Effect of case management on neonatal mortality due to sepsis and pneumonia.

BACKGROUND: Each year almost one million newborns die from infections, mostly in low-income countries. Timely case management would save many lives but the relative mortality effect of varying strategies is unknown. We have estimated the effect of providing oral, or injectable antibiotics at home or in first-level facilities, and of in-patient hospital care on neonatal mortality from pneumonia and sepsis for use in the Lives Saved Tool (LiST). METHODS: We conducted systematic searches of multiple databases to identify relevant studies with mortality data. Standardized abstraction tables were used and study quality assessed by adapted GRADE criteria. Meta-analyses were undertaken where appropriate. For interventions with biological plausibility but low quality evidence, a Delphi process was undertaken to estimate effectiveness. RESULTS: Searches of 2876 titles identified 7 studies. Among these, 4 evaluated oral antibiotics for neonatal pneumonia in non-randomised, concurrently controlled designs. Meta-analysis suggested reductions in all-cause neonatal mortality (RR 0.75 95% CI 0.64- 0.89; 4 studies) and neonatal pneumonia-specific mortality (RR 0.58 95% CI 0.41- 0.82; 3 studies). Two studies (1 RCT, 1 observational study), evaluated community-based neonatal care packages including injectable antibiotics and reported mortality reductions of 44% (RR = 0.56, 95% CI 0.41-0.77) and 34% (RR = 0.66, 95% CI 0.47-0.93), but the interpretation of these results is complicated by co-interventions. A third, clinic-based, study reported a case-fatality ratio of 3.3% among neonates treated with injectable antibiotics as outpatients. No studies were identified evaluating injectable antibiotics alone for neonatal pneumonia. Delphi consensus (median from 20 respondents) effects on sepsis-specific mortality were 30% reduction for oral antibiotics, 65% for injectable antibiotics and 75% for injectable antibiotics on pneumonia-specific mortality. No trials were identified assessing effect of hospital management for neonatal infections and Delphi consensus suggested 80%, and 90% reductions for sepsis and pneumonia-specific mortality respectively. CONCLUSION: Oral antibiotics administered in the community are effective for neonatal pneumonia mortality reduction based on a meta-analysis, but expert opinion suggests much higher impact from injectable antibiotics in the community or primary care level and even higher for facility-based care. Despite feasibility and low cost, these interventions are not widely available in many low income countries. FUNDING: This work was supported by the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation through a grant to the US Fund for UNICEF, and to Saving Newborn Lives Save the Children, through Save the Children US

Clean birth and postnatal care practices to reduce neonatal deaths from sepsis and tetanus: a systematic review and Delphi estimation of mortality effect

BACKGROUND: Annually over 520,000 newborns die from neonatal sepsis, and 60,000 more from tetanus. Estimates of the effect of clean birth and postnatal care practices are required for evidence-based program planning. OBJECTIVE: To review the evidence for clean birth and postnatal care practices and estimate the effect on neonatal mortality from sepsis and tetanus for the Lives Saved Tool (LiST). METHODS: We conducted a systematic review of multiple databases. Data were abstracted into standard tables and assessed by GRADE criteria. Where appropriate, meta-analyses were undertaken. For interventions with low quality evidence but a strong GRADE recommendation, a Delphi process was conducted. RESULTS: Low quality evidence supports a reduction in all-cause neonatal mortality (19% (95% c.i. 1-34%)), cord infection (30% (95% c.i. 20-39%)) and neonatal tetanus (49% (95% c.i. 35-62%)) with birth attendant handwashing. Very low quality evidence supports a reduction in neonatal tetanus mortality with a clean birth surface (93% (95% c.i. 77-100%)) and no relationship between a clean perineum and tetanus. Low quality evidence supports a reduction of neonatal tetanus with facility birth (68% (95% c.i. 47-88%). No relationship was found between birth place and cord infections or sepsis mortality. For postnatal clean practices, all-cause mortality is reduced with chlorhexidine cord applications in the first 24 hours of life (34% (95% c.i. 5-54%, moderate quality evidence) and antimicrobial cord applications (63% (95% c.i. 41-86%, low quality evidence). One study of postnatal maternal handwashing reported reductions in all-cause mortality (44% (95% c.i. 18-62%)) and cord infection ((24% (95% c.i. 5-40%)).Given the low quality of evidence, a Delphi expert opinion process was undertaken. Thirty experts reached consensus regarding reduction of neonatal sepsis deaths by clean birth practices at home (15% (IQR 10-20)) or in a facility (27% IQR 24-36)), and by clean postnatal care practices (40% (IQR 25-50)). The panel estimated that neonatal tetanus mortality was reduced by clean birth practices at home (30% (IQR(20-30)), or in a facility (38% (IQR 34-40)), and by clean postnatal care practices (40% (IQR 30-50)). CONCLUSION: According to expert opinion, clean birth and particularly postnatal care practices are effective in reducing neonatal mortality from sepsis and tetanus. Further research is required regarding optimal implementation strategies

