Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2017 Nov 21;14(1):153.
doi: 10.1186/s12978-017-0405-3.

Evaluating implementation of the World Health Organization's Strategic Approach to strengthening sexual and reproductive health policies and programs to address unintended pregnancy and unsafe abortion

Affiliations

Evaluating implementation of the World Health Organization's Strategic Approach to strengthening sexual and reproductive health policies and programs to address unintended pregnancy and unsafe abortion

Shusmita Rashid et al. Reprod Health. .

Abstract

Background: We conducted a process evaluation to assess how the World Health Organization's (WHO) Strategic Approach to strengthening sexual and reproductive health policies and programs ("the SA") was used in 15 countries that requested WHO's technical support in addressing unintended pregnancy and unsafe abortion. The SA is a three-stage planning, policy, and program implementation process. We used the social ecological model (SEM) to analyze the contextual factors that influenced SA implementation.

Methods: We used a two-phased sequential approach to data collection and analysis. In Phase A, we conducted a document and literature review and synthesized data thematically. In Phase B, we conducted interviews with stakeholders who used the SA in the countries of interest. We used a qualitative method triangulation technique to analyze and combine data from both phases to understand how the SA was implemented in each country.

Results: Data from 145 documents and 19 interviews described the SA process and activities in each country. All 15 countries completed Stage 1 activities. The activities of Stage 1 determined activities in subsequent stages and varied across countries. Following Stage 1, some countries focused on reforming policies to improve access to sexual and reproductive health (SRH) services whereas others focused on improving provider-level capacity to enhance SRH service quality and improving community-level SRH education. We identified factors across SEM levels that affected SA implementation, including individual- and community-level perceptions of using the SA and the recommendations that emerged from its use, organizational capacity to conduct SA activities, and how well these activities aligned with the existing political climate. Stakeholders perceived SA implementation to be country-driven and systematic in bringing attention to important SRH issues in their countries.

Conclusion: We identified key success factors for influencing the individual, organization, and system change required for implementing the SA. These include sustaining stakeholder engagement for all SA stages, monitoring and reporting on activities, and leveraging activities and outputs from each SA stage to obtain technical and financial support for subsequent stages. Results may be used to optimize ongoing implementation efforts to improve access to and the quality of SRH services.

Keywords: Contextual factors; Implementation; Process evaluation; Sexual reproductive health; Social ecological model; Strategic Approach; Unintended pregnancy; Unsafe abortion.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

Ethics approval and consent to participate

Ethics approval was obtained from the University of Toronto Health Sciences Research Ethics Board (REB #31181), and verbal informed consent was obtained from all participants. Data were de-identified prior to analysis.

Consent for publication

Not applicable.

Competing interests

The authors declare that they have no competing interests.

Publisher’s Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Figures

Fig. 1
Fig. 1
The SA implementation process [8]
Fig. 2
Fig. 2
Overview of data collection and analysis
Fig. 3
Fig. 3
Study flow for literature search
Fig. 4
Fig. 4
Progression through SA stages to date by country

Similar articles

Cited by

References

    1. WHO . Unsafe abortion: global and regional estimates of the incidence of unsafe abortion and associated mortality in 2008. Geneva: WHO; 2011.
    1. Sedgh G, Bearak J, Singh S, Bankole A, Popinchalk A, Ganatra B, et al. Abortion incidence between 1990 and 2014: global, regional, and subregional levels and trends. Lancet. 2016;388(10041):258–267. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(16)30380-4. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. WHO . World Health Organization information sheet in unsafe abortion incidence and mortality global and regional levels in 2008 and trends during 1990–2008. Geneva: WHO; 2012.
    1. Kassebaum NJ, Bertozzi-Villa A, Coggeshall MS, Shackelford KA, Steiner C, Heuton KR, et al. Global, regional, and national levels and causes of maternal mortality during 1990-2013: a systematic analysis for the global burden of disease study 2013. Lancet. 2014;384(9947):980–1004. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(14)60696-6. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Say L, Chou D, Gemmill A, Tunçalp Ö, Moller A-B, Daniels J, et al. Global causes of maternal death: a WHO systematic analysis. Lancet Glob Health. 2014;2(6):e323–ee33. doi: 10.1016/S2214-109X(14)70227-X. - DOI - PubMed

Publication types