scholarly journals Mode and timing of twin delivery and perinatal outcomes in low- and middle-income countries: a secondary analysis of the WHO Multicountry Survey on Maternal and Newborn Health

2014 ◽  
Vol 121 ◽  
pp. 89-100 ◽  
Author(s):  
T Ganchimeg ◽  
N Morisaki ◽  
JP Vogel ◽  
JG Cecatti ◽  
J Barrett ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Secondary Analysis ◽  
Perinatal Outcomes ◽  
Newborn Health ◽  
Maternal And Newborn Health ◽  
Middle Income ◽  
Middle Income Countries ◽  
Twin Delivery ◽  
Maternal And Newborn ◽  
Low And Middle Income

scholarly journals Effects of community health worker interventions on socioeconomic inequities in maternal and newborn health in low-income and middle-income countries: a mixed-methods systematic review

2019 ◽  
Vol 4 (3) ◽  
pp. e001308 ◽  
Author(s):  
Andrea Katryn Blanchard ◽  
Audrey Prost ◽  
Tanja A J Houweling
Keyword(s):  
Mixed Methods ◽  
Low Income ◽  
Home Visits ◽  
Newborn Health ◽  
Maternal And Newborn Health ◽  
Women's Groups ◽  
Middle Income ◽  
Middle Income Countries ◽  
Women’S Groups ◽  
Maternal And Newborn

IntroductionCommunity health worker (CHW) interventions are promoted to improve maternal and newborn health in low-income and middle-income countries. We reviewed the evidence on their effectiveness in reducing socioeconomic inequities in maternal and newborn health outcomes, how they achieve these effects, and contextual processes that shape these effects.MethodsWe conducted a mixed-methods systematic review of quantitative and qualitative studies published between 1996 and 2017 in Medline, Embase, Web of Science and Scopus databases. We included studies examining the effects of CHW interventions in low-income and middle-income countries on maternal and newborn health outcomes across socioeconomic groups (wealth, occupation, education, class, caste or tribe and religion). We then conducted a narrative synthesis of evidence.ResultsWe identified 1919 articles, of which 22 met the inclusion criteria. CHWs facilitated four types of interventions: home visits, community-based groups, cash transfers or combinations of these. Four studies found that CHWs providing home visits or facilitating women’s groups had equitable coverage. Four others found that home visits and cash transfer interventions had inequitable coverage. Five studies reported equitable effects of CHW interventions on antenatal care, skilled birth attendance and/or essential newborn care. One study found that a CHW home visit intervention did not reduce wealth inequities in skilled birth attendance. A study of women’s groups reported greater reductions in neonatal mortality among lower compared with higher socioeconomic groups. Equity was most improved when CHWs had relevant support for assisting women to improve health practices and access health care within community contexts.ConclusionWhile current evidence remains limited, particularly for mortality, existing studies suggest that CHW interventions involving home visits, cash transfers, participatory women’s groups or multiple components can improve equity in maternal and newborn health. Future mixed-methods research should explore intervention strategies and contextual processes shaping such effects on equity to optimise these efforts.

scholarly journals Rates and risk factors for preterm birth and low birthweight in the global network sites in six low- and low middle-income countries

2020 ◽  
Vol 17 (S3) ◽  
Author(s):  
Yamini V. Pusdekar ◽  
Archana B. Patel ◽  
Kunal G. Kurhe ◽  
Savita R. Bhargav ◽  
Vanessa Thorsten ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Public Health ◽  
Risk Factors ◽  
Preterm Birth ◽  
Newborn Health ◽  
Maternal And Newborn Health ◽  
Middle Income ◽  
Factors Associated ◽  
Middle Income Countries ◽  
Health Registry ◽  
Maternal And Newborn

