24
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
2 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Increasing access to care for sick newborns: evidence from the Ghana Newhints cluster-randomised controlled trial

      research-article

      Read this article at

      ScienceOpenPublisherPMC
      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Objectives

          To evaluate the impact of Newhints community-based surveillance volunteer (CBSV) assessments and referrals on access to care for sick newborns and on existing inequities in access.

          Design

          We evaluated a prospective cohort nested within the Newhints cluster-randomised controlled trial.

          Setting

          Community-based intervention involving more than 750 000, predominantly rural, population in seven contiguous districts in the Brong-Ahafo Region, Ghana.

          Participants

          Participants were recently delivered women (from more than 120 000 women under surveillance) and their 16 168 liveborn babies. Qualitative in-depth interviews with referral narratives (IDIs) were conducted with 92 mothers, CBSVs and health facility front-desk and maternity/paediatrics ward staff.

          Interventions

          Newhints trained and effectively supervised 475 CBSVs (existing within the Ghana Health Service) in 49 of 98 supervisory zones (clusters) to assess and refer newborns with any of the 10-key-danger signs to health facilities within the first week after birth; promote independent care seeking for sick newborns and problem-solve around barriers between November 2008 and December 2009.

          Primary outcomes

          The main evaluation outcomes were rates of compliance with referrals and independent care seeking for newborn illnesses.

          Results

          Of 4006 sampled, 2795 (69.8%) recently delivered women received CBSV assessment visits and 279 (10.0%) newborns were referred with danger signs. Compliance with referrals was unprecedentedly high (86.0%) with women in the poorest quintile (Q1) complying better than the least poor (Q5):87.5%(Q1) vs 69.7%(Q5); p=0.038. Three-quarters went to hospitals; 18% were admitted and 58% received outpatient treatment. Some (24%) mothers were turned away at facilities and follow-on IDIs showed that some of these untreated babies subsequently died. Independent care seeking for severe newborn illness increased from 55.4% in control to 77.3% in Newhints zones, especially among Q1 where care seeking almost doubled (95.0% vs 48.6%; RR=1.94 (1.32, 2.84); p=0.001). Rates were the highest among rural residents but urban residents complied quicker.

          Conclusions

          Home visits are feasible and a potentially pro-poor approach to link sick newborns to facilities. Its effectiveness in improving survival hinges on matched improvement in facility quality of care.

          Trial registration number

          NCT00623337.

          Related collections

          Most cited references38

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Evidence-based, cost-effective interventions: how many newborn babies can we save?

          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.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Achieving child survival goals: potential contribution of community health workers.

            There is renewed interest in the potential contribution of community health workers to child survival. Community health workers can undertake various tasks, including case management of childhood illnesses (eg, pneumonia, malaria, and neonatal sepsis) and delivery of preventive interventions such as immunisation, promotion of healthy behaviour, and mobilisation of communities. Several trials show substantial reductions in child mortality, particularly through case management of ill children by these types of community interventions. However, community health workers are not a panacea for weak health systems and will need focussed tasks, adequate remuneration, training, supervision, and the active involvement of the communities in which they work. The introduction of large-scale programmes for community health workers requires evaluation to document the impact on child survival and cost effectiveness and to elucidate factors associated with success and sustainability.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              4 million neonatal deaths: when? Where? Why?

              The proportion of child deaths that occurs in the neonatal period (38% in 2000) is increasing, and the Millennium Development Goal for child survival cannot be met without substantial reductions in neonatal mortality. Every year an estimated 4 million babies die in the first 4 weeks of life (the neonatal period). A similar number are stillborn, and 0.5 million mothers die from pregnancy-related causes. Three-quarters of neonatal deaths happen in the first week--the highest risk of death is on the first day of life. Almost all (99%) neonatal deaths arise in low-income and middle-income countries, yet most epidemiological and other research focuses on the 1% of deaths in rich countries. The highest numbers of neonatal deaths are in south-central Asian countries and the highest rates are generally in sub-Saharan Africa. The countries in these regions (with some exceptions) have made little progress in reducing such deaths in the past 10-15 years. Globally, the main direct causes of neonatal death are estimated to be preterm birth (28%), severe infections (26%), and asphyxia (23%). Neonatal tetanus accounts for a smaller proportion of deaths (7%), but is easily preventable. Low birthweight is an important indirect cause of death. Maternal complications in labour carry a high risk of neonatal death, and poverty is strongly associated with an increased risk. Preventing deaths in newborn babies has not been a focus of child survival or safe motherhood programmes. While we neglect these challenges, 450 newborn children die every hour, mainly from preventable causes, which is unconscionable in the 21st century.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                BMJ Open
                BMJ Open
                bmjopen
                bmjopen
                BMJ Open
                BMJ Publishing Group (BMA House, Tavistock Square, London, WC1H 9JR )
                2044-6055
                2016
                13 June 2016
                : 6
                : 6
                : e008107
                Affiliations
                [1 ]Department of Maternal, Newborn and Adolescent Health cluster, Kintampo Health Research Centre, Ghana Health Service , Kintampo, Ghana
                [2 ]Department of Population Health, London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine , London, UK
                [3 ]Faculty of Population Health Sciences, Institute of Global Health, University College London , London, UK
                [4 ]Department of Global Health, Academic Medical Centre , Amsterdam, The Netherlands
                Author notes
                [Correspondence to ] Dr Alexander Manu; makmanu128@ 123456gmail.com
                Article
                bmjopen-2015-008107
                10.1136/bmjopen-2015-008107
                4916576
                27297006
                97d8daf6-fa19-4040-8740-4f1ef7780818
                Published by the BMJ Publishing Group Limited. For permission to use (where not already granted under a licence) please go to http://www.bmj.com/company/products-services/rights-and-licensing/

                This is an Open Access article distributed in accordance with the Creative Commons Attribution Non Commercial (CC BY-NC 4.0) license, which permits others to distribute, remix, adapt, build upon this work non-commercially, and license their derivative works on different terms, provided the original work is properly cited and the use is non-commercial. See: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/

                History
                : 4 March 2015
                : 9 August 2015
                : 19 August 2015
                Funding
                Funded by: Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, http://dx.doi.org/10.13039/100000865;
                Funded by: World Health Organization, http://dx.doi.org/10.13039/100004423;
                Funded by: Department for International Development, http://dx.doi.org/10.13039/501100000278;
                Categories
                Public Health
                Research
                1506
                1724
                1694
                1699
                1692
                1704
                1725

                Medicine
                epidemiology,primary care,preventive medicine
                Medicine
                epidemiology, primary care, preventive medicine

                Comments

                Comment on this article