RESUMEN

Background: Institutional births ensure deliveries happen under the supervision of skilled healthcare personnel in an enabling environment. For countries like India, with high neonatal and maternal mortalities, achieving 100% coverage of institutional births is a top policy priority. In this respect, public health institutions have a key role, given that they remain the preferred choice by most of the population, owing to the existing barriers to healthcare access. While research in this domain has focused on private health institutions, there are limited studies, especially in the Indian context, that look at the enablers of institutional births in public health facilities. In this study, we look to identify the significant predictors of institutional birth in public health facilities in India. Method: We rely on the National Family Health Survey (NFHS-5) factsheet data for analysis. Our dependent variable (DV) in this study is the % of institutional births in public health facilities. We first use Welch's t-test to determine if there is any significant difference between urban and rural areas in terms of the DV. We then use multiple linear regression and partial F-test to identify the best-fit model that predicts the variation in the DV. We generate two models in this study and use Akaike's Information Criterion (AIC) and adjusted R2 values to identify the best-fit model. Results: We find no significant difference between urban and rural areas (P = 0.02, α =0.05) regarding the mean % of institutional births in public health facilities. The best-fit model is an interaction model with a moderate effect size (Adjusted2 = 0.35) and an AIC of 179.93, lower than the competitive model (AIC = 183.56). We find household health insurance (ß = -0.29) and homebirth conducted under the supervision of skilled healthcare personnel (ß = -0.56) to be significant predictors of institutional births in public facilities in India. Additionally, we observe low body mass index (BMI) and obesity to have a synergistic impact on the DV. Our findings show that the interaction between low BMI and obesity has a strong negative influence (ß = -0.61) on institutional births in public health facilities in India. Conclusion: Providing households with health insurance coverage may not improve the utilisation of public health facilities for deliveries in India, where other barriers to public healthcare access exist. Therefore, it is important to look at interventions that minimise the existing barriers to access. While the ultimate objective from a policy perspective should be achieving 100% coverage of institutional births in the long run, a short-term strategy makes sense in the Indian context, especially to manage the complications arising during births outside an institutional setting.

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: Postpartum hemorrhage (PPH) is the leading cause of maternal mortality worldwide. In Afghanistan, where most births take place at home without the assistance of a skilled birth attendant, there is a need for options to manage PPH in community-based settings. Misoprostol, a uterotonic that has been used as prophylaxis at the household level and has also been proven to be effective in treating PPH in hospital settings, is one possible option. METHODS: A double-blind, randomized placebo-controlled trial was conducted in six districts in Badakhshan Province, Afghanistan to test the effectiveness and safety of administering 800mcg sublingual misoprostol to women after a home birth for treatment of excessive blood loss. Consenting women were enrolled prior to delivery and given 600mcg misoprostol to self-administer orally as prophylaxis. Community health workers (CHW) were trained to observe for signs of PPH after delivery and if PPH was diagnosed, administer the study medication (misoprostol or placebo) and immediately refer the woman. A hemoglobin (Hb) decline of 2 g/dL or greater, measured pre- and post-delivery, served as the primary outcome; side effects, additional interventions, and transfer rates were also analyzed. RESULTS: Among the 1884 women who delivered at home, nearly all (98.7%) reported self-use of misoprostol for PPH prevention. A small fraction was diagnosed with PPH (4.4%, 82/1884) and was administered treatment. Hb outcomes, including the proportion of women with a Hb drop of 2 g/dL or greater, were similar between the study groups (misoprostol: 56.4% (22/39), placebo: 60.6% (20/33), p = 0.45). Significantly more women randomized to receive misoprostol experienced shivering (82.5% vs. placebo: 61.5%, p = 0.03). Other side effects were similar between study groups and none required treatment, including among the subset of 39 women, who received misoprostol for both of its PPH indications. CONCLUSIONS: While the study did not document a clinical benefit associated with misoprostol for treatment of PPH, study findings suggest that use of misoprostol for both prevention and treatment in the same birth as well as its use by lay level providers in home births does not result in any safety concerns. TRIAL REGISTRATION: This trial was registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01508429 Registered on December 1, 2011.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: Previous community-based research shows that secondary prevention of postpartum hemorrhage (PPH) with misoprostol only given to women with above-average measured blood loss produces similar clinical outcomes compared to routine administration of misoprostol for prevention of PPH. Given the difficulty of routinely measuring blood loss for all deliveries, more operational models of secondary prevention are needed. METHODS: This cluster-randomized, non-inferiority trial included women giving birth with nurse-midwives at home or in Primary Health Units (PHUs) in rural Egypt. Two PPH management approaches were compared: 1) 600mcg oral misoprostol given to all women after delivery (i.e. primary prevention, current standard of care); 2) 800mcg sublingual misoprostol given only to women with 350-500 ml postpartum blood loss estimated using an underpad (i.e. secondary prevention). The primary outcome was mean change in pre- and post-delivery hemoglobin. Secondary outcomes included hemoglobin ≥2 g/dL and other PPH interventions. RESULTS: Misoprostol was administered after delivery to 100% (1555/1555) and 10.7% (117/1099) of women in primary and secondary prevention clusters, respectively. The mean drop in pre- to post-delivery hemoglobin was 0.37 (SD: 0.91) and 0.45 (SD: 0.76) among women in primary and secondary prevention clusters, respectively (difference adjusted for clustering = 0.01, one-sided 95% CI: < 0.27, p = 0.535). There were no statistically significant differences in secondary outcomes, including hemoglobin drop ≥2 g/dL, PPH diagnosis, transfer to higher level, or other interventions. CONCLUSIONS: Misoprostol for secondary prevention of PPH is comparable to universal prophylaxis and can be implemented using local materials, such as underpads. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Clinicaltrials.gov NCT02226588, date of registration 27 August 2014.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