Abstract Background Preterm birth continues to be a major public health problem contributing to 75% of the neonatal mortality worldwide. Low birth weight (LBW) is an important but imperfect surrogate for prematurity when accurate assessment of gestational age is not possible. While there is overlap between preterm birth and LBW newborns, those that are both premature and LBW are at the highest risk of adverse neonatal outcomes. Understanding the epidemiology of preterm birth and LBW is important for prevention and improved care for at risk newborns, but in many countries, data are sparse and incomplete. Methods We conducted data analyses using the Global Network’s (GN) population-based registry of pregnant women and their babies in rural communities in six low- and middle-income countries (Democratic Republic of Congo, Kenya, Zambia, Guatemala, India and Pakistan). We analyzed data from January 2014 to December 2018. Trained study staff enrolled all pregnant women in the study catchment area as early as possible during pregnancy and conducted follow-up visits shortly after delivery and at 42 days after delivery. We analyzed the rates of preterm birth, LBW and the combination of preterm birth and LBW and studied risk factors associated with these outcomes across the GN sites. Results A total of 272,192 live births were included in the analysis. The overall preterm birth rate was 12.6% (ranging from 8.6% in Belagavi, India to 21.8% in the Pakistani site). The overall LBW rate was 13.6% (ranging from 2.7% in the Kenyan site to 21.4% in the Pakistani site). The overall rate of both preterm birth and LBW was 5.5% (ranging from 1.2% in the Kenyan site to 11.0% in the Pakistani site). Risk factors associated with preterm birth, LBW and the combination were similar across sites and included nulliparity [RR − 1.27 (95% CI 1.21–1.33)], maternal age under 20 [RR 1.41 (95% CI 1.32–1.49)] years, severe antenatal hemorrhage [RR 5.18 95% CI 4.44–6.04)], hypertensive disorders [RR 2.74 (95% CI − 1.21–1.33], and 1–3 antenatal visits versus four or more [RR 1.68 (95% CI 1.55–1.83)]. Conclusions Preterm birth, LBW and their combination continue to be common public health problems at some of the GN sites, particularly among young, nulliparous women who have received limited antenatal care services. Trial registration The identifier of the Maternal and Newborn Health Registry at ClinicalTrials.gov is NCT01073475.Trial registration: The identifier of the Maternal and Newborn Health Registry at ClinicalTrials.gov is NCT01073475.

scholarly journals Private sector delivery of maternal and newborn health care in low-income and middle-income countries: a scoping review protocol

BMJ Open ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (12) ◽  
pp. e055600
Author(s):  
Samantha R Lattof ◽  
Blerta Maliqi ◽  
Nuhu Yaqub ◽  
Anne-Sophie Jung
Keyword(s):  
Private Sector ◽  
Scoping Review ◽  
Health Sector ◽  
Newborn Health ◽  
Maternal And Newborn Health ◽  
Middle Income ◽  
Middle Income Countries ◽  
Private Health Sector ◽  
Review Protocol ◽  
Maternal And Newborn

IntroductionRecent studies have pointed to the substantial role of private health sector delivery of maternal and newborn health (MNH) care in low-/middle-income countries (LMICs). While this role has been partly documented, an evidence synthesis is missing. To analyse opportunities and challenges of private sector delivery of MNH care as they pertain to the new World Health Organization (WHO) strategy on engaging the private health service delivery sector through governance in mixed health systems, a more granular understanding of the private health sector’s role and extent in MNH delivery is imperative. We developed a scoping review protocol to map and conceptualise interventions that were explicitly designed and implemented by formal private health sector providers to deliver MNH care in mixed health systems.Methods and analysisThis protocol details our intended methodological and analytical approach following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for scoping reviews. Seven databases (Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health, Excerpta Medica Database, International Bibliography of the Social Sciences, PubMed, ScienceDirect, Web of Science, WHO Institutional Repository for Information Sharing) and two websites will be searched for studies published between 1 January 2002 and 1 June 2021. For inclusion, quantitative and/or qualitative studies in LMICs must report at least one of the following outcomes: maternal morbidity or mortality; newborn morbidity or mortality; experience of care; use of formal private sector care during pregnancy, childbirth, and postpartum; and stillbirth. Analyses will synthesise the evidence base and gaps on private sector MNH service delivery interventions for each of the six governance behaviours.Ethics and disseminationEthical approval is not required. Findings will be used to develop a menu of private sector interventions for MNH care by governance behaviour. This study will be disseminated through a peer-reviewed publication, working groups, webinars and partners.

