Evidence from facility level inputs to improve quality of care for maternal and newborn health: interventions and findings

Most of the maternal and newborn deaths occur at birth or within 24 hours of birth. Therefore, essential lifesaving interventions need to be delivered at basic or comprehensive emergency obstetric care facilities. Facilities provide complex interventions including advice on referrals, post discharge care, long-term management of chronic conditions along with staff training, managerial and administrative support to other facilities. This paper reviews the effectiveness of facility level inputs for improving maternal and newborn health outcomes. We considered all available systematic reviews published before May 2013 on the pre-defined facility level interventions and included 32 systematic reviews. Findings suggest that additional social support during pregnancy and labour significantly decreased the risk of antenatal hospital admission, intrapartum analgesia, dissatisfaction, labour duration, cesarean delivery and instrumental vaginal birth. However, it did not have any impact on pregnancy outcomes. Continued midwifery care from early pregnancy to postpartum period was associated with reduced medical procedures during labour and shorter length of stay. Facility based stress training and management interventions to maintain well performing and motivated workforce, significantly reduced job stress and improved job satisfaction while the interventions tailored to address identified barriers to change improved the desired practice. We found limited and inconclusive evidence for the impacts of physical environment, exit interviews and organizational culture modifications. At the facility level, specialized midwifery teams and social support during pregnancy and labour have demonstrated conclusive benefits in improving maternal newborn health outcomes. However, the generalizability of these findings is limited to high income countries. Future programs in resource limited settings should utilize these findings to implement relevant interventions tailored to their needs

Stress, job satisfaction and work hours in medical and surgical residency programmes in private sector teaching hospitals of Karachi, Pakistan

Objective: To assess stress levels, job satisfaction and working hours of the residents in Medicine and Surgery and to explore a correlation among the three factors.Methods: The questionnaire-based. Cross-sectional study was conducted in 2011 at two tertiary level teaching hospitals in Karachi, Pakistan (Ziauddin University Hospital and Aga Khan University Hospital, Karachi, Pakistan). The study population comprised 176 residents, General Health Questionnaire-12 was used to assess the mental health of the residents and a standardised Job Satisfaction Survey tool was used to assess their work satisfaction.Results: A total of 176 residents participated in the study; 115 (65%) from Medicine, and 61 (35%) from surgery. Of the total residents, 99 (56.3%) were under stress, and there was no significant difference in stress between Medicine and Surgery residents. Besides, 133 (75.6%) residents reported to be satisfied with their jobs. There was a statistically significant difference in job satisfaction between Medicine and Surgery residents (p \u3c 0.001). Mean number of working hours per week reported by Medicine and Surgery residents were 74.82 +/- 15.95 and 92.07 +/- 15.91 respectively (p \u3c 0.001). A positive correlation of mean working hours with both stress (p = 0.009) and job satisfaction (p = 0.029) was found.CONCLUSIONS: Medicine and Surgery residents tend to differ on mean working hours and job satisfaction. The greater mean working hours of the residents could be a possible reason for increased stress and decreased job satisfaction among the residents

Impact of service provision platforms on maternal and newborn health in conflict areas and their acceptability in Pakistan: a systematic review

Various models and strategies have been implemented over the years in different parts of the world to improve maternal and newborn health (MNH) in conflict affected areas. These strategies are based on specific needs and acceptability of local communities. This paper has undertaken a systematic review of global and local (Pakistan) information from conflict areas on platforms of health service provision in the last 10 years and information on acceptability from local stakeholders on effective models of service delivery; and drafted key recommendations for improving coverage of health services in conflict affected areas. The literature search revealed ten studies that described MNH service delivery platforms. The results from the systematic review showed that with utilisation of community outreach services, the greatest impacts were observed in skilled birth attendance and antenatal consultation rates. Facility level services, on the other hand, showed that labour room services for an internally displaced population (IDP) improved antenatal care coverage, contraceptive prevalence rate and maternal mortality. Consultative meetings and discussions conducted in Quetta and Peshawar (capitals of conflict affected provinces) with relevant stakeholders revealed that no systematic models of MNH service delivery, especially tailored for conflict areas, are available. During conflict, even previously available services and infrastructure suffered due to various barriers specific to times of conflict and unrest. A number of barriers that hinder MNH services were discussed. Suggestions for improving MNH services in conflict areas were also laid down by participants. The review identified some important steps that can be undertaken to mitigate the effects of conflict on MNH services, which include: improve provision and access to infrastructure and equipment; development and training of healthcare providers; and advocacy at different levels for free access to healthcare services and for the introduction of the programme model in existing healthcare system. The obligation is enormous, however, for a sustainable programme, it is important to work closely with both the IDP and host community, and collaborating with the government and non-government organisations