Maternal and child health in Yushu, Qinghai Province, China

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Introduction</p> <p>Surmang, Qinghai Province is a rural nomadic Tibetan region in western China recently devastated by the 2010 Yushu earthquake; little information is available on access and coverage of maternal and child health services.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>A cross-sectional household survey was conducted in August 2004. 402 women of reproductive age (15-50) were interviewed regarding their pregnancy history, access to and utilization of health care, and infant and child health care practices.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>Women's access to education was low at 15% for any formal schooling; adult female literacy was <20%. One third of women received any antenatal care during their last pregnancy. Institutional delivery and skilled birth attendance were <1%, and there were no reported cesarean deliveries. Birth was commonly attended by a female relative, and 8% of women delivered alone. Use of unsterilized instrument to cut the umbilical cord was nearly universal (94%), while coverage for tetanus toxoid immunization was only 14%. Traditional Tibetan healers were frequently sought for problems during pregnancy (70%), the postpartum period (87%), and for childhood illnesses (74%). Western medicine (61%) was preferred over Tibetan medicine (9%) for preventive antenatal care. The average time to reach a health facility was 4.3 hours. Postpartum infectious morbidity appeared to be high, but only 3% of women with postpartum problems received western medical care. 64% of recently pregnant women reported that they were very worried about dying in childbirth. The community reported 3 maternal deaths and 103 live births in the 19 months prior to the survey.</p> <p>Conclusions</p> <p>While China is on track to achieve national Millennium Development Goal targets for maternal and child health, women and children in Surmang suffer from substantial health inequities in access to antenatal, skilled birth and postpartum care. Institutional delivery, skilled attendance and cesarean delivery are virtually inaccessible, and consequently maternal and infant morbidity and mortality are likely high. Urgent action is needed to improve access to maternal, neonatal and child health care in these marginalized populations. The reconstruction after the recent earthquake provides a unique opportunity to link this population with the health system.</p

