BackgroundThe first minutes after birth are critical to reducing neonatal mortality. Helping Babies Breathe (HBB) is a simulation-based neonatal resuscitation program for low resource settings. We studied the impact of initial HBB training followed by refresher training on the knowledge and skills of the birth attendants in facilities.MethodsWe conducted HBB trainings in 71 facilities in the NICHD Global Network research sites (Nagpur and Belgaum, India and Eldoret, Kenya), with a 6:1 ratio of facility trainees to Master Trainers (MT). Because of staff turnover, some birth attendants (BA) were trained as they joined the delivery room staff, after the initial training was completed (catch-up initial training). We compared pass rates for skills and knowledge pre- and post- initial HBB training and following refresher training among active BAs. An Objective Structured Clinical Examination (OSCE) B tested resuscitation skill retention by comparing post-initial training performance with pre-refresher training performance. We identified factors associated with loss of skills in pre-refresher training performance using multivariable logistic regression analysis. Daily bag and mask ventilation practice, equipment checks and supportive supervision were stressed as part of training.ResultsOne hundred five MT (1.6 MT per facility) conducted initial and refresher HBB trainings for 835 BAs; 76% had no prior resuscitation training. Initial training improved knowledge and skills: the pass percentage for knowledge tests improved from 74 to 99% (p < 0.001). Only 5% could ventilate a newborn mannequin correctly before initial training but 97% passed the post-initial ventilation training test (p < 0.0001) and 99% passed the OSCE B resuscitation evaluation. During pre-refresher training evaluation, a mean of 6.7 (SD 2.49) months after the initial training, 99% passed the knowledge test, but the successful completion rate fell to 81% for the OSCE B resuscitation skills test. Characteristics associated with deterioration of resuscitation skills were BAs from tertiary care facilities, no prior resuscitation training, and the timing of training (initial vs. catch-up training).ConclusionsHBB training significantly improved neonatal resuscitation knowledge and skills. However, skills declined more than knowledge over time. Ongoing skills practice and monitoring, more frequent retesting, and refresher trainings are needed to maintain neonatal resuscitation skills.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT01681017; 04 September 2012, retrospectively registered.Electronic supplementary materialThe online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s12884-016-1141-3) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.
BackgroundWhether facility-based implementation of Helping Babies Breathe (HBB) reduces neonatal mortality at a population level in low and middle income countries (LMIC) has not been studied. Therefore, we evaluated HBB implementation in this context where our study team has ongoing prospective outcome data on all pregnancies regardless of place of delivery.MethodsWe compared outcomes of birth cohorts in three sites in India and Kenya pre-post implementation of a facility-based intervention, using a prospective, population-based registry in 52 geographic clusters. Our hypothesis was that HBB implementation would result in a 20 % decrease in the perinatal mortality rate (PMR) among births ≥1500 g.ResultsWe enrolled 70,704 births during two 12-month study periods. Births within each site did not differ pre-post intervention, except for an increased proportion of <2500 g newborns and deliveries by caesarean section in the post period. There were no significant differences in PMR among all registry births; however, a post-hoc analysis stratified by birthweight documented improvement in <2500 g mortality in Belgaum in both registry and in HBB-trained facility births. No improvement in <2500 g mortality measures was noted in Nagpur or Kenya and there was no improvement in normal birth weight survival.ConclusionsRapid scale up of HBB training of facility birth attendants in three diverse sites in India and Kenya was not associated with consistent improvements in mortality among all neonates ≥1500 g; however, differential improvements in <2500 g survival in Belgaum suggest the need for careful implementation of HBB training with attention to the target population, data collection, and ongoing quality monitoring activities.Trial registrationThe study was registered at ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT01681017.
