BackgroundOver 5 million stillbirths and neonatal deaths occur annually. Limited and imprecise information on the cause of these deaths hampers progress in achieving global health targets. Complete diagnostic autopsies (CDAs)—the gold standard for cause of death determination—are difficult to perform in most high-burden settings. Therefore, validation of simpler and more feasible methods is needed.Methods and findingsIn this observational study, the validity of a minimally invasive autopsy (MIA) method in determining the cause of death was assessed in 18 stillbirths and 41 neonatal deaths by comparing the results of the MIA with those of the CDA. Concordance between the categories of diseases obtained by the 2 methods was assessed by the Kappa statistic, and the sensitivity, specificity, positive, and negative predictive values of the MIA diagnoses were calculated. A cause of death was identified in 16/18 (89%) and 15/18 (83%) stillborn babies in the CDA and the MIA, respectively. Fetal growth restriction accounted for 39%, infectious diseases for 22%, intrapartum hypoxia for 17%, and intrauterine hypoxia for 11% of stillborn babies. Overall, the MIA showed in this group a substantial concordance with the CDA (Kappa = 0.78, 95% CI [0.56–0.99]). A cause of death was identified in all (100%) and 35/41 (85%) neonatal deaths in the CDA and the MIA, respectively. In this group, the majority of deaths were due to infectious diseases (66%). The overall concordance of the MIA with the CDA in neonates was moderate (Kappa = 0.40, 95% CI [0.18–0.63]). A high percentage of accuracy was observed for the MIA in all the diagnostic categories in both stillbirths and neonates (>75%). The main limitation of this study is that some degree of subjective interpretation is inherent to cause-of-death attribution in both the MIA and the CDA; this is especially so in stillbirths and in relation to fetal growth restriction.ConclusionsThe MIA could be a useful tool for cause-of-death determination in stillbirths and neonatal deaths. These findings may help to accelerate progress towards meeting global health targets by obtaining more accurate information on the causes of death in these age groups, which is essential in guiding the design of new interventions and increasing the effectiveness of those already implemented.

Background Sub-Saharan Africa and south Asia contributed 81% of 5•9 million under-5 deaths and 77% of 2•6 million stillbirths worldwide in 2015. Vital registration and verbal autopsy data are mainstays for the estimation of leading causes of death, but both are non-specific and focus on a single underlying cause. We aimed to provide granular data on the contributory causes of death in stillborn fetuses and in deceased neonates and children younger than 5 years, to inform child mortality prevention efforts. Methods The Child Health and Mortality Prevention Surveillance (CHAMPS) Network was established at sites in seven countries (

BackgroundDespite global health efforts to reduce maternal mortality, rates continue to be unacceptably high in large parts of the world. Feasible, acceptable, and accurate postmortem sampling methods could provide the necessary evidence to improve the understanding of the real causes of maternal mortality, guiding the design of interventions to reduce this burden.Methods and findingsThe validity of a minimally invasive autopsy (MIA) method in determining the cause of death was assessed in an observational study in 57 maternal deaths by comparing the results of the MIA with those of the gold standard (complete diagnostic autopsy [CDA], which includes any available clinical information). Concordance between the MIA and the gold standard diagnostic categories was assessed by the kappa statistic, and the sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative predictive values and their 95% confidence intervals (95% CI) to identify the categories of diagnoses were estimated. The main limitation of the study is that both the MIA and the CDA include some degree of subjective interpretation in the attribution of cause of death.A cause of death was identified in the CDA in 98% (56/57) of cases, with indirect obstetric conditions accounting for 32 (56%) deaths and direct obstetric complications for 24 (42%) deaths. Nonobstetric infectious diseases (22/32, 69%) and obstetric hemorrhage (13/24, 54%) were the most common causes of death among indirect and direct obstetric conditions, respectively. Thirty-six (63%) women were HIV positive, and HIV-related conditions accounted for 16 (28%) of all deaths. Cerebral malaria caused 4 (7%) deaths. The MIA identified a cause of death in 86% of women. The overall concordance of the MIA with the CDA was moderate (kappa = 0.48, 95% CI: 0.31–0.66). Both methods agreed in 68% of the diagnostic categories and the agreement was higher for indirect (91%) than for direct obstetric causes (38%). All HIV infections and cerebral malaria cases were identified in the MIA. The main limitation of the technique is its relatively low performance for identifying obstetric causes of death in the absence of clinical information.ConclusionsThe MIA procedure could be a valuable tool to determine the causes of maternal death, especially for indirect obstetric conditions, most of which are infectious diseases.The information provided by the MIA could help to prioritize interventions to reduce maternal mortality and to monitor progress towards achieving global health targets.

Background Client satisfaction is an essential component of quality of care. Health system factors, processes of care as well as mothers’ characteristics influence the extent to which care meets the expectations of mothers and families. In our study, we specifically aimed to address the mothers’ experiences of, and satisfaction with, care during childbirth. Methods A population-based cross-sectional study, using structured interviews with published sequences of questions assessing satisfaction, including 4358 mothers who gave birth during the 12 months before June 2016 to estimate satisfaction with childbirth care. Regression analysis was used to determine the predictors of client satisfaction. Results Most mothers (92.5%) reported being satisfied with care during childbirth and would recommend that a family member to deliver at the same facility. Specifically, 94.7% were satisfied with the cleanliness of the facility, 92.0% reported being satisfied with the interaction with the healthcare providers, but only 49.8% felt satisfied with the assistance to feed their baby. Mothers who had negative experiences during the process of care, such as being abandoned when needing help, disrespect, humiliation, or physical abuse, reported low levels of satisfaction when compared to those who had not had such experiences (68.5% vs 93.5%). Additionally, they reported higher levels of dissatisfaction (20.1% vs 2.1%). Regression analysis revealed that mothers who gave birth in primary level facilities tended to be more satisfied than those who gave birth in hospitals, and having a companion increased, on average, the overall satisfaction score, with 0.06 in type II health centres (CI 0.03–0.10) and with 0.05 in type I health centres (CI − 0.02 – 0.13), compared to − 0.01(CI -0.08 – 0.07) in the hospitals, irrespective of age, education and socio-economic background. Conclusion Childbirth at the primary level facilities contributes to the level of satisfaction. The provision of childbirth care should consider women’s preferences and needs, including having a companion of choice. We highlight the challenge in balancing safety of care versus satisfaction with care and in developing policies on the optimum configuration of childbirth care. Interventions to improve the interaction with providers and the provision of respectful care are recommended. Electronic supplementary material The online version of this article (10.1186/s12884-019-2449-6) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.