Reducing neonatal mortality rates in low- and lower-middle-income countries (LMICs) requires postnatal interventions to be delivered through an appropriately prepared and supported workforce. This review examines health workforce interventions that deliver integrated packages of postnatal care to improve neonatal outcomes in LMICs. We conducted a structured search of peer-reviewed articles published during 2003-2014 that investigated the delivery of postnatal interventions by formal and lay health workers. We selected 13 studies and analyzed them using a narrative synthesis methodology. This review observed a wide divergence among studies regarding the outcomes as well as the approaches and duration of workforce training and staff supervision. Except 4, all studies observed a significant reduction in neonatal mortality. On the other hand, teams of lay health workers appear to be more effective in improving neonatal outcomes. Further improvement in the performance of health care providers may require emphasis on workforce interventions such as competency assessment, the acquisition of appropriate skills, and supervisory guidelines. Nevertheless, the heterogeneity and limited number of studies do not allow us to arrive at definitive conclusions, and we recommend the need for the harmonization of future studies, with uniformity of outcome measures and cost analyses.
Every year, nearly 1 million babies succumb to birth asphyxia (BA) within the Asia-Pacific region. The present study sought to determine whether educational interventions containing some element of resuscitation training would decrease the relative risk (RR) of neonatal mortality attributable to BA in low-resource communities. We systematically reviewed 3 electronic databases and identified 14 relevant reports. For community deliveries, providing traditional birth attendants (TBAs) with neonatal resuscitation training modestly reduced the RR in 3 of 4 studies. For institutional deliveries, training a range of clinical staff clearly reduced the RR within 2 of 8 studies. When resuscitation-specific training was directed to community and institutional health care workers, a slight benefit was observed in 1 of 2 studies. Specific training in neonatal resuscitation appears most effective when provided to TBAs (specifically, those presented with ongoing opportunities to review and update their skills), but this particular intervention alone may not appreciably reduce mortality.
BACKGROUND: Approximately 10% of all newborns require resuscitation at birth. Training healthcare providers in standardised formal neonatal resuscitation training (SFNRT) programmes may improve neonatal outcomes. Substantial healthcare resources are expended on SFNRT.
OBJECTIVES: To determine whether SFNRT programmes reduce neonatal mortality and morbidity, improve acquisition and retention of knowledge and skills, or change teamwork and resuscitation behaviour.
SEARCH METHODS: We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, PREMEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, Web of Science and the Oxford Database of Perinatal Trials, ongoing trials and conference proceedings in April 2014 and updated in March 2015.
SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised or quasi-randomised trials including cluster-randomised trials, comparing a SFNRT with no SFNRT, additions to SFNRT or types of SFNRT, and reporting at least one of our specified outcomes.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two authors extracted data independently and performed statistical analyses including typical risk ratio (RR), risk difference (RD), mean difference (MD), and number needed to treat for an additional beneficial outcome (NNTB) or an additional harmful outcome (NNTH) (all with 95% confidence intervals (CI)). We analysed cluster-randomised trials using the generic inverse variance and the approximate analysis methods.
MAIN RESULTS: We identified two community-based and three manikin-based trials that assessed the effect of SFNRT compared with no SFNRT. Very low quality evidence from one study suggested improvement in acquisition of knowledge (RR 5.96, 95% CI 3.60 to 9.87) and skills (RR 170, 95% CI 10.8 to 2711) and retention of knowledge (RR 3.60, 95% CI 2.43 to 5.35) and the other study suggested improvement in resuscitation and behavioural scores.We identified three community-based cluster-randomised trials in developing countries comparing SFNRT with basic resuscitation training (Early Newborn Care). In this setting, there was moderate quality evidence that SFNRT decreased early neonatal mortality (typical RR 0.88, 95% CI 0.78 to 1.00; 3 studies, 66,162 neonates) and when analysed by the approximate analysis method (typical RR 0.85, 95% CI 0.75 to 0.96; RD -0.0044, 95% CI -0.0082 to -0.0006; NNTB 227, 95% CI 122 to 1667). Low quality evidence from one trial showed that SFNRT may decrease 28-day mortality (typical RR 0.55, 95% CI 0.33 to 0.91) but the effect on late neonatal mortality was more uncertain (typical RR 0.47, 95% CI 0.20 to 1.11). None of our a priori defined neonatal morbidities were reported. We did not identify any randomised studies in the developed world.We identified two trials that compared SFNRT with team training to SFNRT. Teamwork training of physician trainees with simulation may increase any teamwork behaviour (assessed by frequency) (MD 2.41, 95% CI 1.72 to 3.11) and decrease resuscitation duration (MD -149.54, 95% CI -214.73 to -84.34) but may lead to little or no difference in Neonatal Resuscitation Program (NRP) scores (MD 1.40, 95% CI -2.02 to 4.82; 98 participants, low quality evidence).We identified two trials that compared SFNRT with booster courses to SFNRT. It is uncertain whether booster courses improve retention of resuscitation knowledge (84 participants, very low quality evidence) but may improve procedural and behavioural skills (40 participants, very low quality evidence).We identified two trials on decision support tools, one on a cognitive aid that did not change resuscitation scores and the other on an electronic decision support tool that improved the frequency of correct decision making on positive pressure ventilation, cardiac compressions and frequency of fraction of inspired oxygen (FiO2) adjustments (97 participants, very low quality evidence).
