1
|
Habibelahi A, Heidarzadeh M, Abdollahi L, Taheri M, Ghaffari-Fam S, Vakilian R, Daemi A. Clinical cause of neonatal mortality in Iran: analysis of the national Iranian Maternal And Neonatal network. BMJ Paediatr Open 2024; 8:e002315. [PMID: 38508661 PMCID: PMC10961515 DOI: 10.1136/bmjpo-2023-002315] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/11/2023] [Accepted: 03/07/2024] [Indexed: 03/22/2024] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND The neonatal mortality rate is a main indicator of the health and development of a country. Having insight into the cause of neonatal deaths may be the first step to reducing it. This paper depicts the cause of newborn deaths in Iran. METHODS This cross-sectional study was performed on data from the national Iranian Maternal And Neonatal network to investigate all neonatal deaths in the country during the year 2019. The cause of death data were reported according to categories of birth weight, gestational age (GA), death time and place. RESULTS The main causes of the 9959 neonatal deaths during the study period were respiratory distress syndrome (RDS) (37%), malformation (21%), prematurity of <26 weeks (20%), others (12%), asphyxia (7%) and infection (3%). The major causes of neonatal mortality in delivery rooms were prematurity of <26 weeks and in the inpatient wards the RDS. By increasing the GA and birth weight towards term babies, the rate of RDS gets lower, while that of malformation gets higher. CONCLUSIONS RDS was the main cause of neonatal mortality in Iran which is seen mainly in preterm babies. Prematurity of <26 weeks was another main cause. Thus, suggestions include reducing prematurity by preconception and pregnancy care and, on the other hand, improving the care of preterm infants in delivery rooms and inpatient wards.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Abbas Habibelahi
- Iran Ministry of Health and Medical Education, Tehran, Iran (the Islamic Republic of)
| | | | - Leila Abdollahi
- Department of Health Services Management, Iran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran (the Islamic Republic of)
| | - Majzoubeh Taheri
- Iran Ministry of Health and Medical Education, Tehran, Iran (the Islamic Republic of)
| | - Saber Ghaffari-Fam
- Department of Epidemiology, Hamadan University of Medical Sciences, Hamadan, Iran (the Islamic Republic of)
| | - Roshanak Vakilian
- Iran Ministry of Health and Medical Education, Tehran, Iran (the Islamic Republic of)
| | - Amin Daemi
- Department of Health Services Management, Iran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran (the Islamic Republic of)
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Agravat P, Loucaides EM, Kumar MB, Howells A, García AM, Sebina I, Balanza N, Fitchett EJA, Lawn JE. Research funding for newborn health and stillbirths, 2011-20: a systematic analysis of levels and trends. Lancet Glob Health 2023; 11:e1794-e1804. [PMID: 37858589 PMCID: PMC10603613 DOI: 10.1016/s2214-109x(23)00379-0] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/27/2023] [Revised: 07/21/2023] [Accepted: 08/03/2023] [Indexed: 10/21/2023]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Worldwide, an estimated 4·4 million newborn deaths and stillbirths occurred in 2020, and 98% of these deaths occurred in low-income and middle-income countries (LMICs). We aimed to analyse new research grants for newborns and stillbirth awarded by major funders in 2019-20, and all research funding allocated to LMIC-based institutions in 2011-20. METHODS For this systematic analysis, we searched Dimensions, the world's largest research funding database, for grants relevant to neonatal and stillbirth research. Included grants were categorised by in-depth content analysis, with descriptive quantitative analyses by funder and recipient countries, research pipeline, topic, and year. FINDINGS Globally, in 2019-20, major funders awarded a mean annual total of US$577·1 million per year for newborn and stillbirth research (mean total of 550 grants per year). $166·3 million (28·8%) of $577·1 million was directed to small and vulnerable newborn research, but only $8·4 million (1·5%) was directed to stillbirth research. The majority of funding, $537·0 million (93·0%), was allocated to organisations based in high-income countries. Between 2011 and 2020, LMIC-based recipients were named on 1985 grants from all funders worth $486·7 million, of which $73·1 million (15·0%) was allocated to small and vulnerable newborn research and $12·0 million (2·5%) was allocated to stillbirth research. Most LMIC funding supported preclinical or observational studies ($236·8 million [48·7%] of $486·7 million), with implementation research receiving only $13·9 million (2·9%). INTERPRETATION Although investment in research related to neonatal health and stillbirths has increased between 2011 and 2020, there are marked disparities in distribution geographically, between major causes of mortality, and among research pipeline types. Stillbirth research received minimal funding in both high-income countries and LMICs, despite a similar number of deaths compared with neonates. Direct investment in LMIC-led research, especially for implementation research, could accelerate the slow global progress on stillbirth prevention and newborn survival. FUNDING None. TRANSLATIONS For the French, German and Spanish translations of the abstract see Supplementary Materials section.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | | | - Meghan Bruce Kumar
- London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine, London, UK; KEMRI-Wellcome Trust, Nairobi, Kenya
| | - Anna Howells
- King's College Hospital NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK
| | | | - Ismail Sebina
- QIMR Berghofer Medical Research Institute, Herston, QLD, Australia
| | - Núria Balanza
- ISGlobal, Hospital Clínic - Universitat de Barcelona, Barcelona, Spain
| | | | - Joy E Lawn
- London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine, London, UK
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
Research priorities for maternal and perinatal health clinical trials and methods used to identify them: A systematic review. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol 2023; 280:120-131. [PMID: 36455392 DOI: 10.1016/j.ejogrb.2022.11.022] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/28/2022] [Revised: 11/14/2022] [Accepted: 11/21/2022] [Indexed: 11/27/2022]
Abstract
OBJECTIVE Research prioritisation helps to target research resources to the most pressing health and healthcare needs of a population. This systematic review aimed to report research priorities in maternal and perinatal health and to assess the methods that were used to identify them. METHODS A systematic review was undertaken. Projects that aimed to identify research priorities that were considered to be amenable to clinical trials research were eligible for inclusion. The search, limited to the last decade and publications in English, included MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINHAL, relevant Cochrane priority lists, Cochrane Priority Setting Methods Group homepage, James Lind Alliance homepage, Joanna Brigg's register, PROSPERO register, reference lists of all included articles, grey literature, and the websites of relevant professional bodies, until 13 October 2020. The methods used for prioritisation were appraised using the Reporting Guideline for Priority Setting of Health Research (REPRISE). FINDINGS From the 62 included projects, 757 research priorities of relevance to maternal and perinatal health were identified. The most common priorities related to healthcare systems and services, pregnancy care and complications, and newborn care and complications. The least common priorities related to preconception and postpartum health, maternal mental health, contraception and pregnancy termination, and fetal medicine and surveillance. The most commonly used prioritisation methods were Delphi (20, 32%), Child Health Nutrition Research Initiative (17, 27%) and the James Lind Alliance (10, 16%). The fourteen projects (23%) that reported on at least 80% of the items included in the REPRISE guideline all used an established research prioritisation method. CONCLUSIONS There are a large number of diverse research priorities in maternal and perinatal health that are amenable to future clinical trials research. These have been identified by a variety of research prioritisation methods.
