24 research outputs found

    Neonatal Near Miss: the need for a standard definition and appropriate criteria and the rationale for a prospective surveillance system

    Get PDF
    In Latin American, there is currently a regional action with the main purposes of putting the concept of severe neonatal morbidity in practice and formulating proposals for interventions. A general overview of neonatal health conditions, including morbidity and mortality, is provided to update regional knowledge on the topic. An example of the development and implementation of the concept of maternal near miss is also provided, followed by results from a systematic review covering all previously published studies on Neonatal Near Miss. Finally, some proposals for building a common concept on the topic and for launching a prospective surveillance study are presented. A Neonatal Near Miss is a neonate who had a severe morbidity (organ dysfunction or failure) but who survived this condition within the first 27 days of life. The pragmatic criteria recommended to be used are as follows: birth weight below 1700 g, Apgar score below 7 at 5 minutes of life and gestational age below 33 weeks. As a proxy for organ dysfunction, the following management criteria are also confirmed: parenteral therapeutic antibiotics; nasal continuous positive airway pressure; any intubation during the first 27 days of life; phototherapy within the first 24 h of life; cardiopulmonary resuscitation; the use of vasoactive drugs, anticonvulsants, surfactants, blood products and steroids for refractory hypoglycemia and any surgical procedure. Although this study starts from a regional perspective, this topic is clearly globally relevant. All nations, especially low and middle-income countries, could benefit from the proposed standardization

    Neonatal near miss: the need for a standard definition and appropriate criteria and the rationale for a prospective surveillance system

    Get PDF
    In Latin American, there is currently a regional action with the main purposes of putting the concept of severe neonatal morbidity in practice and formulating proposals for interventions. A general overview of neonatal health conditions, including morbidity and mortality, is provided to update regional knowledge on the topic. An example of the development and implementation of the concept of maternal near miss is also provided, followed by results from a systematic review covering all previously published studies on Neonatal Near Miss. Finally, some proposals for building a common concept on the topic and for launching a prospective surveillance study are presented. A Neonatal Near Miss is a neonate who had a severe morbidity (organ dysfunction or failure) but who survived this condition within the first 27 days of life. The pragmatic criteria recommended to be used are as follows: birth weight below 1700 g, Apgar score below 7 at 5 minutes of life and gestational age below 33 weeks. As a proxy for organ dysfunction, the following management criteria are also confirmed: parenteral therapeutic antibiotics; nasal continuous positive airway pressure; any intubation during the first 27 days of life; phototherapy within the first 24 h of life; cardiopulmonary resuscitation; the use of vasoactive drugs, anticonvulsants, surfactants, blood products and steroids for refractory hypoglycemia and any surgical procedure. Although this study starts from a regional perspective, this topic is clearly globally relevant. All nations, especially low and middle-income countries, could benefit from the proposed standardization701282082

    Neonatal Near Miss: A Systematic Review.

    Get PDF
    The concept of neonatal near miss has been proposed as a tool for assessment of quality of care in neonates who suffered any life-threatening condition. However, there are no internationally agreed concepts or criteria for defining or identifying neonatal near miss. The purpose of this study was to perform a systematic review of studies and markers that are able to identify neonatal near miss cases and predict neonatal mortality. Electronic searches were performed in the Medline, Embase and Scielo databases, with no time or language restriction, until December 2014. The term neonatal near miss was used alone or in combination with terms related to neonatal morbidity/mortality and neonatal severity scores. Study selection criteria involved three steps: title, abstract and full text of the articles. Two researchers performed study selection and data extraction independently. Heterogeneity of study results did not permit the performance of meta-analysis. Following the inclusion and exclusion criteria adopted, only four articles were selected. Preterm and perinatal asphyxia were used as near miss markers in all studies. Health indicators on neonatal morbidity and mortality were extracted or estimated. The neonatal near miss rate was 2.6 to 8 times higher than the neonatal mortality rate. Pragmatic and management criteria are used to help develop the neonatal near miss concept. The most severe cases are identified and mortality is predicted with these criteria. Furthermore, the near miss concept can be used as a tool for evaluating neonatal care. It is the first step in building management strategies to reduce mortality and long-term sequelae.1532

    Optimal Timing of Delivery among Low-Risk Women with Prior Caesarean Section: A Secondary Analysis of the WHO Multicountry Survey on Maternal and Newborn Health