Effect of case management on neonatal mortality due to sepsis and pneumonia

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Each year almost one million newborns die from infections, mostly in low-income countries. Timely case management would save many lives but the relative mortality effect of varying strategies is unknown. We have estimated the effect of providing oral, or injectable antibiotics at home or in first-level facilities, and of in-patient hospital care on neonatal mortality from pneumonia and sepsis for use in the Lives Saved Tool (LiST).</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>We conducted systematic searches of multiple databases to identify relevant studies with mortality data. Standardized abstraction tables were used and study quality assessed by adapted GRADE criteria. Meta-analyses were undertaken where appropriate. For interventions with biological plausibility but low quality evidence, a Delphi process was undertaken to estimate effectiveness.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>Searches of 2876 titles identified 7 studies. Among these, 4 evaluated oral antibiotics for neonatal pneumonia in non-randomised, concurrently controlled designs. Meta-analysis suggested reductions in all-cause neonatal mortality (RR 0.75 95% CI 0.64- 0.89; 4 studies) and neonatal pneumonia-specific mortality (RR 0.58 95% CI 0.41- 0.82; 3 studies). Two studies (1 RCT, 1 observational study), evaluated community-based neonatal care packages including injectable antibiotics and reported mortality reductions of 44% (RR= 0.56, 95% CI 0.41-0.77) and 34% (RR =0.66, 95% CI 0.47-0.93), but the interpretation of these results is complicated by co-interventions. A third, clinic-based, study reported a case-fatality ratio of 3.3% among neonates treated with injectable antibiotics as outpatients. No studies were identified evaluating injectable antibiotics alone for neonatal pneumonia. Delphi consensus (median from 20 respondents) effects on sepsis-specific mortality were 30% reduction for oral antibiotics, 65% for injectable antibiotics and 75% for injectable antibiotics on pneumonia-specific mortality. No trials were identified assessing effect of hospital management for neonatal infections and Delphi consensus suggested 80%, and 90% reductions for sepsis and pneumonia-specific mortality respectively.</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>Oral antibiotics administered in the community are effective for neonatal pneumonia mortality reduction based on a meta-analysis, but expert opinion suggests much higher impact from injectable antibiotics in the community or primary care level and even higher for facility-based care. Despite feasibility and low cost, these interventions are not widely available in many low income countries.</p> <p>Funding</p> <p>This work was supported by the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation through a grant to the US Fund for UNICEF, and to Saving Newborn Lives Save the Children, through Save the Children US.</p

Neonatal resuscitation in low-resource settings: what, who, and how to overcome challenges to scale up?

BACKGROUND: Each year approximately 10 million babies do not breathe immediately at birth, of which about 6 million require basic neonatal resuscitation. The major burden is in low-income settings, where health system capacity to provide neonatal resuscitation is inadequate. OBJECTIVE: To systematically review the evidence for neonatal resuscitation content, training and competency, equipment and supplies, cost, and key program considerations, specifically for resource-constrained settings. RESULTS: Evidence from several observational studies shows that facility-based basic neonatal resuscitation may avert 30% of intrapartum-related neonatal deaths. Very few babies require advanced resuscitation (endotracheal intubation and drugs) and these newborns may not survive without ongoing ventilation; hence, advanced neonatal resuscitation is not a priority in settings without neonatal intensive care. Of the 60 million nonfacility births, most do not have access to resuscitation. Several trials have shown that a range of community health workers can perform neonatal resuscitation with an estimated effect of a 20% reduction in intrapartum-related neonatal deaths, based on expert opinion. Case studies illustrate key considerations for scale up. CONCLUSION: Basic resuscitation would substantially reduce intrapartum-related neonatal deaths. Where births occur in facilities, it is a priority to ensure that all birth attendants are competent in resuscitation. Strategies to address the gap for home births are urgently required. More data are required to determine the impact of neonatal resuscitation, particularly on long-term outcomes in low-income settings

Neonatal resuscitation and immediate newborn assessment and stimulation for the prevention of neonatal deaths: a systematic review, meta-analysis and Delphi estimation of mortality effect

