Community-Based Interventions for Improving Perinatal and Neonatal Health Outcomes in Developing Countries: A Review of the Evidence

Author:

Bhutta Zulfiqar A.1,Darmstadt Gary L.23,Hasan Babar S.1,Haws Rachel A.3

Affiliation:

1. Department of Pediatrics and Child Health, Aga Khan University, Karachi, Pakistan

2. Saving Newborn Lives Initiative, Office of Health, Save the Children/USA, Washington, DC

3. Department of International Health, Bloomberg School of Public Health, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, MD

Abstract

Background. Infant and under-5 childhood mortality rates in developing countries have declined significantly in the past 2 to 3 decades. However, 2 critical indicators, maternal and newborn mortality, have hardly changed. World leaders at the United Nations Millennium Summit in September 2000 agreed on a critical goal to reduce deaths of children <5 years by two thirds, but this may be unattainable without halving newborn deaths, which now comprise 40% of all under-5 deaths. Greater emphasis on wide-scale implementation of proven, cost-effective measures is required to save women’s and newborns’ lives. Approximately 99% of neonatal deaths take place in developing countries, mostly in homes and communities. A comprehensive review of the evidence base for impact of interventions on neonatal health and survival in developing-country communities has not been reported. Objective. This review of community-based antenatal, intrapartum, and postnatal intervention trials in developing countries aimed to identify (1) key behaviors and interventions for which the weight of evidence is sufficient to recommend their inclusion in community-based neonatal care programs and (2) key gaps in knowledge and priority areas for future research and program learning. Methods. Available published and unpublished data on the impact of community-based strategies and interventions on perinatal and neonatal health status outcomes were reviewed. Evidence was summarized systematically and categorized into 4 levels of evidence based on study size, location, design, and reported impact, particularly on perinatal or neonatal mortality. The evidence was placed in the context of biological plausibility of the intervention; evidence from relevant developed-country studies; health care program experience in implementation; and recommendations from the World Health Organization and other leading agencies. Results. A paucity of community-based data was found from developing-country studies on health status impact for many interventions currently being considered for inclusion in neonatal health programs. However, review of the evidence and consideration of the broader context of knowledge, experience, and recommendations regarding these interventions enabled us to categorize them according to the strength of the evidence base and confidence regarding their inclusion now in programs. This article identifies a package of priority interventions to include in programs and formulates research priorities for advancing the state of the art in neonatal health care. Conclusions. This review emphasizes some new findings while recommending an integrated approach to safe motherhood and newborn health. The results of this study provide a foundation for policies and programs related to maternal and newborn health and emphasizes the importance of health systems research and evaluation of interventions. The review offers compelling support for using research to identify the most effective measures to save newborn lives. It also may facilitate dialogue with policy makers about the importance of investing in neonatal health.

Publisher

American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP)

Subject

Pediatrics, Perinatology and Child Health

Reference740 articles.

1. Koblinsky M, Campbell O, Heichelheim J. Organizing delivery care: what works for safe motherhood?Bull World Health Organ. 1999;77:399–406

2. Graham W, Bell J, Bullough C. Can skilled attendance at delivery reduce maternal mortality in developing countries? In: Studies in Health Services, Organisation, and Policy. Antwerp, Belgium: Prince Leopold Institute of Tropical Medicine; 2001:97–129

3. Sibley L, Sipe T. Traditional Birth Attendant Training Effectiveness: A Meta-analysis. Final Technical Report. Washington, DC: Academy for Educational Development/Sara Project; 2002

4. Bale J, Stoll B, Lucas A, eds. Improving Birth Outcomes: Meeting the Challenge in the Developing World. Committee on Improving Birth Outcomes, Board on Global Health. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press; 2003

5. Concato J, Horwitz R. Beyond randomised versus observational studies. Lancet. 2004;363:1660–1661

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3