The relationship between armed conflict and reproductive, maternal, newborn and child health and nutrition status and services in northeastern Nigeria: a mixed-methods case study

Abstract

Background Armed conflict between the militant Islamist group Boko Haram, other insurgents, and the Nigerian military has principally affected three states of northeastern Nigeria (Borno, Adamawa, Yobe) since 2002. An intensification of the conflict in 2009 brought the situation to increased international visibility. However, full-scale humanitarian intervention did not occur until 2016. Even prior to this period of armed conflict, reproductive, maternal, neonatal, and child health indicators were extremely low in the region. The presence of local and international humanitarian actors, in the form of United Nations agencies and non-governmental organizations, working in concert with concerned federal, state, and local entities of the Government of Nigeria, were able to prioritize and devise strategies for the delivery of health services that resulted in marked improvement of health status in the subset of the population in which this could be measured. Prospects for the future remain uncertain. Methods Interviews were conducted with more than 60 respondents from government, United Nations agencies, and national and international non-governmental organizations. Quantitative data on intervention coverage indicators from publicly available national surveys (Demographic and Health Surveys (DHS), Multiple Indicator Cluster Surveys (MICS)), National Nutrition and Health Surveys (NNHS)) were descriptively analyzed. Results Overall, indicators of low reproductive, maternal, neonatal, and child health (RMNCH) status and intervention coverage were found in the pre-intervention period (prior to 2016) and important improvements were noted following the arrival of international humanitarian assistance, even while armed conflict and adverse conditions persisted. Security issues, workforce limitations, and inadequate financing were frequently cited obstacles. Conclusion It is assumed that armed conflict would have a negative impact on the health status of the affected population, but pre-conflict indicators can be so depressed that this effect is difficult to measure. When this is the case, health sector intervention by the international community can often result in marked improvements in the accessible population. What might happen upon the departure of the humanitarian organizations cannot be predicted with an appreciable degree of certainty.

Implications of armed conflict for maternal and child health: A regression analysis of data from 181 countries for 2000–2019

“…Additionally, changes to security, governance, health workforce, financing, supplies, and monitoring can affect the quality of maternal and child healthcare [ 37 ]. For example, interviews with government and UN officials working in conflict-affected Nigeria and Mali highlighted the difficulty in planning for healthcare resource allocation due to constant population movement, and in accessing remote populations in insecure settings [ 38 , 39 ], which explained poor maternal and child health indicators. Further empirical evidence from Nigeria has found that living in close proximity to development aid during conflict was associated with lower infant mortality [ 15 ].…”

Exposure to conflicts and the continuum of maternal healthcare: Analyses of pooled cross-sectional data for 452,192 women across 49 countries and 82 surveys

“…By disrupting health infrastructure, mobility of health workers, and availability and accessibility of healthcare provisions, conflict exposure may negatively affect the utilization of care throughout the continuum. Also, conflict-led fear and security concerns, availability of transport facilities, wage loss, and injury or death of family members or neighbors also influence health-seeking behavior [ 14 – 24 ].…”

Exploring the influence of health management processes on health outcomes among internally displaced persons (IDPs)

“…Strong coordination that combines interventions and health system strengthening is essential for improving IDP health management ( Bile et al., 2011 , Olu et al., 2015 ). Involvement of various stakeholders in IDP healthcare, especially international organisations, offers several benefits ( Bile et al., 2011 , Olu et al., 2015 , Tyndall et al., 2020 , Low et al., 2014 ). For example, the health cluster partnerships approach in Uganda, also overseen by the MoH, improved the humanitarian response and health coordination ( Olu et al., 2015 ).…”