Evaluation of a Cluster-Randomized Controlled Trial of a Package of Community-Based Maternal and Newborn Interventions in Mirzapur, Bangladesh

To evaluate a delivery strategy for newborn interventions in rural Bangladesh.A cluster-randomized controlled trial was conducted in Mirzapur, Bangladesh. Twelve unions were randomized to intervention or comparison arm. All women of reproductive age were eligible to participate. In the intervention arm, community health workers identified pregnant women; made two antenatal home visits to promote birth and newborn care preparedness; made four postnatal home visits to negotiate preventive care practices and to assess newborns for illness; and referred sick neonates to a hospital and facilitated compliance. Primary outcome measures were antenatal and immediate newborn care behaviours, knowledge of danger signs, care seeking for neonatal complications, and neonatal mortality.A total of 4616 and 5241 live births were recorded from 9987 and 11153 participants in the intervention and comparison arm, respectively. High coverage of antenatal (91% visited twice) and postnatal (69% visited on days 0 or 1) home visitations was achieved. Indicators of care practices and knowledge of maternal and neonatal danger signs improved. Adjusted mortality hazard ratio in the intervention arm, compared to the comparison arm, was 1.02 (95% CI: 0.80-1.30) at baseline and 0.87 (95% CI: 0.68-1.12) at endline. Primary causes of death were birth asphyxia (49%) and prematurity (26%). No adverse events associated with interventions were reported.Lack of evidence for mortality impact despite high program coverage and quality assurance of implementation, and improvements in targeted newborn care practices suggests the intervention did not adequately address risk factors for mortality. The level and cause-structure of neonatal mortality in the local population must be considered in developing interventions. Programs must ensure skilled care during childbirth, including management of birth asphyxia and prematurity, and curative postnatal care during the first two days of life, in addition to essential newborn care and infection prevention and management.Clinicaltrials.gov NCT00198627

Measuring Coverage in MNCH:A Prospective Validation Study in Pakistan and Bangladesh on Measuring Correct Treatment of Childhood Pneumonia

Antibiotic treatment for pneumonia as measured by Demographic and Health Surveys (DHS) and Multiple Indicator Cluster Surveys (MICS) is a key indicator for tracking progress in achieving Millennium Development Goal 4. Concerns about the validity of this indicator led us to perform an evaluation in urban and rural settings in Pakistan and Bangladesh.Caregivers of 950 children under 5 y with pneumonia and 980 with "no pneumonia" were identified in urban and rural settings and allocated for DHS/MICS questions 2 or 4 wk later. Study physicians assigned a diagnosis of pneumonia as reference standard; the predictive ability of DHS/MICS questions and additional measurement tools to identify pneumonia versus non-pneumonia cases was evaluated. Results at both sites showed suboptimal discriminative power, with no difference between 2- or 4-wk recall. Individual patterns of sensitivity and specificity varied substantially across study sites (sensitivity 66.9% and 45.5%, and specificity 68.8% and 69.5%, for DHS in Pakistan and Bangladesh, respectively). Prescribed antibiotics for pneumonia were correctly recalled by about two-thirds of caregivers using DHS questions, increasing to 72% and 82% in Pakistan and Bangladesh, respectively, using a drug chart and detailed enquiry.Monitoring antibiotic treatment of pneumonia is essential for national and global programs. Current (DHS/MICS questions) and proposed new (video and pneumonia score) methods of identifying pneumonia based on maternal recall discriminate poorly between pneumonia and children with cough. Furthermore, these methods have a low yield to identify children who have true pneumonia. Reported antibiotic treatment rates among these children are therefore not a valid proxy indicator of pneumonia treatment rates. These results have important implications for program monitoring and suggest that data in its current format from DHS/MICS surveys should not be used for the purpose of monitoring antibiotic treatment rates in children with pneumonia at the present time

Scientific rationale for study design of community-based simplified antibiotic therapy trials in newborns and young infants with clinically diagnosed severe infections or fast breathing in South Asia and sub-Saharan Africa.

Background: Newborns and young infants suffer high rates of infections in South Asia and sub-Saharan Africa. Timely access to appropriate antibiotic therapy is essential for reducing mortality. In an effort to develop community case management guidelines for young infants, 0–59 days old, with clinically diagnosed severe infections, or with fast breathing, 4 trials of simplified antibiotic therapy delivered in primary care clinics (Pakistan, Democratic Republic of Congo, Kenya and Nigeria) or at home (Bangladesh and Nigeria) are being conducted. Methods: This article describes the scientific rationale for these trials, which share major elements of trial design. All the trials are in settings of high neonatal mortality, where hospitalization is not feasible or frequently refused. All use procaine penicillin and gentamicin intramuscular injections for 7 days as reference therapy and compare this to various experimental arms utilizing comparatively simpler combination regimens with fewer injections and oral amoxicillin. Conclusion: The results of these trials will inform World Health Organization policy regarding community case management of young infants with clinical severe infections or with fast breathing

Hospitalization of Pediatric Enteric Fever Cases, Dhaka, Bangladesh, 2017-2019: Incidence and Risk Factors