    Get PDF
    ObjectiveTo investigate optimal timing of elective repeat caesarean section among low-risk pregnant women with prior caesarean section in a multicountry sample from largely low- and middle-income countries.DesignSecondary analysis of a cross-sectional study.SettingTwenty-nine countries from the World Health Organization Multicountry Survey on Maternal and Newborn Health.Population29,647 women with prior caesarean section and no pregnancy complications in their current pregnancy who delivered a term singleton (live birth and stillbirth) at gestational age 37–41 weeks by pre-labour caesarean section, intra-partum caesarean section, or vaginal birth following spontaneous onset of labour.MethodsWe compared the rate of short-term adverse maternal and newborn outcomes following pre-labour caesarean section at a given gestational age, to those following ongoing pregnancies beyond that gestational age.Main Outcome MeasuresSevere maternal outcomes, neonatal morbidity, and intra-hospital early neonatal mortality.ResultsOdds of neonatal morbidity and intra-hospital early neonatal mortality were 0.48 (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.39–0.60) and 0.31 (95% CI 0.16–0.58) times lower for ongoing pregnancies compared to pre-labour caesarean section at 37 weeks. We did not find any significant change in the risk of severe maternal outcomes between pre-labour caesarean section at a given gestational age and ongoing pregnancies beyond that gestational age.ConclusionsElective repeat caesarean section at 37 weeks had higher risk of neonatal morbidity and mortality compared to ongoing pregnancy, however risks at later gestational ages did not differ between groups

    Prevalence of early initiation of breastfeeding and determinants of delayed initiation of breastfeeding: secondary analysis of the WHO Global Survey

    Get PDF
    Early initiation of breastfeeding (EIBF) within 1 hour of birth can decrease neonatal death. However, the prevalence of EIBF is approximately 50% in many developing countries, and data remains unavailable for some countries. We conducted a secondary analysis using the WHO Global Survey on Maternal and Perinatal Health to identify factors hampering EIBF. We described the coverage of EIBF among 373 health facilities for singleton neonates for whom breastfeeding was initiated after birth. Maternal and facility characteristics of EIBF were compared to those of breastfeeding >1 hour after birth, and multiple logistic regression analysis was performed. In total, 244,569 singleton live births without severe adverse outcomes were analysed. The EIBF prevalence varied widely among countries and ranged from 17.7% to 98.4% (average, 57.6%). There was less intra-country variation for BFI <24 hours. After adjustment, EIBF was significantly lower among women with complications during pregnancy and caesarean delivery. Globally, EIBF varied considerably across countries. Maternal complications during pregnancy, caesarean delivery and absence of postnatal/neonatal care guidelines at hospitals may affect EIBF. Our findings suggest that to better promote EIBF, special support for breastfeeding promotion is needed for women with complications during pregnancy and those who deliver by caesarean section

    Antenatal corticosteroids for women at risk of imminent preterm birth in low-resource countries: the case for equipoise and the need for efficacy trials

    Get PDF
    The scientific basis for antenatal corticosteroids (ACS) for women at risk of preterm birth has rapidly changed in recent years. Two landmark trials—the Antenatal Corticosteroid Trial and the Antenatal Late Preterm Steroids Trial—have challenged the long-held assumptions on the comparative health benefits and harms regarding the use of ACS for preterm birth across all levels of care and contexts, including resource-limited settings. Researchers, clinicians, programme managers, policymakers and donors working in low-income and middle-income countries now face challenging questions of whether, where and how ACS can be used to optimise outcomes for both women and preterm newborns. In this article, we briefly present an appraisal of the current evidence around ACS, how these findings informed WHO’s current recommendations on ACS use, and the knowledge gaps that have emerged in the light of new trial evidence. Critical considerations in the generalisability of the available evidence demonstrate that a true state of clinical equipoise exists for this treatment option in low-resource settings. An expert group convened by WHO concluded that there is a clear need for more efficacy trials of ACS in these settings to inform clinical practice

    Neonatal Near Miss: the need for a standard definition and appropriate criteria and the rationale for a prospective surveillance system

    No full text
    In Latin American, there is currently a regional action with the main purposes of putting the concept of severe neonatal morbidity in practice and formulating proposals for interventions. A general overview of neonatal health conditions, including morbidity and mortality, is provided to update regional knowledge on the topic. An example of the development and implementation of the concept of maternal near miss is also provided, followed by results from a systematic review covering all previously published studies on Neonatal Near Miss. Finally, some proposals for building a common concept on the topic and for launching a prospective surveillance study are presented. A Neonatal Near Miss is a neonate who had a severe morbidity (organ dysfunction or failure) but who survived this condition within the first 27 days of life. The pragmatic criteria recommended to be used are as follows: birth weight below 1700 g, Apgar score below 7 at 5 minutes of life and gestational age below 33 weeks. As a proxy for organ dysfunction, the following management criteria are also confirmed: parenteral therapeutic antibiotics; nasal continuous positive airway pressure; any intubation during the first 27 days of life; phototherapy within the first 24 h of life; cardiopulmonary resuscitation; the use of vasoactive drugs, anticonvulsants, surfactants, blood products and steroids for refractory hypoglycemia and any surgical procedure. Although this study starts from a regional perspective, this topic is clearly globally relevant. All nations, especially low and middle-income countries, could benefit from the proposed standardization

    Cyclo-oxygenase (COX) inhibitors for treating preterm labour (Review)