BackgroundTraining of birth attendants in neonatal resuscitation is likely to reduce birth asphyxia and neonatal mortality. We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis to assess the impact of neonatal resuscitation training (NRT) programme in reducing stillbirths, neonatal mortality, and perinatal mortalityMethodsWe considered studies where any NRT was provided to healthcare personnel involved in delivery process and handling of newborns. We searched MEDLINE, CENTRAL, ERIC and other electronic databases. We also searched ongoing trials and bibliographies of the retrieved articles, and contacted experts for unpublished work. We undertook screening of studies and assessment of risk of bias in duplicates. We performed review according to Cochrane Handbook. We assessed the quality of evidence using the GRADE approach.ResultsWe included 20 trials with 1 653 805 births in this meta-analysis. The meta-analysis of NRT versus control shows that NRT decreases the risk of all stillbirths by 21% (RR 0.79, 95% CI 0.44 to 1.41), 7-day neonatal mortality by 47% (RR 0.53, 95% CI 0.38 to 0.73), 28-day neonatal mortality by 50% (RR 0.50, 95% CI 0.37 to 0.68) and perinatal mortality by 37% (RR 0.63, 95% CI 0.42 to 0.94). The meta-analysis of pre-NRT versus post-NRT showed that post-NRT decreased the risk of all stillbirths by 12% (RR 0.88, 95% CI 0.83 to 0.94), fresh stillbirths by 26% (RR 0.74, 95% CI 0.61 to 0.90), 1-day neonatal mortality by 42% (RR 0.58, 95% CI 0.42 to 0.82), 7-day neonatal mortality by 18% (RR 0.82, 95% CI 0.73 to 0.93), 28-day neonatal mortality by 14% (RR 0.86, 95% CI 0.65 to 1.13) and perinatal mortality by 18% (RR 0.82, 95% CI 0.74 to 0.91).ConclusionsFindings of this review show that implementation of NRT improves neonatal and perinatal mortality. Further good quality randomised controlled trials addressing the role of NRT for improving neonatal and perinatal outcomes may be warranted.Trial registration numberPROSPERO 2016:CRD42016043668
BackgroundNeonatal deaths account for over 40% of all under-5 year deaths; their reduction is increasingly critical for achieving Millennium Development Goal 4. An estimated 3 million newborns die annually during their first month of life; half of these deaths occur during delivery or within 24 hours. Every year, 6 million babies require help to breathe immediately after birth. Resuscitation training to help babies breathe and prevent/manage birth asphyxia is not routine in low-middle income facility settings. Helping Babies Breathe (HBB), a simulation-training program for babies wherever they are born, was developed for use in low-middle income countries. We evaluated whether HBB training of facility birth attendants reduces perinatal mortality in the Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development’s Global Network research sites.Methods/designWe hypothesize that a two-year prospective pre-post study to evaluate the impact of a facility-based training package, including HBB and essential newborn care, will reduce all perinatal mortality (fresh stillbirth or neonatal death prior to 7 days) among the Global Network’s Maternal Neonatal Health Registry births ≥1500 grams in the study clusters served by the facilities. We will also evaluate the effectiveness of the HBB training program changing on facility-based perinatal mortality and resuscitation practices. Seventy-one health facilities serving 52 geographically-defined study clusters in Belgaum and Nagpur, India, and Eldoret, Kenya, and 30,000 women will be included. Primary outcome data will be collected by staff not involved in the HBB intervention. Additional data on resuscitations, resuscitation debriefings, death audits, quality monitoring and improvement will be collected. HBB training will include training of MTs, facility level birth attendants, and quality monitoring and improvement activities.DiscussionOur study will evaluate the effect of a HBB/ENC training and quality monitoring and improvement package on perinatal mortality using a large multicenter design and approach in 71 resource-limited health facilities, leveraging an existing birth registry to provide neonatal outcomes through day 7. The study will provide the evidence base, lessons learned, and best practices that will be essential to guiding future policy and investment in neonatal resuscitation.Trial registrationTrial registration ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT01681017
BackgroundPneumonia is the leading cause of child mortality under five years of age worldwide. For pneumonia with chest indrawing in children aged 3–59 months, injectable penicillin and hospitalization was the recommended treatment. This increased the health care cost and exposure to nosocomial infections. We compared the clinical and cost outcomes of a seven day treatment with oral amoxicillin with the first 48 h of treatment given in the hospital (hospital group) or at home (home group).MethodsWe conducted an open-label, multi-center, two-arm randomized clinical trial at six tertiary hospitals in India. Children aged 3 to 59 months with chest indrawing pneumonia were randomized to home or hospital group. Clinical outcomes, treatment adherence, and patient safety were monitored through home visits on day 3, 5, 8, and 14 with an additional visit for the home group at 24 h. Clinical outcomes included treatment failure rates up to 7 days (primary outcome) and between 8–14 days (secondary outcome) using the intention to treat and per protocol analyses. Cost outcomes included direct medical, direct non-medical and indirect costs for a random 17 % subsample using the micro-costing technique.Results1118 children were enrolled and randomized to home (n = 554) or hospital group (n = 564). Both groups had similar baseline characteristics. Overall treatment failure rate was 11.5 % (per protocol analysis). The hospital group was significantly more likely to fail treatment than the home group in the intention to treat analysis. Predictors with increased risk of treatment failure at any time were age 3–11 months, receiving antibiotics within 48 h prior to enrolment and use of high polluting fuel. Death rates at 7 or 14 days did not differ significantly. (Difference −0.0 %; 95 % CI −0.5 to 0.5). The median total treatment cost was Rs. 399 for the home group versus Rs. 602 for the hospital group (p < 0.001), for the same effect of 5 % failure rate at the end of 7 days of treatment in the random subsample.ConclusionsHome based oral amoxicillin treatment was equivalent to hospital treatment for first 48 h in selected children of chest indrawing pneumonia and was cheaper. Consistent with the recent WHO simplified guidelines, management with home based oral amoxicillin for select children with only fast breathing and chest-indrawing can be a cost effective intervention.Trial RegistrationClinicalTrials.gov NCT01386840, registered 25th June 2011 and the Indian Council of Medical Research REFCTRI/2010/000629.Electronic supplementary materialThe online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s12887-015-0510-9) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.