Cost-effectiveness analysis and mortality impact estimation of scaling-up pregnancy test kits in Madagascar, Ethiopia and Malawi

In this second article of the neonatal survival series, we identify 16 interventions with proven efficacy (implementation under ideal conditions) for neonatal survival and combine them into packages for scaling up in health systems, according to three service delivery modes (outreach, family-community, and facility-based clinical care). All the packages of care are cost effective compared with single interventions. Universal (99%) coverage of these interventions could avert an estimated 41-72% of neonatal deaths worldwide. At 90% coverage, intrapartum and postnatal packages have similar effects on neonatal mortality--two-fold to three-fold greater than that of antenatal care. However, running costs are two-fold higher for intrapartum than for postnatal care. A combination of universal--ie, for all settings--outreach and family-community care at 90% coverage averts 18-37% of neonatal deaths. Most of this benefit is derived from family-community care, and greater effect is seen in settings with very high neonatal mortality. Reductions in neonatal mortality that exceed 50% can be achieved with an integrated, high-coverage programme of universal outreach and family-community care, consisting of 12% and 26%, respectively, of total running costs, plus universal facility-based clinical services, which make up 62% of the total cost. Early success in averting neonatal deaths is possible in settings with high mortality and weak health systems through outreach and family-community care, including health education to improve home-care practices, to create demand for skilled care, and to improve care seeking. Simultaneous expansion of clinical care for babies and mothers is essential to achieve the reduction in neonatal deaths needed to meet the Millennium Development Goal for child survival.

Promotion of family planning in countries with high birth rates has the potential to reduce poverty and hunger and avert 32% of all maternal deaths and nearly 10% of childhood deaths. It would also contribute substantially to women's empowerment, achievement of universal primary schooling, and long-term environmental sustainability. In the past 40 years, family-planning programmes have played a major part in raising the prevalence of contraceptive practice from less than 10% to 60% and reducing fertility in developing countries from six to about three births per woman. However, in half the 75 larger low-income and lower-middle income countries (mainly in Africa), contraceptive practice remains low and fertility, population growth, and unmet need for family planning are high. The cross-cutting contribution to the achievement of the Millennium Development Goals makes greater investment in family planning in these countries compelling. Despite the size of this unfinished agenda, international funding and promotion of family planning has waned in the past decade. A revitalisation of the agenda is urgently needed. Historically, the USA has taken the lead but other governments or agencies are now needed as champions. Based on the sizeable experience of past decades, the key features of effective programmes are clearly established. Most governments of poor countries already have appropriate population and family-planning policies but are receiving too little international encouragement and funding to implement them with vigour. What is currently missing is political willingness to incorporate family planning into the development arena.

To study the impact of interpregnancy interval on maternal morbidity and mortality. Retrospective cross sectional study with data from the Perinatal Information System database of the Latin American Centre for Perinatology and Human Development, Montevideo, Uruguay. Latin America and the Caribbean, 1985-97. 456 889 parous women delivering singleton infants. Crude and adjusted odds ratios of the effects of short and long interpregnancy intervals on maternal death, pre-eclampsia, eclampsia, gestational diabetes mellitus, third trimester bleeding, premature rupture of membranes, postpartum haemorrhage, puerperal endometritis, and anaemia. Short ( 59 months) interpregnancy intervals were observed for 2.8% and 19.5% of women, respectively. After adjustment for major confounding factors, compared with those conceiving at 18 to 23 months after a previous birth, women with interpregnancy intervals of 5 months or less had higher risks for maternal death (odds ratio 2.54; 95% confidence interval 1.22 to 5.38), third trimester bleeding (1.73; 1.42 to 2.24), premature rupture of membranes (1.72; 1.53 to 1.93), puerperal endometritis (1.33; 1.22 to 1.45), and anaemia (1.30; 1.18 to 1.43). Compared with women with interpregnancy intervals of 18 to 23 months, women with interpregnancy intervals longer than 59 months had significantly increased risks of pre-eclampsia (1.83; 1.72 to 1.94) and eclampsia (1.80; 1.38 to 2.32). Interpregnancy intervals less than 6 months and longer than 59 months are associated with an increased risk of adverse maternal outcomes.