In the past three decades, Brazil has undergone rapid changes in major social determinants of health and in the organisation of health services. In this report, we examine how these changes have affected indicators of maternal health, child health, and child nutrition. We use data from vital statistics, population censuses, demographic and health surveys, and published reports. In the past three decades, infant mortality rates have reduced substantially, decreasing by 5·5% a year in the 1980s and 1990s, and by 4·4% a year since 2000 to reach 20 deaths per 1000 livebirths in 2008. Neonatal deaths account for 68% of infant deaths. Stunting prevalence among children younger than 5 years decreased from 37% in 1974-75 to 7% in 2006-07. Regional differences in stunting and child mortality also decreased. Access to most maternal-health and child-health interventions increased sharply to almost universal coverage, and regional and socioeconomic inequalities in access to such interventions were notably reduced. The median duration of breastfeeding increased from 2·5 months in the 1970s to 14 months by 2006-07. Official statistics show stable maternal mortality ratios during the past 10 years, but modelled data indicate a yearly decrease of 4%, a trend which might not have been noticeable in official reports because of improvements in death registration and the increased number of investigations into deaths of women of reproductive age. The reasons behind Brazil's progress include: socioeconomic and demographic changes (economic growth, reduction in income disparities between the poorest and wealthiest populations, urbanisation, improved education of women, and decreased fertility rates), interventions outside the health sector (a conditional cash transfer programme and improvements in water and sanitation), vertical health programmes in the 1980s (promotion of breastfeeding, oral rehydration, and immunisations), creation of a tax-funded national health service in 1988 (coverage of which expanded to reach the poorest areas of the country through the Family Health Program in the mid-1990s); and implementation of many national and state-wide programmes to improve child health and child nutrition and, to a lesser extent, to promote women's health. Nevertheless, substantial challenges remain, including overmedicalisation of childbirth (nearly 50% of babies are delivered by caesarean section), maternal deaths caused by illegal abortions, and a high frequency of preterm deliveries.

Summary Background Babies with low birthweight (<2500 g) are at increased risk of early mortality. However, low birthweight includes babies born preterm and with fetal growth restriction, and not all these infants have a birthweight less than 2500 g. We estimated the neonatal and infant mortality associated with these two characteristics in low-income and middle-income countries. Methods For this pooled analysis, we searched all available studies and identified 20 cohorts (providing data for 2 015 019 livebirths) from Asia, Africa, and Latin America that recorded data for birthweight, gestational age, and vital statistics through 28 days of life. Study dates ranged from 1982 through to 2010. We calculated relative risks (RR) and risk differences (RD) for mortality associated with preterm birth (<32 weeks, 32 weeks to <34 weeks, 34 weeks to <37 weeks), small-for-gestational-age (SGA; babies with birthweight in the lowest third percentile and between the third and tenth percentile of a US reference population), and preterm and SGA combinations. Findings Pooled overall RRs for preterm were 6·82 (95% CI 3·56–13·07) for neonatal mortality and 2·50 (1·48–4·22) for post-neonatal mortality. Pooled RRs for babies who were SGA (with birthweight in the lowest tenth percentile of the reference population) were 1·83 (95% CI 1·34–2·50) for neonatal mortality and 1·90 (1·32–2·73) for post-neonatal mortality. The neonatal mortality risk of babies who were both preterm and SGA was higher than that of babies with either characteristic alone (15·42; 9·11–26·12). Interpretation Many babies in low-income and middle-income countries are SGA. Preterm birth affects a smaller number of neonates than does SGA, but is associated with a higher mortality risk. The mortality risks associated with both characteristics extend beyond the neonatal period. Differentiation of the burden and risk of babies born preterm and SGA rather than with low birthweight could guide prevention and management strategies to speed progress towards Millennium Development Goal 4—the reduction of child mortality. Funding Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation.

