BackgroundTargeted clinical interventions have been associated with a decreased risk of neonatal morbidity and mortality. In conflict-affected countries such as South Sudan, however, implementation of lifesaving interventions face barriers and facilitators that are not well understood. We aimed to describe the factors that influence implementation of a package of facility- and community-based neonatal interventions in four displaced person camps in South Sudan using a health systems framework.MethodsWe used a mixed method case study design to document the implementation of neonatal interventions from June to November 2016 in one hospital, four primary health facilities, and four community health programs operated by International Medical Corps. We collected primary data using focus group discussions among health workers, in-depth interviews among program managers, and observations of health facility readiness. Secondary data were gathered from documents that were associated with the implementation of the intervention during our study period.ResultsKey bottlenecks for implementing interventions in our study sites were leadership and governance for comprehensive neonatal services, health workforce for skilled care, and service delivery for small and sick newborns. Program managers felt national policies failed to promote integration of key newborn interventions in donor funding and clinical training institutions, resulting in deprioritizing newborn health during humanitarian response. Participants confirmed that severe shortage of skilled care at birth was the main bottleneck for implementing quality newborn care. Solutions to this included authorizing the task-shifting of emergency newborn care to mid-level cadre, transitioning facility-based traditional birth attendants to community health workers, and scaling up institutions to upgrade community midwives into professional midwives. Additionally, ongoing supportive supervision, educational materials, and community acceptance of practices enabled community health workers to identify and refer small and sick newborns.ConclusionsImproving integration of newborn interventions into national policies, training institutions, health referral systems, and humanitarian supply chain can expand emergency care provided to women and their newborns in these contexts.Electronic supplementary materialThe online version of this article (10.1186/s12884-018-1953-4) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

BackgroundApproximately 2.7 million neonatal deaths occur annually, with highest rates of neonatal mortality in countries that have recently experienced conflict. Constant instability in South Sudan further strains a weakened health system and poses public health challenges during the neonatal period. We aimed to describe the state of newborn facility-level care in displaced person camps across Juba, Malakal, and Maban.MethodsWe conducted clinical observations of the labor and delivery period, exit interviews with recently delivered mothers, health facility assessments, and direct observations of midwife time-use. Study participants were mother-newborn pairs who sought services and birth attendants who provided delivery services between April and June 2016 in five health facilities.ResultsFacilities were found to be lacking the recommended medical supplies for essential newborn care. Two of the five facilities had skilled midwives working during all operating hours, with 6.2% of their time spent on postnatal care. Selected components of thermal care (62.5%), infection prevention (74.8%), and feeding support (63.6%) were commonly practiced, but postnatal monitoring (27.7%) was less consistently observed. Differences were found when comparing the primary care level to the hospital (thermal: relative risk [RR] 0.48 [95% CI] 0.40–0.58; infection: RR 1.28 [1.11–1.47]; feeding: RR 0.49 [0.40–0.58]; postnatal: RR 3.17 [2.01–5.00]). In the primary care level, relative to newborns delivered by traditional birth attendants, those delivered by skilled attendants were more likely to receive postnatal monitoring (RR 1.59 [1.09-2.32]), but other practices were not statistically different. Mothers’ knowledge of danger signs was poor, with fever as the highest reported (44.8%) followed by not feeding well (41.0%), difficulty breathing (28.9%), reduced activity (27.7%), feeling cold (18.0%) and convulsions (11.2%).ConclusionsAddressing health service delivery in contexts affected by conflict is vital to reducing the global newborn mortality rate and reaching the Sustainable Development Goals. Gaps in intrapartum and postnatal care, particularly skilled care at birth, suggest a critical need to build the capacity of the existing health workforce while increasing access to skilled deliveries.