Objectives The objective of this study was to identify maternal and provider predictors of newborn screening (NBS) refusal in North Dakota between 2011 and 2014. Methods Records of 40,440 live resident births occurring in North Dakota between 2011 and 2014 were obtained from the North Dakota Department of Health and included in the study. Factor-specific percentages of NBS refusals and 95% confidence intervals were computed for each predictor. Since the outcome is rare, multivariable Firth logistic regression was used to investigate maternal and provider predictors of NBS refusal. Model goodness-of-fit test was evaluated using the Hosmer-Lemeshow test. All analyses were conducted in SAS 9.4. Results Of the 40,440 live births, 135 (0.33%) were NBS refusals. 97% of the refusals were to white women, 94% were homebirths, and 93% utilized state non-credentialed birth attendants. The odds of NBS refusals were significantly higher among non-credentialed birth attendants (p < 0.0001), homebirths (p < 0.0001), and among those that refused Hepatitis B vaccination (HBV) at birth (p = 0.047). On the other hand, odds of NBS refusals were significantly (p < 0.0001) lower among women that had more prenatal visits. Conclusions for Practice This study provides preliminary evidence of association between NBS refusal and provider type, home births, and HBV refusal. Additional studies of obstetric providers, home births and women are needed to improve our understanding of the reasons for NBS refusal to better deliver preventive services to newborns.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: Kenya's high maternal mortality ratio can be partly explained by the low proportion of women delivering in health facilities attended by skilled birth attendants (SBAs). Many women continue to give birth at home attended by family members or traditional birth attendants (TBAs). This is particularly true for pastoralist women in Laikipia and Samburu counties, Kenya. This paper investigates the socio-demographic factors and cultural beliefs and practices that influence place of delivery for these pastoralist women. METHODS: Qualitative data were collected in five group ranches in Laikipia County and three group ranches in Samburu County. Fifteen in-depth interviews were conducted: seven with SBAs and eight with key informants. Nineteen focus group discussions (FGDs) were conducted: four with TBAs; three with community health workers (CHWs); ten with women who had delivered in the past two years; and two with husbands of women who had delivered in the past two years. Topics discussed included reasons for homebirths, access and referrals to health facilities, and strengths and challenges of TBAs and SBAs. The data were translated, transcribed and inductively and deductively thematically analysed both manually and using NVivo. RESULTS: Socio-demographic characteristics and cultural practices and beliefs influence pastoralist women's place of delivery in Laikipia and Samburu counties, Kenya. Pastoralist women continue to deliver at home due to a range of factors including: distance, poor roads, and the difficulty of obtaining and paying for transport; the perception that the treatment and care offered at health facilities is disrespectful and unfriendly; lack of education and awareness regarding the risks of delivering at home; and local cultural values related to women and birthing. CONCLUSIONS: Understanding factors influencing the location of delivery helps to explain why many pastoralist women continue to deliver at home despite health services becoming more accessible. This information can be used to inform policy and program development aimed at increasing the proportion of facility-based deliveries in challenging settings.

Asunto(s)