This Lancet Series paper, one of three on the high rate of Caesarean Section (CS), describes the global, regional and selected country levels, trends, determinants and inequalities in CS. Based on data from 169 countries representing 98.4% of the world's births, we estimate that 21.1% (95% uncertainty range 19.9-22.4%) or 29.7 million births occurred through CS in 2015, representing almost a doubling since 2000 (12.1%; 10.9-13.3%). The differences in CS rates between regions in 2015 were tenfold, with a high of 44.3% (41.3-47.4%) in the Latin America and the Caribbean region and a low of 4.1% (3.6-4.6%) in the West and Central African region. The global and regional increases were driven both by increasing coverage of births by health facilities (66.5% of the global increase) and higher CS rates within health facilities (33.5%), with considerable variation between regions. Based on the most recent data, population-based CS rates exceeded 15% of births in 63% of 169 countries, while 28% countries had CS rates below 10%. National CS rates varied from 0.6% in South Sudan to 58.1% in the Dominican Republic. Within-country disparities in CS rates were also very large, with a sixfold difference in CS rates between births in the richest and poorest quintiles in low-and middle-income countries, markedly high CS rates among low obstetric risk births among especially more educated women in Brazil and China and 1.6 times higher CS rates in private facilities compared to public facilities.

No abstract

Background Population-based data on COVID-19 are essential for guiding policies. There are few such studies, particularly from low or middle-income countries. Brazil is currently a hotspot for COVID-19 globally. We aimed to investigate severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) antibody prevalence by city and according to sex, age, ethnicity group, and socioeconomic status, and compare seroprevalence estimates with official statistics on deaths and cases. Methods In this repeated cross-sectional study, we did two seroprevalence surveys in 133 sentinel cities in all Brazilian states. We randomly selected households and randomly selected one individual from all household members. We excluded children younger than 1 year. Presence of antibodies against SARS-CoV-2 was assessed using a lateral flow point-of-care test, the WONDFO SARS-CoV-2 Antibody Test (Wondfo Biotech, Guangzhou, China), using two drops of blood from finger prick samples. This lateral-flow assay detects IgG and IgM isotypes that are specific to the SARS-CoV-2 receptor binding domain of the spike protein. Participants also answered short questionnaires on sociodemographic information (sex, age, education, ethnicity, household size, and household assets) and compliance with physical distancing measures. Findings We included 25 025 participants in the first survey (May 14–21) and 31 165 in the second (June 4–7). For the 83 (62%) cities with sample sizes of more than 200 participants in both surveys, the pooled seroprevalence increased from 1·9% (95% CI 1·7–2·1) to 3·1% (2·8–3·4). City-level prevalence ranged from 0% to 25·4% in both surveys. 11 (69%) of 16 cities with prevalence above 2·0% in the first survey were located in a stretch along a 2000 km of the Amazon river in the northern region. In the second survey, we found 34 cities with prevalence above 2·0%, which included the same 11 Amazon cities plus 14 from the northeast region, where prevalence was increasing rapidly. Prevalence levels were lower in the south and centre-west, and intermediate in the southeast, where the highest level was found in Rio de Janeiro (7·5% [4·2–12·2]). In the second survey, prevalence was similar in men and women, but an increased prevalence was observed in participants aged 20–59 years and those living in crowded conditions (4·4% [3·5–5·6] for those living with households with six or more people). Prevalence among Indigenous people was 6·4% (4·1–9·4) compared with 1·4% (1·2–1·7) among White people. Prevalence in the poorest socioeconomic quintile was 3·7% (3·2–4·3) compared with 1·7% (1·4–2·2) in the wealthiest quintile. Interpretation Antibody prevalence was highly heterogeneous by country region, with rapid initial escalation in Brazil's north and northeast. Prevalence is strongly associated with Indigenous ancestry and low socioeconomic status. These population subgroups are unlikely to be protected if the policy response to the pandemic by th...