Highest rates of neonatal mortality occur in countries that have recently experienced conflict. International Medical Corps implemented a package of newborn interventions in June 2016, based on the Newborn health in humanitarian settings: field guide, targeting community-and facility-based health workers in displaced person camps in South Sudan. We describe health workers' knowledge and attitudes toward newborn health interventions, before and after receiving clinical training and supplies, and recommend dissemination strategies for improved uptake of newborn guidelines during crises. A mixed methods approach was utilised, including pre-post knowledge tests and in-depth interviews. Study participants were community-and facility-based health workers in two internally displaced person camps located in Juba and Malakal and two refugee camps in Maban from March to October 2016. Mean knowledge scores for newborn care practices and danger signs increased among 72 community health workers (pretraining: 5. . Knowledge and attitudes toward key essential practices, such as the use of partograph to assess labour progress, early initiation of breastfeeding, skin-to-skin care and weighing the baby, improved among skilled birth attendants. Despite challenges in conflict-affected settings, conducting training has the potential to increase health workers' knowledge on neonatal health post-training. The humanitarian community should reinforce this knowledge with key actions to shift cultural norms that expand the care provided to women and their newborns in these contexts.

IntroductionConflict adversely impacts health and health systems, yet its effect on health inequalities, particularly for women and children, has not been systematically studied. We examined wealth, education and urban/rural residence inequalities for child mortality and essential reproductive, maternal, newborn and child health interventions between conflict and non-conflict low-income and middle-income countries (LMICs).MethodsWe carried out a time-series multicountry ecological study using data for 137 LMICs between 1990 and 2017, as defined by the 2019 World Bank classification. The data set covers approximately 3.8 million surveyed mothers (15–49 years) and 1.1 million children under 5 years including newborns (<1 month), young children (1–59 months) and school-aged children and adolescents (5–14 years). Outcomes include annual maternal and child mortality rates and coverage (%) of family planning services, 1+antenatal care visit, skilled attendant at birth (SBA), exclusive breast feeding (0–5 months), early initiation of breast feeding (within 1 hour), neonatal protection against tetanus, newborn postnatal care within 2 days, 3 doses of diphtheria, pertussis and tetanus vaccine, measles vaccination, and careseeking for pneumonia and diarrhoea.ResultsConflict countries had consistently higher maternal and child mortality rates than non-conflict countries since 1990 and these gaps persist despite rates continually declining for both groups. Access to essential reproductive and maternal health services for poorer, less educated and rural-based families was several folds worse in conflict versus non-conflict countries.ConclusionsInequalities in coverage of reproductive/maternal health and child vaccine interventions are significantly worse in conflict-affected countries. Efforts to protect maternal and child health interventions in conflict settings should target the most disadvantaged families including the poorest, least educated and those living in rural areas.

Background Maternal and perinatal death surveillance and response (MPDSR) is a system of identifying, analysing and learning lessons from such deaths in order to respond and prevent future deaths, and has been recommended by WHO and implemented in many low-and-middle income settings in recent years. However, there is limited documentation of experience with MPDSR in humanitarian settings. A meeting on MPDSR in humanitarian settings was convened by WHO, UNICEF, CDC and Save the Children, UNFPA and UNHCR on 17th–18th October 2019, informed by semi-structured interviews with a range of professionals, including expert attendees. Consultation findings Interviewees revealed significant obstacles to full implementation of the MPDSR process in humanitarian settings. Many obstacles were familiar to low resource settings in general but were amplified in the context of a humanitarian crisis, such as overburdened services, disincentives to reporting, accountability gaps, a blame approach, and politicisation of mortality. Factors more unique to humanitarian contexts included concerns about health worker security and moral distress. There are varying levels of institutionalisation and implementation capacity for MPDSR within humanitarian organisations. It is suggested that if poorly implemented, particularly with a punitive or blame approach, MPDSR may be counterproductive. Nevertheless, successes in MPDSR were described whereby the process led to concrete actions to prevent deaths, and where death reviews have led to improved understanding of complex and rectifiable contextual factors leading to deaths in humanitarian settings. Conclusions Despite the challenges, examples exist where the lessons learnt from MPDSR processes have led to improved access and quality of care in humanitarian contexts, including successful advocacy. An adapted approach is required to ensure feasibility, with varying implementation being possible in different phases of crises. There is a need for guidance on MPDSR in humanitarian contexts, and for greater documentation and learning from experiences.