BACKGROUND: Of 136 million babies born annually, around 10 million require assistance to breathe. Each year 814,000 neonatal deaths result from intrapartum-related events in term babies (previously "birth asphyxia") and 1.03 million from complications of prematurity. No systematic assessment of mortality reduction from tactile stimulation or resuscitation has been published. OBJECTIVE: To estimate the mortality effect of immediate newborn assessment and stimulation, and basic resuscitation on neonatal deaths due to term intrapartum-related events or preterm birth, for facility and home births. METHODS: We conducted systematic reviews for studies reporting relevant mortality or morbidity outcomes. Evidence was assessed using GRADE criteria adapted to provide a systematic approach to mortality effect estimates for the Lives Saved Tool (LiST). Meta-analysis was performed if appropriate. For interventions with low quality evidence but strong recommendation for implementation, a Delphi panel was convened to estimate effect size. RESULTS: We identified 24 studies of neonatal resuscitation reporting mortality outcomes (20 observational, 2 quasi-experimental, 2 cluster randomized controlled trials), but none of immediate newborn assessment and stimulation alone. A meta-analysis of three facility-based studies examined the effect of resuscitation training on intrapartum-related neonatal deaths (RR= 0.70, 95%CI 0.59-0.84); this estimate was used for the effect of facility-based basic neonatal resuscitation (additional to stimulation). The evidence for preterm mortality effect was low quality and thus expert opinion was sought. In community-based studies, resuscitation training was part of packages with multiple concurrent interventions, and/or studies did not distinguish term intrapartum-related from preterm deaths, hence no meta-analysis was conducted. Our Delphi panel of 18 experts estimated that immediate newborn assessment and stimulation would reduce both intrapartum-related and preterm deaths by 10%, facility-based resuscitation would prevent a further 10% of preterm deaths, and community-based resuscitation would prevent further 20% of intrapartum-related and 5% of preterm deaths. CONCLUSION: Neonatal resuscitation training in facilities reduces term intrapartum-related deaths by 30%. Yet, coverage of this intervention remains low in countries where most neonatal deaths occur and is a missed opportunity to save lives. Expert opinion supports smaller effects of neonatal resuscitation on preterm mortality in facilities and of basic resuscitation and newborn assessment and stimulation at community level. Further evaluation is required for impact, cost and implementation strategies in various contexts. FUNDING: This work was supported by the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation through a grant to the US Fund for UNICEF, and to the Saving Newborn Lives program of Save the Children, through Save the Children US

Basic newborn care and neonatal resuscitation: a multi-country analysis of health system bottlenecks and potential solutions.

BACKGROUND: An estimated two-thirds of the world's 2.7 million newborn deaths could be prevented with quality care at birth and during the postnatal period. Basic Newborn Care (BNC) is part of the solution and includes hygienic birth and newborn care practices including cord care, thermal care, and early and exclusive breastfeeding. Timely provision of resuscitation if needed is also critical to newborn survival. This paper describes health system barriers to BNC and neonatal resuscitation and proposes solutions to scale up evidence-based strategies. METHODS: The maternal and newborn bottleneck analysis tool was applied by 12 countries in Africa and Asia as part of the Every Newborn Action Plan process. Country workshops engaged technical experts to complete the survey tool, which is designed to synthesise and grade health system "bottlenecks" that hinder the scale up of maternal-newborn intervention packages. We used quantitative and qualitative methods to analyse the bottleneck data, combined with literature review, to present priority bottlenecks and actions relevant to different health system building blocks for BNC and neonatal resuscitation. RESULTS: Eleven of the 12 countries provided grading data. Overall, bottlenecks were graded more severely for resuscitation. The most severely graded bottlenecks for BNC were health workforce (8 of 11 countries), health financing (9 out of 11) and service delivery (7 out of 9); and for neonatal resuscitation, workforce (9 out of 10), essential commodities (9 out of 10) and service delivery (8 out of 10). Country teams from Africa graded bottlenecks overall more severely. Improving workforce performance, availability of essential commodities, and well-integrated health service delivery were the key solutions proposed. CONCLUSIONS: BNC was perceived to have the least health system challenges among the seven maternal and newborn intervention packages assessed. Although neonatal resuscitation bottlenecks were graded more severe than for BNC, similarities particularly in the workforce and service delivery building blocks highlight the inextricable link between the two interventions and the need to equip birth attendants with requisite skills and commodities to assess and care for every newborn. Solutions highlighted by country teams include ensuring more investment to improve workforce performance and distribution, especially numbers of skilled birth attendants, incentives for placement in challenging settings, and skills-based training particularly for neonatal resuscitation

Diagnostic Accuracy of Neonatal Assessment for Gestational Age Determination: A Systematic Review.

