Master of Science

thesisGrowing evidence demonstrates that (a) executive functions (EF) become deleteriously affected by engagement in the emotion regulation strategy known as expressive suppression and (b) EF show considerable functional and neuroanatomical overlap with motor output. The current study aimed to bridge these two literatures by examining the relationships between naturally occurring expressive suppression and several different aspects of motor output, including action planning, action learning, and motor-control speed and accuracy. In addition we investigated whether any identified relationships could be explained by EF. Fifty-one healthy young adults completed selected subtests from the Delis-Kaplan Executive Function System as indices of EF, a self-report measure of expressive suppression, and a computerized motor sequencing task (Push Turn Taptap task; PTT) designed to assess action planning, action learning, and motor-control speed and accuracy. Hierarchical regressions using each aspect of PTT performance as the dependent variable revealed that higher-than-usual self-reported expressive suppression on the day of testing (relative to the two weeks preceding testing) was associated with longer action-planning latencies. This relationship was fully explained by EF. No other PTT variables related to expressive suppression on the day of testing. These results suggest that increased expressive suppression in daily life measurably degrades action planning, an aspect of motor output that is reliant on EF, highlighting the importance of factors that lead to intraindividual fluctuations in EF ability and motor performance

Parental distress around supplementing breastfed babies using nasogastric tubes on the post-natal ward: a theme from an ethnographic study

‘The definitive version is available at: www3.interscience.wiley.com ' Copyright Blackwell Publishing. DOI: 10.1111/j.1740-8709.2008.00165.xThere is abundant evidence of the benefits of breastfeeding. In the UK, supplementation in hospital has consistently been shown to be associated with shortened duration of breastfeeding. This paper reports on a subset of the data from an ethnographic study that explored the expectations, beliefs and experiences of mothers and health professionals concerning supplementation, using a variety of methods, of breastfed babies in an English maternity unit in 2002. This paper aims to describe the expectations, beliefs and experiences of mothers and health professionals concerning supplementation by nasogastric (NG) tube on the post-natal ward. Participant observation was carried out on day and night shifts and at weekends over 9 months. Mothers, midwives, neonatal nurses, health care assistants and senior paediatricians were interviewed. Categories and themes were generated. The researchers' constructs of 'the essential method', when the tube was the method needed for medical reasons, and 'the chosen method', when other methods of oral feeding should have been possible, emerged. The latter included time pressures and the avoidance of any form of oral activity that might perhaps make return to the breast more difficult. The data concerning the use of NG tubes for supplementation yielded the specific theme of parental distress. In the absence of evidence that supplementation by NG tube on the post-natal ward is associated with greater breastfeeding success than other methods, the use of the tube to avoid any form of 'oral confusion' should be discontinued. Its use primarily to save time should not be considered acceptable.Peer reviewe

The impact of training non-physician clinicians in Malawi on maternal and perinatal mortality : a cluster randomised controlled evaluation of the enhancing training and appropriate technologies for mothers and babies in Africa (ETATMBA) project

Background: Maternal mortality in much of sub-Saharan Africa is very high whereas there has been a steady decline in over the past 60 years in Europe. Perinatal mortality is 12 times higher than maternal mortality accounting for about 7 million neonatal deaths; many of these in sub-Saharan countries. Many of these deaths are preventable. Countries, like Malawi, do not have the resources nor highly trained medical specialists using complex technologies within their healthcare system. Much of the burden falls on healthcare staff other than doctors including non-physician clinicians (NPCs) such as clinical officers, midwives and community health-workers. The aim of this trial is to evaluate a project which is training NPCs as advanced leaders by providing them with skills and knowledge in advanced neonatal and obstetric care. Training that will hopefully be cascaded to their colleagues (other NPCs, midwives, nurses). Methods/design: This is a cluster randomised controlled trial with the unit of randomisation being the 14 districts of central and northern Malawi (one large district was divided into two giving an overall total of 15). Eight districts will be randomly allocated the intervention. Within these eight districts 50 NPCs will be selected and will be enrolled on the training programme (the intervention). Primary outcome will be maternal and perinatal (defined as until discharge from health facility) mortality. Data will be harvested from all facilities in both intervention and control districts for the lifetime of the project (3–4 years) and comparisons made. In addition a process evaluation using both quantitative and qualitative (e.g. interviews) will be undertaken to evaluate the intervention implementation. Discussion: Education and training of NPCs is a key to improving healthcare for mothers and babies in countries like Malawi. Some of the challenges faced are discussed as are the potential limitations. It is hoped that the findings from this trial will lead to a sustainable improvement in healthcare and workforce development and training. Trial registration: ISRCTN6329415

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

Cardiopulmonary resuscitation in low-resource settings: a statement by the International Liaison Committee on Resuscitation, supported by the AFEM, EUSEM, IFEM, and IFRC.