    No full text
    Background: Preterm birth is a major cause of perinatal mortality and morbidity. Cyclo-oxygenase (COX) inhibitors inhibit uterine contractions, are easily administered and appear to have few maternal side effects. However, adverse effects have been reported in the fetus and newborn as a result of exposure to COX inhibitors. Objectives: To assess the effects on maternal and neonatal outcomes of COX inhibitors administered as a tocolytic agent to women in preterm labour when compared with (i) placebo or no intervention and (ii) other tocolytics. In addition, to compare the effects of non-selective COX inhibitors with COX-2 selective inhibitors. Search methods: We searched the Cochrane Pregnancy and Childbirth Group's Trials Register (24 August 2014). We also contacted recognised experts and searched reference lists of retrieved studies. Selection criteria: All published and unpublished randomised trials in which COX inhibitors were used for tocolysis for women in labour between 20 and 36 completed weeks' gestation. Data collection and analysis: Two review authors independently evaluated methodological quality and extracted data. We sought additional information from study authors. Results are presented using risk ratio (RR; dichotomous data) and mean difference (MD; continuous data) with 95% confidence interval (CI). The number needed to treat for benefit (NNTB) and the number needed to treat for harm (NNTH) were calculated for statistically different categorical outcomes. Main results: With the addition of seven studies with a total of 684 women, this review now includes outcome data from 20 studies including 1509 women. The non-selective COX inhibitor indomethacin was used in 15 studies. The overall quality of the included studies was considered moderate to low. Three small studies (102 women), two of which were conducted in the 1980's, compared COX inhibition (indomethacin only) with placebo. No difference was shown in birth less than 48 hours after trial entry (average RR 0.20, 95% CI 0.03 to 1.28; two studies with 70 women). Indomethacin resulted in a reduction in preterm birth (before completion of 37 weeks of gestation) in one small study (36 women) (RR 0.21, 95% CI 0.07 to 0.62; NNTB 2, 95% CI 2 to 4); and an increase in gestational age at birth (average MD 3.59 weeks, 95% CI 0.65 to 6.52; two studies with 66 women) and birthweight (MD 716.34 g, 95% CI 425.52 to 1007.16; two studies with 67 infants). No difference was shown in measures of neonatal morbidity or neonatal mortality. Compared with betamimetics, COX inhibitors resulted in a reduction in birth less than 48 hours after trial entry (RR 0.27, 95% CI 0.08 to 0.96; NNTB 7, 95% CI 6 to 120; two studies with 100 women) and preterm birth (before completion of 37 weeks of gestation) (RR 0.53, 95% CI 0.28 to 0.99; NNTB 6, 95% CI 4 to 236; two studies with 80 women) although no benefit was shown in terms of neonatal morbidity or mortality. COX inhibition was also associated with fewer maternal adverse affects compared with betamimetics (RR 0.19, 95% CI 0.11 to 0.31; NNTB 3, 95% CI 2 to 3; five studies with 248 women) and maternal adverse effects requiring cessation of treatment (average RR 0.09, 95% CI 0.02 to 0.49; NNTB 5, CI 95% 5 to 9; three studies with 166 women). No differences were shown when comparing COX inhibitors with magnesium sulphate (MgSO) (seven studies with 792 women) or calcium channel blockers (CCBs) (two studies with 230 women) in terms of prolonging pregnancy or for any fetal/neonatal outcomes. There were also no differences in very preterm birth (before completion of 34 weeks of gestation) and no maternal deaths occurred in the one study that reported on this outcome. However COX inhibitors resulted in fewer maternal adverse affects when compared with MgSO (RR 0.39, 95% CI 0.25 to 0.62; NNTB 11, 95% CI 9 to 17; five studies with 635 women). A comparison of non-selective COX inhibitors versus any COX-2 inhibitor (two studies with 54 women) did not demonstrate any differences in maternal, fetal or neonatal outcomes. No data were available to assess COX inhibitors compared with oxytocin receptor antagonists (ORAs). Further, no data were available on extremely preterm birth (before 28 weeks of gestation), longer-term infant outcomes or costs. Authors' conclusions: In this review, no clear benefit for COX inhibitors was shown over placebo or any other tocolytic agents. While some benefit was demonstrated in terms of postponement of birth for COX inhibitors over placebo and betamimetics and also maternal adverse effects over betamimetics and MgSO, due to the limitations of small numbers, minimal data on safety, lack of longer-term outcomes and generally low quality of the studies included in this review, we conclude that there is insufficient evidence on which to base decisions about the role of COX inhibition for women in preterm labour. Further well-designed tocolytic studies are required to determine short- and longer-term infant benefit of COX inhibitors over placebo and other tocolytics, particularly CCBs and ORAs. Another important focus for future studies is identifying whether COX-2 inhibitors are superior to non-selective COX inhibitors. All future studies on tocolytics for women in preterm labour should assess longer-term effects into early childhood and also costs
    corecore