Collapse
|
4
|
Marx MA, Frost E, Hazel E, Mohan D. Measuring Quality of Maternal, Neonatal, Child, Reproductive Health and Nutrition Care with tools developed by the RADAR project and tested in Sub Saharan Africa. Glob Health Action 2022; 15:2006469. [PMID: 36098957 PMCID: PMC9481078 DOI: 10.1080/16549716.2021.2006469] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/20/2022] Open
Abstract
Increasing coverage of evidence-based maternal, neonatal, child, reproductive health and nutrition (MNCRHN) programs in low- and middle-income countries has coincided with dramatic improvements in health despite variable quality of implementation. Comprehensive evaluation to inform program improvement requires standardized but adaptable tools, which the Real Accountability, Data Analysis for Results (RADAR) project has developed. To inform selection of tools and methods packages (‘packages’) to measure program quality of care (QoC), we documented experiences testing the packages, which were developed and adapted based on global and local expertise, and pre- and pilot-testing. We conducted cross-sectional studies in 2018–2019 on the quality of 1) integrated community case management, 2) counseling on maternal, infant, and young child feeding, 3) intrapartum care, and 4) family planning counseling in Mali, Mozambique, Tanzania, and Malawi. Herein we describe package performance and highlight experiences that inform their selection and use. Direct observation packages provided high-quality, immediately applicable results but they required specialized expertise, in-person collection, adequate patient volume, reasonable wait times, and unambiguously ‘correct’ provision of care. General satisfaction questions from exit interview packages produced unvaryingly positive responses despite variable observed quality of care. Variation increased when questions were more targeted, but findings on caregiver and client’s recall of recommendations were more actionable. When interactive, clinical vignettes can capture knowledge of clinical care. But for conditions that can be simulated, like provision of family planning counseling, we could capture provider practice from simulated clients. Clinicians could more easily demonstrate tactile aspects of intrapartum care using observed structured clinical examinations, but this method required storage and transport of the required mannequins. Based on our findings we recommend ten questions upon which evaluators can base package selection. Findings from these packages inform programs and, in the context of comprehensive program evaluation enable us to link programs with impact.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Melissa A Marx
- Institute for International Programs, Department of International Health, Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, Baltimore, MD, USA
| | - Emily Frost
- Institute for International Programs, Department of International Health, Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, Baltimore, MD, USA
| | - Elizabeth Hazel
- Institute for International Programs, Department of International Health, Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, Baltimore, MD, USA
| | - Diwakar Mohan
- Institute for International Programs, Department of International Health, Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, Baltimore, MD, USA
| |
Collapse
|
5
|
Ssegujja E, Andipatin M. Building on momentum from the global campaigns: an exploration of factors that influenced prioritization of stillbirth prevention at the national level in Uganda. Global Health 2021; 17:66. [PMID: 34174919 PMCID: PMC8236146 DOI: 10.1186/s12992-021-00724-1] [Citation(s) in RCA: 3] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/24/2020] [Accepted: 06/15/2021] [Indexed: 11/15/2022] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Of the close to 2.6 million stillbirths that happen annually, most are from low-income countries where until recently policies rarely paid special attention to addressing them. The global campaigns that followed called on countries to implement strategies addressing stillbirths and the adoption of recommendations varied according to contexts. This study explored factors that influenced the prioritization of stillbirth reduction in Uganda. METHODS The study employed an exploratory qualitative design adopting Shiffman's framework for political prioritization. Data collection methods included a document review and key informants' interviews with a purposively selected sample of 20 participants from the policy community. Atlas. Ti software was used for data management while thematic analysis was conducted to analyze the findings. FINDINGS Political prioritization of stillbirth interventions gained momentum following norm promotion from the global campaigns which peaked during the 2011 Lancet stillbirth series. This was followed by funding and technical support of various projects in Uganda. A combination of domestic advocacy factors such as a cohesive policy community converging around the Maternal and Child Health cluster accelerated the process by vetting the evidence and refining recommendations to support the adoption of the policy. The government's health systems strengthening aspirations and integration of interventions to address stillbirths within the overall Maternal and Child Health programming resonated well. CONCLUSIONS The transnational influence played a key role during the initial stages of raising attention to the problem and provision of technical and financial support. The success and subsequent processes, however, relied heavily on domestic advocacy and the national political environment, and the cohesive policy community.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Eric Ssegujja
- Department of Health Policy Planning and Management, Makerere University School of Public Health, Kampala, Uganda.