Most recommendations on cardiopulmonary resuscitation were developed from the perspective of high-resource settings with the aim of applying them in these settings. These so-called international guidelines are often not applicable in low-resource settings. Organisations including the International Liaison Committee on Resuscitation (ILCOR) have not sufficiently addressed this problem. We formed a collaborative group of experts from various settings including low-income, middle-income, and high-income countries, and conducted a prospective, multiphase consensus process to formulate this ILCOR Task Force statement. We highlight the discrepancy between current cardiopulmonary resuscitation guidelines and their applicability in low-resource settings. Successful existing initiatives such as the Helping Babies Breathe programme and the WHO Emergency Care Systems Framework are acknowledged. The concept of the chainmail of survival as an adaptive approach towards a framework of resuscitation, the potential enablers of and barriers to this framework, and gaps in the knowledge are discussed, focusing on low-resource settings. Action points are proposed, which might be expanded into future recommendations and suggestions, addressing a large diversity of addressees from caregivers to stakeholders. This statement serves as a stepping-stone to developing a truly global approach to guide resuscitation care and science, including in health-care systems worldwide

Neonatal resuscitation: EN-BIRTH multi-country validation study.

BACKGROUND: Annually, 14 million newborns require stimulation to initiate breathing at birth and 6 million require bag-mask-ventilation (BMV). Many countries have invested in facility-based neonatal resuscitation equipment and training. However, there is no consistent tracking for neonatal resuscitation coverage. METHODS: The EN-BIRTH study, in five hospitals in Bangladesh, Nepal, and Tanzania (2017-2018), collected time-stamped data for care around birth, including neonatal resuscitation. Researchers surveyed women and extracted data from routine labour ward registers. To assess accuracy, we compared gold standard observed coverage to survey-reported and register-recorded coverage, using absolute difference, validity ratios, and individual-level validation metrics (sensitivity, specificity, percent agreement). We analysed two resuscitation numerators (stimulation, BMV) and three denominators (live births and fresh stillbirths, non-crying, non-breathing). We also examined timeliness of BMV. Qualitative data were collected from health workers and data collectors regarding barriers and enablers to routine recording of resuscitation. RESULTS: Among 22,752 observed births, 5330 (23.4%) babies did not cry and 3860 (17.0%) did not breathe in the first minute after birth. 16.2% (n = 3688) of babies were stimulated and 4.4% (n = 998) received BMV. Survey-report underestimated coverage of stimulation and BMV. Four of five labour ward registers captured resuscitation numerators. Stimulation had variable accuracy (sensitivity 7.5-40.8%, specificity 66.8-99.5%), BMV accuracy was higher (sensitivity 12.4-48.4%, specificity > 93%), with small absolute differences between observed and recorded BMV. Accuracy did not vary by denominator option. < 1% of BMV was initiated within 1 min of birth. Enablers to register recording included training and data use while barriers included register design, documentation burden, and time pressure. CONCLUSIONS: Population-based surveys are unlikely to be useful for measuring resuscitation coverage given low validity of exit-survey report. Routine labour ward registers have potential to accurately capture BMV as the numerator. Measuring the true denominator for clinical need is complex; newborns may require BMV if breathing ineffectively or experiencing apnoea after initial drying/stimulation or subsequently at any time. Further denominator research is required to evaluate non-crying as a potential alternative in the context of respectful care. Measuring quality gaps, notably timely provision of resuscitation, is crucial for programme improvement and impact, but unlikely to be feasible in routine systems, requiring audits and special studies

Quality improvement initiatives for hospitalised small and sick newborns in low- and middle-income countries: a systematic review.

BACKGROUND: An estimated 2.6 million newborns died in 2016; over 98.5% of deaths occurred in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs). Neonates born preterm and small for gestational age are particularly at risk given the high incidence of infectious complications, cardiopulmonary, and neurodevelopmental disorders in this group. Quality improvement (QI) initiatives can reduce the burden of mortality and morbidity for hospitalised newborns in these settings. We undertook a systematic review to synthesise evidence from LMICs on QI approaches used, outcome measures employed to estimate effects, and the nature of implementation challenges. METHODS: We searched Medline, EMBASE, WHO Global Health Library, Cochrane Library, WHO ICTRP, and ClinicalTrials.gov and scanned the references of identified studies and systematic reviews. Searches covered January 2000 until April 2017. Search terms were "quality improvement", "newborns", "hospitalised", and their derivatives. Studies were excluded if they took place in high-income countries, did not include QI interventions, or did not include small and sick hospitalised newborns. Cochrane Risk of Bias tools were used to quality appraise the studies. RESULTS: From 8110 results, 28 studies were included, covering 23 LMICs and 65,642 participants. Most interventions were meso level (district and clinic level); fewer were micro (patient-provider level) or macro (above district level). In-service training was the most common intervention subtype; service organisation and distribution of referencing materials were also frequently identified. The most commonly assessed outcome was mortality, followed by length of admission, sepsis rates, and infection rates. Key barriers to implementation of quality improvement initiatives included overburdened staff and lack of sufficient equipment. CONCLUSIONS: The frequency of meso level, single centre, and educational interventions suggests that these interventions may be easier for programme planners to implement. The success of some interventions in reducing morbidity and mortality rates suggests that QI approaches have a high potential for benefit to newborns. Going forward, there are opportunities to strengthen the focus of QI initiatives and to develop improved, larger-scale, collaborative research into implementation of quality improvement initiatives for this high-risk group. TRIAL REGISTRATION: PROSPERO CRD42017055459