Systematic review of zinc fortification trials

Zinc is one of the essential trace elements required by the human body as it is present in more than a hundred specific enzymes and serves as an important structural ion in transcription factors. Around one third of the world population lives in countries with a high prevalence of zinc deficiency. Food fortification with zinc seems to be an attractive public health strategy and a number of programs have been initiated, especially in developing countries. We conducted a systematic review to assess the efficacy of zinc fortification. A total of 11 studies with 771 participants were included in our analysis. Zinc fortification was associated with significant improvements in plasma zinc concentrations [standard mean difference (SMD) 1.28, 95% CI 0.56, 2.01] which is a functional indicator of zinc status. Significant improvement was observed for height velocity (SMD 0.52, 95% CI 0.01, 1.04); however, this finding was weak and based on a restricted analysis. Further subgroup analysis showed significant improvement in height velocity among very-low-birth-weight infants (SMD 0.70, 95% CI 0.02, 1.37), while for healthy newborns, the impact was insignificant. Zinc fortification had insignificant impacts on serum alkaline levels, serum copper levels, hemoglobin and weight gain. Although the findings highlight that zinc fortification is associated with an increased serum concentration of the micronutrient, overall evidence of the effectiveness of this approach is limited. Data on pregnant and lactating women is scarce. Large-scale fortification programs with robust impact assessment should be initiated to cover larger populations in all age groups. Mass fortification of zinc may be a cost-effective strategy to overcome zinc deficiency

Antibiotic therapy versus no antibiotic therapy for children aged two to 59 months with WHO-defined non-severe pneumonia and wheeze

Background: Worldwide, pneumonia is the leading cause of death among children under five years of age and accounts for approximately two million deaths annually. The World Health Organization (WHO) has developed case management guidelines based on simple clinical signs to help clinicians decide on the appropriate pneumonia treatment. Children and infants who exhibit fast breathing (50 breaths per minute or more in infants two months to 12 months of age and 40 or more in children 12 months to five years of age) and cough are presumed to have non-severe pneumonia and the WHO recommends antibiotics. Implementation of these guidelines to identify and manage pneumonia at the community level has been shown to reduce acute respiratory infection (ARI)-related mortality by 36%, although apprehension exists regarding these results due to the questionable quality of evidence. As WHO guidelines do not make a distinction between viral and bacterial pneumonia, these children continue to receive antibiotics because of the concern that it may not be safe to do otherwise. Therefore, it is essential to explore the role of antibiotics in children with WHO-defined non-severe pneumonia and wheeze and to develop effective guidelines for initial antibiotic treatment.Objectives: To evaluate the efficacy of antibiotic therapy versus no antibiotic therapy for children aged two to 59 months with WHO-defined non-severe pneumonia and wheeze.SEARCH Methods: We searched CENTRAL (2014, Issue 1), MEDLINE (1946 to March week 3, 2014), EMBASE (January 2010 to March 2014), CINAHL (1981 to March 2014), LILACS (1982 to March 2014), Networked Digital Library of Theses and Dissertations (23 July 2013) and Web of Science (1985 to March 2014).SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) evaluating the efficacy of antibiotic therapy versus no antibiotic therapy for children aged two to 59 months with non-severe pneumonia and wheeze. We considered studies that defined non-severe pneumonia as cough or difficulty in breathing with a respiratory rate above the WHO-defined age-specific values (respiratory rate of 50 breaths per minute or more for children aged two to 12 months, or a respiratory rate of 40 breaths per minute or more for children aged 12 to 59 months) and wheeze for inclusion. We have excluded non-RCTs (quasi-RCTs).DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors independently assessed the search results and extracted data.MAIN Results: We did not identify any study that completely fulfilled our inclusion criteria.AUTHORS\u27 CONCLUSIONS: There is a clear need for RCTs to address this question in representative populations. We do not currently have evidence to support or challenge the continued use of antibiotics for the treatment of non-severe pneumonia, as suggested by WHO guidelines

Food fortification with multiple micronutrients: Impact on health outcomes in general population