- School of Public Health, University of the Western Cape, Cape Town, South Africa.
| | - Michelle Andipatin
- Department of Psychology, University of the Western Cape, Cape Town, South Africa
| |
Collapse
|
6
|
Vaz LME, Franco L, Guenther T, Simmons K, Herrera S, Wall SN. Operationalising health systems thinking: a pathway to high effective coverage. Health Res Policy Syst 2020; 18:132. [PMID: 33143734 PMCID: PMC7641804 DOI: 10.1186/s12961-020-00615-8] [Citation(s) in RCA: 6] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/01/2019] [Accepted: 08/03/2020] [Indexed: 01/25/2023] Open
Abstract
Background The global health community has recognised the importance of defining and measuring the effective coverage of health interventions and their implementation strength to monitor progress towards global mortality and morbidity targets. Existing health system models and frameworks guide thinking around these measurement areas; however, they fall short of adequately capturing the dynamic and multi-level relationships between different components of the health system. These relationships must be articulated for measurement and managed to effectively deliver health interventions of sufficient quality to achieve health impacts. Save the Children’s Saving Newborn Lives programme and EnCompass LLC, its evaluation partner, developed and applied the Pathway to High Effective Coverage as a health systems thinking framework (hereafter referred to as the Pathway) in its strategic planning, monitoring and evaluation. Methods We used an iterative approach to develop, test and refine thinking around the Pathway. The initial framework was developed based on existing literature, then shared and vetted during consultations with global health thought leaders in maternal and newborn health. Results The Pathway is a robust health systems thinking framework that unpacks system, policy and point of intervention delivery factors, thus encouraging specific actions to address gaps in implementation and facilitate the achievement of high effective coverage. The Pathway includes six main components – (1) national readiness; (2) system structures; (3) management capacity; (4) implementation strength; (5) effective coverage; and (6) impact. Each component is comprised of specific elements reflecting the range of facility-, community- and home-based interventions. We describe applications of the Pathway and results for in-country strategic planning, monitoring of progress and implementation strength, and evaluation. Conclusions The Pathway provides a cohesive health systems thinking framework that facilitates assessment and coordinated action to achieve high coverage and impact. Experiences of its application show its utility in guiding strategic planning and in more comprehensive and effective monitoring and evaluation as well as its potential adaptability for use in other health areas and sectors.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Lara M E Vaz
- Population Reference Bureau, 1875 Connecticut Avenue, NW Suite 520, Washington, DC, 20009, United States of America.
| | - Lynne Franco
- EnCompass LLC, 1451 Rockville Pike Suite 600, Rockville, MD, 20852, USA
| | - Tanya Guenther
- Formerly with Save the Children US, 899 North Capitol St NE Suite 900, Washington DC, 20001, USA
| | - Kelsey Simmons
- Ford Foundation, 320 E 43rd St, New York, NY, 10017, USA
| | - Samantha Herrera
- Save the Children US, 899 North Capitol St NE Suite 900, Washington DC, 20001, USA
| | - Stephen N Wall
- Save the Children US, 899 North Capitol St NE Suite 900, Washington DC, 20001, USA
| |
Collapse
|
7
|
Ditai J, Nakyazze M, Namutebi DA, Auma P, Chebet M, Nalumansi C, Nabulo GM, Mugabe K, Gronlund TA, Mbonye A, Weeks AD. Maternal and newborn health priority setting partnership in rural Uganda in association with the James Lind Alliance: a study protocol. RESEARCH INVOLVEMENT AND ENGAGEMENT 2020; 6:57. [PMID: 32974053 PMCID: PMC7506205 DOI: 10.1186/s40900-020-00231-4] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Figures] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/07/2020] [Accepted: 09/14/2020] [Indexed: 06/11/2023]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Maternal and newborn deaths and ill health are relatively common in low income countries, but can adequately be addressed through locally, collaboratively designed, and responsive research. This has the potential to enable the