Background: Enteric fever causes substantial morbidity and mortality in low- and middle-income countries. Here, we analyzed Surveillance for Enteric Fever in Asia Project (SEAP) data to estimate the burden of enteric fever hospitalization among children aged <15 years and identify risk factors for hospitalization in Bangladesh. Methods: SEAP used hospital surveillance paired with a community-based health-care utilization assessment. In SEAP hospital surveillance, blood was obtained for culture from children aged <15 years with ≥3 days of fever. In the hospital catchment area, a health-care utilization survey (HCUS) was conducted to estimate the proportion of febrile children hospitalized at the study hospitals. We analyzed hospital surveillance and HCUS data to estimate the health care-adjusted incidence of enteric fever hospitalization, and conducted univariable and multivariable logistic regressions. Results: From July 2017 through June 2019, 2243 laboratory-confirmed enteric fever cases were detected in 2 study hospitals; 673 (30%) were hospitalized. The health care-adjusted incidence of enteric fever hospitalization among children <15 years old was 303/100 000 children/year (95% confidence interval [CI], 293-313). Salmonella Typhi contributed most to the enteric fever hospitalization incidence (277/100 000 children/year; 95% CI, 267-287). The incidence was highest among children aged 2 to <5 years (552/100 000 children/year; 95% CI, 522-583), followed by those aged <2 years (316/100 000 children/year; 95% CI, 288-344). Factors independently associated with enteric fever hospitalization included fever duration, diarrhea, vomiting, abdominal pain, and leukocytopenia. Conclusions: We estimated a high burden of hospitalization due to enteric fever among children aged <5 years in Bangladesh. The introduction of a typhoid conjugate vaccine would protect children from typhoid and avert typhoid hospitalizations

Safety and efficacy of alternative antibiotic regimens compared with 7 day injectable procaine benzylpenicillin and gentamicin for outpatient treatment of neonates and young infants with clinical signs of severe infection when referral is not possible: a randomised, open-label, equivalence trial

Background: Severe infections remain one of the main causes of neonatal deaths worldwide. Possible severe infection is diagnosed in young infants (aged 0–59 days) according to the presence of one or more clinical signs. The recommended treatment is hospital admission with 7–10 days of injectable antibiotic therapy. In low-income and middle-income countries, barriers to hospital care lead to delayed, inadequate, or no treatment for many young infants. We aimed to identify effective alternative antibiotic regimens to expand treatment options for situations where hospital admission is not possible. Methods: We did this randomised, open-label, equivalence trial in four urban hospitals and one rural field site in Bangladesh to determine whether two alternative antibiotic regimens with reduced numbers of injectable antibiotics combined with oral antibiotics had similar efficacy and safety to the standard regimen, which was also used as outpatient treatment. We randomly assigned infants who showed at least one clinical sign of severe, but not critical, infection (except fast breathing alone), whose parents refused hospital admission, to one of the three treatment regimens. We stratified randomisation by study site and age (<7 days or 7–59 days) using computer-generated randomisation sequences. The standard treatment was intramuscular procaine benzylpenicillin and gentamicin once per day for 7 days (group A). The alternative regimens were intramuscular gentamicin once per day and oral amoxicillin twice per day for 7 days (group B) or intramuscular procaine benzylpenicillin and gentamicin once per day for 2 days, then oral amoxicillin twice per day for 5 days (group C). The primary outcome was treatment failure within 7 days after enrolment. Assessors of treatment failure were masked to treatment allocation. Primary analysis was per protocol. We used a prespecified similarity margin of 5% to assess equivalence between regimens. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00844337. Findings: Between July 1, 2009, and June 30, 2013, we recruited 2490 young infants into the trial. We assigned 830 infants to group A, 831 infants to group B, and 829 infants to group C. 2367 (95%) infants fulfilled per-protocol criteria. 78 (10%) of 795 per-protocol infants had treatment failure in group A compared with 65 (8%) of 782 infants in group B (risk difference −1·5%, 95% CI −4·3 to 1·3) and 64 (8%) of 790 infants in group C (−1·7%, −4·5 to 1·1). In group A, 14 (2%) infants died before day 15, compared with 12 (2%) infants in group B and 12 (2%) infants in group C. Non-fatal relapse rates were similar in all three groups (12 [2%] infants in group A vs 13 [2%] infants in group B and 10 [1%] infants in group C). Interpretation: Our results suggest that the two alternative antibiotic regimens for outpatient treatment of clinical signs of severe infection in young infants whose parents refused hospital admission are as efficacious as the standard regimen. This finding could increase treatment options in resource-poor settings when referral care is not available or acceptable. Funding: USAID, WHO, Save the Children-US, and Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation

Baseline characteristics of the study children.

<p>Data are given as number (percent) unless otherwise indicated.</p>a<p>There was only one child in the 0–2 age group at the Bangladesh rural site, hence a standard deviation value could not be calculated.</p><p>SD, standard deviation.</p

Discriminative power of DHS/MICS questions about suspected pneumonia and of video for identifying childhood pneumonia (based on 2-wk and 4-wk recall).

<p>Discriminative power of DHS/MICS questions about suspected pneumonia and of video for identifying childhood pneumonia (based on 2-wk and 4-wk recall).</p

Bangladesh urban site—flowchart of selection of pneumonia and no-pneumonia cases in Dhaka Shishu Hospital, Bangladesh.

<p>Bangladesh urban site—flowchart of selection of pneumonia and no-pneumonia cases in Dhaka Shishu Hospital, Bangladesh.</p

Sensitivity and specificity of different tools (individually and in combination).

<p>Data are given as percent (95% CI). Results for both recall periods combined.</p>a<p>These variables from the pneumonia score were selected for this analysis because they had the strongest association with pneumonia in screening univariate analyses.</p><p>LCI, lower chest indrawing.</p

Validity of composite pneumonia score.

<p>Validity of composite pneumonia score.</p