Antenatal counseling on breastfeeding – is it adequate? A descriptive study from Pondicherry, India

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Antenatal counseling on breastfeeding and postnatal lactation support are likely to improve rates of exclusive breastfeeding. This descriptive study was undertaken to assess whether antenatal visits were utilized for promotion of exclusive breastfeeding in addition to the routine obstetric services.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>This descriptive study was conducted at a tertiary hospital in Pondicherry, India. Every third primigravida mother admitted in the maternity ward from June to December 2005 was recruited. Among these 144 primigravida mothers, 108 who had a minimum of three antenatal visits ("booked") were included in the study. These 108 mothers were administered a pre-tested semi-structured questionnaire on breastfeeding in the local language, Tamil, within 24 hours of giving birth. Appropriate flash cards with pictures were also used while administering the questionnaire. The awareness among mothers (both "counseled" and "not counseled") regarding health information pertaining to breastfeeding was assessed.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>Of the booked mothers, 21% (n = 23) had received some antenatal counseling about breastfeeding while 79% (n = 85) had not received any such counseling. Four percent had undergone breast examination during antenatal visits. Awareness related to breastfeeding among mothers in the "counseled" group was better than those in the "not counseled" group. Even in the "counseled" group, awareness among mothers with regard to correct breastfeeding technique and concept of continuing breastfeeding during illness in the baby was no different from those in the "not counseled" group.</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>Existing antenatal counseling on breastfeeding is inadequate in the population studied and needs to be strengthened. Informing all pregnant women about the benefits and management of breastfeeding should be a priority during antenatal visits.</p

Neonatal invasive candidiasis in low-and-middle-income countries: data from the NeoOBS study

Neonatal invasive candidiasis (NIC) has significant morbidity and mortality. Reports have shown a different profile of those neonates affected with NIC and of fluconazole resistant Candida spp. isolates in low-and-middle-income -countries (LMICs) compared to high-income-countries (HIC). We describe the epidemiology, Candida spp. distribution, treatment and outcomes of neonates with NIC from LMICs enrolled in a global, prospective, longitudinal, observational cohort study (NeoOBS) of hospitalised infants < 60 days postnatal age with sepsis (August 2018-February 2021). 127 neonates from 14 hospitals in 8 countries with Candida spp. isolated from blood culture were included. Median gestational age of affected neonates was 30 weeks (IQR: 28-34) and median birth weight was 1270 g (IQR: 990-1692). Only a minority had high risk criteria, such as being born < 28 weeks, 19% (24/127), or birth weight < 1000 g, 27% (34/127). The most common Candida species were C. albicans (n = 45, 35%), C. parapsilosis (n = 38, 30%) and Candida auris (n = 18, 14%). The majority of C. albicans isolates were fluconazole susceptible, whereas 59% of C. parapsilosis isolates were fluconazole resistant. Amphotericin B was the most common antifungal used [74% (78/105)], followed by fluconazole [22% (23/105)]. Death by day 28 post-enrolment was 22% (28/127). To our knowledge, this is the largest multi-country cohort of NIC in LMICs. Most of the neonates would not have been considered at high risk for NIC in HICs. A substantial proportion of isolates was resistant to first choice fluconazole. Understanding the burden of NIC in LMIC is essential to guide future research and treatment guidelines

Challenges in the implementation of the NeoOBS study, a global pragmatic observational cohort study, to investigate the aetiology and management of neonatal sepsis in the hospital setting

Neonatal sepsis is a significant cause of mortality and morbidity in low- and middle-income countries. To deliver high-quality data studies and inform future trials, it is crucial to understand the challenges encountered when managing global multi-centre research studies and to identify solutions that can feasibly be implemented in these settings. This paper provides an overview of the complexities faced by diverse research teams in different countries and regions, together with actions implemented to achieve pragmatic study management of a large multi-centre observational study of neonatal sepsis. We discuss specific considerations for enrolling sites with different approval processes and varied research experience, structures, and training. Implementing a flexible recruitment strategy and providing ongoing training were necessary to overcome these challenges. We emphasize the attention that must be given to designing the database and monitoring plans. Extensive data collection tools, complex databases, tight timelines, and stringent monitoring arrangements can be problematic and might put the study at risk. Finally, we discuss the complexities added when collecting and shipping isolates and the importance of having a robust central management team and interdisciplinary collaborators able to adapt easily and make swift decisions to deliver the study on time and to target. With pragmatic approaches, appropriate training, and good communication, these challenges can be overcome to deliver high-quality data from a complex study in challenging settings through a collaborative research network

Challenges in the Implementation of the NeoOBS Study, a Global Pragmatic Observational Cohort Study, to Investigate the Aetiology and Management of Neonatal Sepsis in the Hospital Setting

Neonatal sepsis is a significant cause of mortality and morbidity in low- and middle-income countries. To deliver high-quality data studies and inform future trials, it is crucial to understand the challenges encountered when managing global multi-centre research studies and to identify solutions that can feasibly be implemented in these settings. This paper provides an overview of the complexities faced by diverse research teams in different countries and regions, together with actions implemented to achieve pragmatic study management of a large multi-centre observational study of neonatal sepsis. We discuss specific considerations for enrolling sites with different approval processes and varied research experience, structures, and training. Implementing a flexible recruitment strategy and providing ongoing training were necessary to overcome these challenges. We emphasize the attention that must be given to designing the database and monitoring plans. Extensive data collection tools, complex databases, tight timelines, and stringent monitoring arrangements can be problematic and might put the study at risk. Finally, we discuss the complexities added when collecting and shipping isolates and the importance of having a robust central management team and interdisciplinary collaborators able to adapt easily and make swift decisions to deliver the study on time and to target. With pragmatic approaches, appropriate training, and good communication, these challenges can be overcome to deliver high-quality data from a complex study in challenging settings through a collaborative research network