CONTEXT: An estimated 15 million neonates are born preterm annually. However, in low- and middle-income countries, the dating of pregnancy is frequently unreliable or unknown. OBJECTIVE: To conduct a systematic literature review and meta-analysis to determine the diagnostic accuracy of neonatal assessments to estimate gestational age (GA). DATA SOURCES: PubMed, Embase, Cochrane, Web of Science, POPLINE, and World Health Organization library databases. STUDY SELECTION: Studies of live-born infants in which researchers compared neonatal signs or assessments for GA estimation with a reference standard. DATA EXTRACTION: Two independent reviewers extracted data on study population, design, bias, reference standard, test methods, accuracy, agreement, validity, correlation, and interrater reliability. RESULTS: Four thousand nine hundred and fifty-six studies were screened and 78 included. We identified 18 newborn assessments for GA estimation (ranging 4 to 23 signs). Compared with ultrasound, the Dubowitz score dated 95% of pregnancies within ±2.6 weeks (n = 7 studies), while the Ballard score overestimated GA (0.4 weeks) and dated pregnancies within ±3.8 weeks (n = 9). Compared with last menstrual period, the Dubowitz score dated 95% of pregnancies within ± 2.9 weeks (n = 6 studies) and the Ballard score, ±4.2 weeks (n = 5). Assessments with fewer signs tended to be less accurate. A few studies showed a tendency for newborn assessments to overestimate GA in preterm infants and underestimate GA in growth-restricted infants. LIMITATIONS: Poor study quality and few studies with early ultrasound-based reference. CONCLUSIONS: Efforts in low- and middle-income countries should focus on improving dating in pregnancy through ultrasound and improving validity in growth-restricted populations. Where ultrasound is not possible, increased efforts are needed to develop simpler yet specific approaches for newborn assessment through new combinations of existing parameters, new signs, or technology

National and regional estimates of term and preterm babies born small for gestational age in 138 low-income and middle-income countries in 2010

Background National estimates for the numbers of babies born small for gestational age and the comorbidity with preterm birth are unavailable. We aimed to estimate the prevalence of term and preterm babies born small for gestational age (term-SGA and preterm-SGA), and the relation to low birthweight (<2500 g), in 138 countries of low and middle income in 2010. Methods Small for gestational age was defi ned as lower than the 10th centile for fetal growth from the 1991 US national reference population. Data from 22 birth cohort studies (14 low-income and middle-income countries) and from the WHO Global Survey on Maternal and Perinatal Health (23 countries) were used to model the prevalence of term-SGA births. Prevalence of preterm-SGA infants was calculated from meta-analyses. Findings In 2010, an estimated 32·4 million infants were born small for gestational age in low-income and middleincome countries (27% of livebirths), of whom 10·6 million infants were born at term and low birthweight. The prevalence of term-SGA babies ranged from 5·3% of livebirths in east Asia to 41·5% in south Asia, and the prevalence of preterm-SGA infants ranged from 1·2% in north Africa to 3·0% in southeast Asia. Of 18 million low-birthweight babies, 59% were term-SGA and 41% were preterm. Two-thirds of small-for-gestational-age infants were born in Asia (17·4 million in south Asia). Preterm-SGA babies totalled 2·8 million births in low-income and middle-income countries. Most small-for-gestational-age infants were born in India, Pakistan, Nigeria, and Bangladesh. Interpretation The burden of small-for-gestational-age births is very high in countries of low and middle income and is concentrated in south Asia. Implementation of eff ective interventions for babies born too small or too soon is an urgent priority to increase survival and reduce disability, stunting, and non-communicable diseases. Funding Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation by a grant to the US Fund for UNICEF to support the activities of the Child Health Epidemiology Reference Group (CHERG)