Background: Vitamins and minerals are essential for growth and maintenance of a healthy body, and have a role in the functioning of almost every organ. Multiple interventions have been designed to improve micronutrient deficiency, and food fortification is one of them.Objectives: To assess the impact of food fortification with multiple micronutrients on health outcomes in the general population, including men, women and children.Search methods: We searched electronic databases up to 29 August 2018, including the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trial (CENTRAL), the Cochrane Effective Practice and Organisation of Care (EPOC) Group Specialised Register and Cochrane Public Health Specialised Register; MEDLINE; Embase, and 20 other databases, including clinical trial registries. There were no date or language restrictions. We checked reference lists of included studies and relevant systematic reviews for additional papers to be considered for inclusion.Selection criteria: We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs), cluster-RCTs, quasi-randomised trials, controlled before-after (CBA) studies and interrupted time series (ITS) studies that assessed the impact of food fortification with multiple micronutrients (MMNs). Primary outcomes included anaemia, micronutrient deficiencies, anthropometric measures, morbidity, all-cause mortality and cause-specific mortality. Secondary outcomes included potential adverse outcomes, serum concentration of specific micronutrients, serum haemoglobin levels and neurodevelopmental and cognitive outcomes. We included food fortification studies from both high-income and low- and middle-income countries (LMICs).Data collection and analysis: Two review authors independently screened, extracted and quality-appraised the data from eligible studies. We carried out statistical analysis using Review Manager 5 software. We used random-effects meta-analysis for combining data, as the characteristics of study participants and interventions differed significantly. We set out the main findings of the review in \u27Summary of findings\u27 tables, using the GRADE approach.Main results: We identified 127 studies as relevant through title/abstract screening, and included 43 studies (48 papers) with 19,585 participants (17,878 children) in the review. All the included studies except three compared MMN fortification with placebo/no intervention. Two studies compared MMN fortification versus iodised salt and one study compared MMN fortification versus calcium fortification alone. Thirty-six studies targeted children; 20 studies were conducted in LMICs. Food vehicles used included staple foods, such as rice and flour; dairy products, including milk and yogurt; non-dairy beverages; biscuits; spreads; and salt. Fourteen of the studies were fully commercially funded, 13 had partial-commercial funding, 14 had non-commercial funding and two studies did not specify the source of funding. We rated all the evidence as of low to very low quality due to study limitations, imprecision, high heterogeneity and small sample size. When compared with placebo/no intervention, MMN fortification may reduce anaemia by 32% (risk ratio (RR) 0.68, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.56 to 0.84; 11 studies, 3746 participants; low-quality evidence), iron deficiency anaemia by 72% (RR 0.28, 95% CI 0.19 to 0.39; 6 studies, 2189 participants; low-quality evidence), iron deficiency by 56% (RR 0.44, 95% CI 0.32 to 0.60; 11 studies, 3289 participants; low-quality evidence); vitamin A deficiency by 58% (RR 0.42, 95% CI 0.28 to 0.62; 6 studies, 1482 participants; low-quality evidence), vitamin B2 deficiency by 64% (RR 0.36, 95% CI 0.19 to 0.68; 1 study, 296 participants; low-quality evidence), vitamin B6 deficiency by 91% (RR 0.09, 95% CI 0.02 to 0.38; 2 studies, 301 participants; low-quality evidence), vitamin B12 deficiency by 58% (RR 0.42, 95% CI 0.25 to 0.71; 3 studies, 728 participants; low-quality evidence), weight-for-age z-scores (WAZ) (mean difference (MD) 0.1, 95% CI 0.02 to 0.17; 8 studies, 2889 participants; low-quality evidence) and weight-for-height/length z-score (WHZ/WLZ) (MD 0.1, 95% CI 0.02 to 0.18; 6 studies, 1758 participants; low-quality evidence). We are uncertain about the effect of MMN fortification on zinc deficiency (RR 0.84, 95% CI 0.65 to 1.08; 5 studies, 1490 participants; low-quality evidence) and height/length-for-age z-score (HAZ/LAZ) (MD 0.09, 95% CI 0.01 to 0.18; 8 studies, 2889 participants; low-quality evidence). Most of the studies in this comparison were conducted in children. Subgroup analyses of funding sources (commercial versus non-commercial) and duration of intervention did not demonstrate any difference in effects, although this was a relatively small number of studies and the possible association between commercial funding and increased effect estimates has been demonstrated in the wider health literature. We could not conduct subgroup analysis by food vehicle and funding; since there were too few studies in each subgroup to draw any meaningful conclusions. When we compared MMNs versus iodised salt, we are uncertain about the effect of MMN fortification on anaemia (R 0.86, 95% CI 0.37 to 2.01; 1 study, 88 participants; very low-quality evidence), iron deficiency anaemia (RR 0.40, 95% CI 0.09 to 1.83; 2 studies, 245 participants; very low-quality evidence), iron deficiency (RR 0.98, 95% CI 0.82 to 1.17; 1 study, 88 participants; very low-quality evidence) and vitamin A deficiency (RR 0.19, 95% CI 0.07 to 0.55; 2 studies, 363 participants; very low-quality evidence). Both of the studies were conducted in children. Only one study conducted in children compared MMN fortification versus calcium fortification. None of the primary outcomes were reported in the study. None of the included studies reported on morbidity, adverse events, all-cause or cause-specific mortality.Authors\u27 conclusions: The evidence from this review suggests that MMN fortification when compared to placebo/no intervention may reduce anaemia, iron deficiency anaemia and micronutrient deficiencies (iron, vitamin A, vitamin B2 and vitamin B6). We are uncertain of the effect of MMN fortification on anthropometric measures (HAZ/LAZ, WAZ and WHZ/WLZ). There are no data to suggest possible adverse effects of MMN fortification, and we could not draw reliable conclusions from various subgroup analyses due to a limited number of studies in each subgroup. We remain cautious about the level of commercial funding in this field, and the possibility that this may be associated with higher effect estimates, although subgroup analysis in this review did not demonstrate any impact of commercial funding. These findings are subject to study limitations, imprecision, high heterogeneity and small sample sizes, and we rated most of the evidence low to very low quality. and hence no concrete conclusions could be drawn from the findings of this review