Brazil is a large complex country that is undergoing rapid economic, social, and environmental change. In this Series of six articles, we have reported important improvements in health status and life expectancy, which can be ascribed largely to progress in social determinants of health and to implementation of a comprehensive national health system with strong social participation. Many challenges remain, however. Socioeconomic and regional disparities are still unacceptably large, refl ecting the fact that much progress is still needed to improve basic living conditions for a large proportion of the population. New health problems arise as a result of urbanisation and social and environmental change, and some old health issues remain unabated. Administration of a complex, decentralised public-health system, in which a large share of services is contracted out to the private sector, together with many private insurance providers, inevitably causes confl ict and contradiction. The challenge is ultimately political, and we conclude with a call for action that requires continuous engagement by Brazilian society as a whole in securing the right to health for all Brazilian people.

Background Low- and middle-income countries continue to experience a large burden of stunting; 148 million children were estimated to be stunted, around 30–40% of all children in 2011. In many of these countries, foetal growth restriction (FGR) is common, as is subsequent growth faltering in the first 2 years. Although there is agreement that stunting involves both prenatal and postnatal growth failure, the extent to which FGR contributes to stunting and other indicators of nutritional status is uncertain. Methods Using extant longitudinal birth cohorts (n = 19) with data on birth-weight, gestational age and child anthropometry (12–60 months), we estimated study-specific and pooled risk estimates of stunting, wasting and underweight by small-for-gestational age (SGA) and preterm birth. Results We grouped children according to four combinations of SGA and gestational age: adequate size-for-gestational age (AGA) and preterm; SGA and term; SGA and preterm; and AGA and term (the reference group). Relative to AGA and term, the OR (95% confidence interval) for stunting associated with AGA and preterm, SGA and term, and SGA and preterm was 1.93 (1.71, 2.18), 2.43 (2.22, 2.66) and 4.51 (3.42, 5.93), respectively. A similar magnitude of risk was also observed for wasting and underweight. Low birthweight was associated with 2.5–3.5-fold higher odds of wasting, stunting and underweight. The population attributable risk for overall SGA for outcomes of childhood stunting and wasting was 20% and 30%, respectively. Conclusions This analysis estimates that childhood undernutrition may have its origins in the foetal period, suggesting a need to intervene early, ideally during pregnancy, with interventions known to reduce FGR and preterm birth.

Background ‘Kangaroo mother care’ (KMC) includes thermal care through continuous skin-to-skin contact, support for exclusive breastfeeding or other appropriate feeding, and early recognition/response to illness. Whilst increasingly accepted in both high- and low-income countries, a Cochrane review (2003) did not find evidence of KMC’s mortality benefit, and did not report neonatal-specific data.Objectives The objectives of this study were to review the evidence, and estimate the effect of KMC on neonatal mortality due to complications of preterm birth.Methods We conducted systematic reviews. Standardized abstraction tables were used and study quality assessed by adapted GRADE methodology. Meta-analyses were undertaken.Results We identified 15 studies reporting mortality and/or morbidity outcomes including nine randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and six observational studies all from low- or middle-income settings. Except one, all were hospital-based and included only babies of birth-weight <2000 g (assumed preterm). The one community-based trial had missing birthweight data, as well as other limitations and was excluded. Neonatal-specific data were supplied by two authors. Meta-analysis of three RCTs commencing KMC in the first week of life showed a significant reduction in neonatal mortality [relative risk (RR) 0.49, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.29–0.82] compared with standard care. A meta-analysis of three observational studies also suggested significant mortality benefit (RR 0.68, 95% CI 0.58–0.79). Five RCTs suggested significant reductions in serious morbidity for babies <2000 g (RR 0.34, 95% CI 0.17–0.65).Conclusion This is the first published meta-analysis showing that KMC substantially reduces neonatal mortality amongst preterm babies (birth weight <2000 g) in hospital, and is highly effective in reducing severe morbidity, particularly from infection. However, KMC remains unavailable at-scale in most low-income countries.