the possible implementation in Ethiopia. The study was conducted in Oromia regional state, purposively selected as it is geographically large in comparison with other regions and nearly one-third of the Ethiopian population live in the Oromia region (3). The stakeholders (national and provincial reproductive health coordinators as well as all midwives and nurses allocated to midwifery units in all hospitals in Kenya) participating and contributing to the development of Chelagat’s framework, were similar to the stakeholders involved in postnatal care in Ethiopia. Therefore, the postnatal care service providers, namely, midwives, nurses, and health officers at health facilities, as well as the district, regional, and national reproductive health coordinators in the Ethiopian health system assisted in adapting and contextualizing the framework. The postnatal care providers and coordinators working at the 80 health centers, 25 hospitals, the district and regional postnatal care coordinators in the district health departments, as well as the regional health department, formed the population. The identified populations are key to postnatal care in the Ethiopian health system. The total number of participants comprised of 422 participants (294 nurses, 74 midwives, 46 health officers, 6 district postnatal care coordinators, and 2 regional postnatal care coordinators). The study respondents were selected by using stratified simple random sampling as there was a sampling frame prepared by the researcher based on the existing lists of postnatal care providers and coordinators at each health facility or health department. The total sample size was determined, using the single population proportion formula as described by Kothari (29): The assumptions under this formula were as follows: Considering a non-response rate of 10%, the final sample size was 422. The sampling frames were the lists of individuals from which the researcher selected the sample, namely, the lists of postnatal care providers and postnatal care coordinators. A questionnaire was used to collect data from each participant to assess applicability, for the adaptation and contextualization of the framework in the Ethiopian context. Ten trained field workers were purposively selected from university graduate nurses to gather the data. Before commencement of the actual data collection, a pilot study was conducted with 5% (21) of the participants who were outside the study area but who were postnatal care providers and coordinators (30). The AGREE II, a standardized and tested questionnaire (30, 31), was used for data collection. Additional questions, guided by standardized WHO guidelines, were added to the AGREE II to assess baseline information on postnatal care services in Ethiopia as to compare the data, with that available from Kenya. The data from the questionnaires were analyzed with the assistance of a statistician. The Statistical Package for Social Scientists (SPSS) computer program, Version 21 was used to process and analyze the data. Descriptive statistics, using frequencies and percentages for categorical data were used, and the results for this study were presented in text form, in tables, and in pie charts. For guideline or framework adaptability assessment, AGREE is a commonly used instrument. The instrument allows for assessing methodological rigor and transparency in which a guideline or framework is developed. The original AGREE instrument has been refined, which has resulted in the new AGREE II version and a new user’s manual which was published in 2013 (31). AGREE II includes 23 appraisal criteria (items) organized within six domains and two overall assessments as follows: (1) Overall framework quality; (2) Recommendation for use. The six domains are (1) overall aim of the guideline, (2) stakeholder involvement, (3) rigor of development, (4) clarity of presentation, (5) applicability, and (6) editorial independence. Each domain in AGREE II assesses, by means of a Likert scale, a unique dimension of the developed framework quality. The participants were allowed to provide individual opinions on what they believe would improve the quality of the guidelines or framework to be contextualized in the space that was provided additional to the AGREE II tool. Ten data collectors (6 males and 4 females) from a university college of medicine and health sciences were purposively selected for assisting with data collection. They were chosen based on their experience as fieldworkers. They shared with all eligible respondents an information and recruitment letter them and provided a consent form to complete, if volunteering to participate. The data collectors distributed the questionnaires to all consenting participants, requesting them to complete it in private and return the completed questionnaire within 2 days. The data analysis was done, using statistical procedures as well as open coding for the open-ended questions. Quantitative data were analyzed, summarized, and presented in tables and pie charts using frequencies and percentages (32), applying the principles suggested by AGREE II (2013:10). The analysis of the questionnaire, thus, was based on the following six domains indicated in AGREE II: (1) Scope and Purpose; (2) Stakeholder Involvement; (3) Rigor of Development; (4) Clarity of Presentation; (5) Applicability, and (6) Editorial Independence. As recommended in AGREE II, each of the AGREE II items and the two global rating items were rated on a 7-point scale that ranged from 1 to 7 (1–strongly disagree to 7–strongly agree). The AGREE II User’s Manual section was used to rate each domain. Accordingly, the AGREE II was used to calculate the domain scores by summing up all the scores of the individual items in a domain and scaling the total as a percentage of the maximum possible score for that domain calculated as follows: As recommended in AGREE II, the scaled domain for the contextualization possibility of the framework was assessed using the formula (31): An inductive thematic analysis was employed for the narrative data from open-ended questions. Themes and categories were identified after the data were read and coded so that similar ideas were grouped as themes that were underpinned by categories. Ethical approval to conduct the study was obtained from the ethics committee from the custodian university (HSHDC/452/2015). Permission and support to conduct the study and gain access into the field were obtained from the respective administrative offices of Oromia Regional State Health Bureau, each health facility, including health centers, hospitals, district, and regional health departments as well as from each individual respondent who volunteered to participate.
N/A