scholarly journals Assessing the quality of antenatal corticosteroids in low- and middle-income countries: A systematic review

PLoS ONE ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 15 (12) ◽  
pp. e0243034
Author(s):  
Euodia Mosoro ◽  
Alyce N. Wilson ◽  
Caroline S. E. Homer ◽  
Joshua P. Vogel
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Newborn Health ◽  
Poor Quality ◽  
Maternal And Newborn Health ◽  
Antenatal Corticosteroids ◽  
Middle Income ◽  
Middle Income Countries ◽  
Medicine Quality ◽  
Maternal And Newborn

Background The World Health Organization (WHO) recommends the administration of intramuscular antenatal corticosteroids to women at risk of preterm birth to prevent preterm-associated neonatal mortality and morbidity. Poor quality medicines are a major problem for health services in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs), however the quality of antenatal corticosteroids is not well understood. We aimed to conduct a systematic review of available studies describing the quality of recommended injectable antenatal corticosteroids (dexamethasone or betamethasone) in LMICs. Methods Structured search strategy was applied to six databases (MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, International Pharmaceutical Abstracts, Global Index Medicus, WHO Medicines Quality Database), without year or language restrictions. Any primary study reporting any medicine quality parameter (Active Pharmacological Ingredient, pH and sterility) for injectable dexamethasone or betamethasone was eligible. Two authors independently screened studies for eligibility, extracted data on included studies and applied Medicine Quality Assessment Reporting Guidelines tool to assess study quality. Results were reported narratively, stratified by country of manufacture, organisation type and level of care. Results In total, 15,547 citations were screened with two eligible studies identified that focussed on dexamethasone quality (no studies of betamethasone were identified). One study included 19 samples from 9 LMICs, and the other included “less than 100 samples” from India. The prevalence of failed dexamethasone samples ranged from 3.14% to 32.2% due to inadequate Active Pharmacological Ingredient. A higher prevalence of failed dexamethasone samples were seen at the point of care and the public sector. Conclusions Poor quality maternal and newborn health medicines can endanger women and newborns. Though available evidence on antenatal corticosteroids quality in LMICs is limited, results suggested poor quality dexamethasone may be prevalent in some countries. More primary studies are required to confirm these findings and guide policymakers on procurement of good-quality maternal and newborn health medicines.

scholarly journals Improving global maternal and newborn survival via innovation: Stakeholder perspectives on the Saving Lives at Birth Grand Challenge

PLoS ONE ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 16 (7) ◽  
pp. e0254589
Author(s):  
Amy Finnegan ◽  
Blen Biru ◽  
Andrea Taylor ◽  
Sowmya Rajan ◽  
Krishna Udayakumar ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Newborn Health ◽  
Maternal And Newborn Health ◽  
Grand Challenge ◽  
Open Approach ◽  
Full Spectrum ◽  
Middle Income ◽  
Stakeholder Perspectives ◽  
Private Investors ◽  
Maternal And Newborn ◽  
Low And Middle Income

The Saving Lives at Birth (SL@B) funding partners joined in 2011 to source, support, and scale maternal and newborn health (MNH) innovations to improve maternal and newborn survival by focusing on the 24 hours around the time of birth. A multi-methods, retrospective portfolio evaluation was conducted to determine SL@B’s impact. Forty semi-structured, key informant interviews (KIIs) were conducted with experts in global MNH based in low- and middle-income and in high-income countries to assess the SL@B program. KIIs were conducted with global MNH technical experts, innovators, government officials in low- and middle-income countries, donors, private investors, and implementing partners to include the full spectrum of voices involved in identifying and scaling innovations. Data were analyzed using thematic analysis. Stakeholders believe the SL@B program has been successful in changing the way maternal and newborn health programs are delivered with a focus on doing things differently through innovation. The open approach to sourcing innovation was seen as positive to the extent that it brought more interdisciplinary stakeholders to think about the problem of maternal and newborn survival. However, a demand-driven approach that aims to source innovations that address MNH priority needs and takes into account the needs of end users (e.g. individuals and governments) was suggested as a strategy for ensuring that more innovations go to scale.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document