Patterns of antibiotic use, pathogens, and prediction of mortality in hospitalized neonates and young infants with sepsis: A global neonatal sepsis observational cohort study (NeoOBS)

BACKGROUND: There is limited data on antibiotic treatment in hospitalized neonates in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs). We aimed to describe patterns of antibiotic use, pathogens, and clinical outcomes, and to develop a severity score predicting mortality in neonatal sepsis to inform future clinical trial design. METHODS AND FINDINGS: Hospitalized infants <60 days with clinical sepsis were enrolled during 2018 to 2020 by 19 sites in 11 countries (mainly Asia and Africa). Prospective daily observational data was collected on clinical signs, supportive care, antibiotic treatment, microbiology, and 28-day mortality. Two prediction models were developed for (1) 28-day mortality from baseline variables (baseline NeoSep Severity Score); and (2) daily risk of death on IV antibiotics from daily updated assessments (NeoSep Recovery Score). Multivariable Cox regression models included a randomly selected 85% of infants, with 15% for validation. A total of 3,204 infants were enrolled, with median birth weight of 2,500 g (IQR 1,400 to 3,000) and postnatal age of 5 days (IQR 1 to 15). 206 different empiric antibiotic combinations were started in 3,141 infants, which were structured into 5 groups based on the World Health Organization (WHO) AWaRe classification. Approximately 25.9% (n = 814) of infants started WHO first line regimens (Group 1-Access) and 13.8% (n = 432) started WHO second-line cephalosporins (cefotaxime/ceftriaxone) (Group 2-"Low" Watch). The largest group (34.0%, n = 1,068) started a regimen providing partial extended-spectrum beta-lactamase (ESBL)/pseudomonal coverage (piperacillin-tazobactam, ceftazidime, or fluoroquinolone-based) (Group 3-"Medium" Watch), 18.0% (n = 566) started a carbapenem (Group 4-"High" Watch), and 1.8% (n = 57) a Reserve antibiotic (Group 5, largely colistin-based), and 728/2,880 (25.3%) of initial regimens in Groups 1 to 4 were escalated, mainly to carbapenems, usually for clinical deterioration (n = 480; 65.9%). A total of 564/3,195 infants (17.7%) were blood culture pathogen positive, of whom 62.9% (n = 355) had a gram-negative organism, predominantly Klebsiella pneumoniae (n = 132) or Acinetobacter spp. (n = 72). Both were commonly resistant to WHO-recommended regimens and to carbapenems in 43 (32.6%) and 50 (71.4%) of cases, respectively. MRSA accounted for 33 (61.1%) of 54 Staphylococcus aureus isolates. Overall, 350/3,204 infants died (11.3%; 95% CI 10.2% to 12.5%), 17.7% if blood cultures were positive for pathogens (95% CI 14.7% to 21.1%, n = 99/564). A baseline NeoSep Severity Score had a C-index of 0.76 (0.69 to 0.82) in the validation sample, with mortality of 1.6% (3/189; 95% CI: 0.5% to 4.6%), 11.0% (27/245; 7.7% to 15.6%), and 27.3% (12/44; 16.3% to 41.8%) in low (score 0 to 4), medium (5 to 8), and high (9 to 16) risk groups, respectively, with similar performance across subgroups. A related NeoSep Recovery Score had an area under the receiver operating curve for predicting death the next day between 0.8 and 0.9 over the first week. There was significant variation in outcomes between sites and external validation would strengthen score applicability. CONCLUSION: Antibiotic regimens used in neonatal sepsis commonly diverge from WHO guidelines, and trials of novel empiric regimens are urgently needed in the context of increasing antimicrobial resistance (AMR). The baseline NeoSep Severity Score identifies high mortality risk criteria for trial entry, while the NeoSep Recovery Score can help guide decisions on regimen change. NeoOBS data informed the NeoSep1 antibiotic trial (ISRCTN48721236), which aims to identify novel first- and second-line empiric antibiotic regimens for neonatal sepsis. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov, (NCT03721302)

Morbidity and treatment-seeking pattern among low birth weight infants: A community-based cohort study from Puducherry

Background: To compare the morbidity and treatment-seeking pattern of low birth weight (LBW) and normal birth weight (NBW) infants during the first six months. Material and Methods: A prospective cohort study was conducted in the service areas of eight urban primary health centers of Puducherry from October 2019 to July 2021. Details of LBW and sex-matched NBW infants were obtained from the birth registers of selected PHCs. Data were collected using a structured interview schedule on completion of the first, third, and sixth months at their homes. For comparison, Mid-p exact test was used for incidence rates, t-test/Mann-Whitney for continuous variables and the Chi-square/Fisher's exact test for the categorical variables. Results: Ninety-four pairs of LBWS and NBW infants were recruited. The incidence of morbidity during the first six months among LBW and NBW infants was 37.5 and 33.3 episodes per 100 child months, respectively (P value 0.118). Though the incidence of all-cause morbidity was similar, skin infections were significantly higher among LBW (3.10 vs 1.21 per 100 child months, P = 0.04). The incidence of all-cause morbidity was high in LBW infants with poor weight gain. Conclusion: Birth weight was associated with all-cause morbidity during the first three months. However, this association varied in age points and infants' weight gain