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
Review
. 2016 May 26:7:97-108.
doi: 10.2147/OAJC.S101281. eCollection 2016.

Measuring and monitoring quality of care in family planning: are we ignoring negative experiences?

Shannon Harris  1 , Laura Reichenbach  2 , Karen Hardee  2
Affiliations
Review

Measuring and monitoring quality of care in family planning: are we ignoring negative experiences?

Shannon Harris et al. Open Access J Contracept. .

Abstract

Despite decades of emphasis on quality of care, qualitative research continues to describe incidents of poor quality client-provider interactions in family planning provision. Using an emerging framework on disrespect and abuse (D and A) in maternal health services, we reviewed the global published literature for quantitative tools that could be used to measure the prevalence of negative client experiences in family planning programs. The search returned over 7,000 articles, but only 12 quantitative tools included measures related to four types of D and A (non-confidential care, non-dignified care, non-consented care, or discrimination). We mapped individual measurement items to D and A constructs from the maternal health field to identify measurement gaps for family planning. We found significant gaps; current tools are not adequate for determining the prevalence or impact of negative client experiences in family planning programs. Programs need to invest in tools that describe all aspects of client experiences, including negative experiences, to increase accountability and maximize the impact of current investments in family planning programs.

Keywords: client–provider interactions; disrespect and abuse; family planning programs; quality of care.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

Disclosure The authors report no conflicts of interest in this work.

References

    1. Bruce J. The fundamental elements of Quality of Care: a simple framework. Stud Fam Plann. 1990;21(2):61–91. - PubMed
    1. Jain AK. Fertility reduction and the quality of family planning services. Stud Fam Plann. 1989;20(1):1–16. - PubMed
    1. Simmons R, Phillips JF. The proximate operational determinants of fertility regulation behaviour. In: Phillips JF, Ross JA, editors. Family Planning Programs and Fertility. New York: Oxford University Press; 1992. pp. 181–201.
    1. Evaluation MEASURE. Quick Investigation of Quality (QIQ). A user’s guide for monitoring quality of care in family planning. Carolina Population Center: University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill; 2001. (MEASURE Evaluation Manual Series, No. 2. MEASURE Evaluation).
    1. Blanc AK, Curtis SL, Croft TN. Monitoring contraceptive continuation: links to fertility outcomes and quality of care. Stud Fam Plann. 2002;33(2):127–140. - PubMed

LinkOut - more resources