affected women, their families and health workers themselves to explore 'why maternal and newborn adverse outcomes continue to occur. The objectives of the study include; To work with seldom heard groups of mothers, their families, and health workers to identify unanswered research questions for maternal and newborn health in villages and health facilities in rural UgandaTo establish locally responsive research questions for maternal and newborn health that could be prioritised together with the public in UgandaTo support the case for locally responsive research in maternal and newborn health by the ministry of health, academic researchers and funding bodies in Uganda. METHODS The present study will follow the James Lind Alliance (JLA) Priority Setting Partnership (PSP) methodology. The project was initiated by an academic research group and will be managed by a research team at the Sanyu Africa Research Institute on a day to day basis. A steering group with a separate lay mothers' group and partners' group (individuals or organisations with interest in maternal and newborn health) will be recruited. The PSP will be initiated by launch meetings, then a face-to-face initial survey for the collection of raw unanswered questions; followed by data collation. A face-to-face interim prioritisation survey will then be performed to choose questions before the three separate final prioritisation workshops.The PSP will involve many participants from an illiterate, non-internet population in rural eastern Uganda, but all with an interest in strategies to avert maternal and newborn deaths or morbidities in rural eastern Uganda. This includes local rural women, their families, health and social workers, and relevant local groups or organisations.We will generate a top 10 list of maternal and newborn health research priorities from a group with no prior experience in setting a research agenda in rural eastern Uganda. DISCUSSION The current protocol elaborates the JLA methods for application with a new topic and in a new setting translating the JLA principles not just into the local language, but into a rural, vulnerable, illiterate, and non-internet population in Uganda. The face-to-face human interaction is powerful in eliciting what exactly matters to individuals in this particular context as opposed to online surveys.This will be the first time that mothers and lay public with current or previous experience of maternal or neonatal adverse outcomes will have the opportunity to identify and prioritise research questions that matter to them in Uganda. We will be able to compare how the public would prioritise maternal health research questions over newborn health in this setting.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- James Ditai
- Sanyu Research Unit, Department of Women’s and Children’s Health, University of Liverpool, Liverpool Health Partners, Crown Street, Liverpool, L8 7SS UK
- Sanyu Africa Research Institute (SAfRI), Mbale Regional Referral Hospital, Pallisa road, Mbale, Uganda
- Busitema University Faculty of Health Sciences, Mbale, Uganda
| | - Monicah Nakyazze
- Sanyu Africa Research Institute (SAfRI), Mbale Regional Referral Hospital, Pallisa road, Mbale, Uganda
| | - Deborah Andrinar Namutebi
- Sanyu Africa Research Institute (SAfRI), Mbale Regional Referral Hospital, Pallisa road, Mbale, Uganda
| | | | - Martin Chebet
- Sanyu Research Unit, Department of Women’s and Children’s Health, University of Liverpool, Liverpool Health Partners, Crown Street, Liverpool, L8 7SS UK
- Busitema University Faculty of Health Sciences, Mbale, Uganda
| | | | - Grace Martha Nabulo
- Sanyu Africa Research Institute (SAfRI), Mbale Regional Referral Hospital, Pallisa road, Mbale, Uganda
- Busiu HCIV, Mbale District local government, Tororo Road, Mbale, Uganda
| | - Kenneth Mugabe
- Busitema University Faculty of Health Sciences, Mbale, Uganda
| | - Toto Anne Gronlund
- The James Lind Alliance, Trials and Studies Coordinating Centre, National Institute for Health Research Evaluation, University of Southampton, Alpha House, Enterprise Road, Southampton, Southampton, SO16 7NS UK
| | - Anthony Mbonye
- School of Public Health, Makerere University College of Health Sciences, Kampala, Uganda
| | - Andrew D. Weeks
- Sanyu Research Unit, Department of Women’s and Children’s Health, University of Liverpool, Liverpool Health Partners, Crown Street, Liverpool, L8 7SS UK
| |
Collapse
|