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: SFNRT compared to basic newborn care or basic newborn resuscitation, in developing countries, results in a reduction of early neonatal and 28-day mortality. Randomised trials of SFNRT should report on neonatal morbidity including hypoxic ischaemic encephalopathy and neurodevelopmental outcomes. Innovative educational methods that enhance knowledge and skills and teamwork behaviour should be evaluated.
BACKGROUND: In several developing countries, achieving Millennium Development Goal 4 is still off track. Multiple maternal and fetal risk factors were inconsistently attributed to the high perinatal mortality in developing countries. However, there was no meta-analysis that assessed the pooled effect of these factors on perinatal mortality. The purpose of this meta-analysis was to identify maternal and fetal factors predicting perinatal mortality.
METHODS: In this meta-analysis, we included 23 studies that assessed perinatal mortality in relation to antenatal care, parity, mode of delivery, gestational age, birth weight and sex of the fetus. A computer based search of articles was conducted mainly in the databases of PUBMED, MEDLINE, HINARI, AJOL, Google Scholar and Cochrane Library. The overall odds ratios (OR) were determined by the random-effect model. Heterogeneity testing and sensitivity analysis were also conducted.
RESULTS: The pooled analysis showed a strong association of perinatal mortality with lack of antenatal care (OR=3.2), prematurity (OR=7.9), low birth weight (OR=9.6), and marginal association with primigravidity (OR=1.5) and male sex (OR=1.2). The regression analysis also showed down-going trend lines of stillbirth and neonatal mortality rates in relation to the proportion of antenatal care. The metaanalysis showed that there was no association between mode of delivery and perinatal mortality.
CONCLUSION: The present meta-analysis indicated a significant reduction in perinatal mortality among women who attended antenatal care, gave birth to term and normal birth weight baby. However, the association of perinatal mortality with parity, mode of delivery and fetal sex needs further investigation.
INTRODUCTION: Previous literature has shown that multifaceted, interactive interventions may be the most effective way to train health and social care professionals. A Train-the-Trainer (TTT) model could incorporate all these components. We conducted a systematic review to determine the overall effectiveness and optimal delivery of TTT programs.
METHODS: We searched 15 databases. Reference lists and online resources were also screened. Studies with an objective follow-up measure collected over 1 week after the intervention were included. The intervention had to be based on a TTT model for health and social care professionals.
RESULTS: Eighteen studies met the inclusion criteria. TTT interventions varied greatly, ranging from didactic presentations to group discussions and role-plays. The heterogeneity of the studies and limited data prevented meta-analysis. A narrative review found that the TTT programs in 13 studies helped to increase knowledge, improve clinical behavior, or produce better patient outcomes. One study showed no effect. Three studies showed possible effect and one study showed that a CD-ROM training method was more effective than a TTT training method in improving participants' knowledge. Ratings of the studies' methodologies suggested moderate risk of bias, which limits interpretation of the results.
DISCUSSION: There is evidence that using a blended learning approach to deliver TTT programs--combining different techniques such as interactive, multifaceted methods and accompanying learning materials--can help to effectively disseminate and implement guidelines and curricula to health and social care professionals. However, further research is needed to determine the optimum "blend" of techniques.
BACKGROUND: Between the 1970s and 1990s, the World Health Organization promoted traditional birth attendant (TBA) training as one strategy to reduce maternal and neonatal mortality. To date, evidence in support of TBA training is limited but promising for some mortality outcomes.
OBJECTIVES: To assess the effects of TBA training on health behaviours and pregnancy outcomes.
SEARCH METHODS: We searched the Cochrane Pregnancy and Childbirth Group's Trials Register (18 June 2012), citation alerts from our work and reference lists of studies identified in the search.
SELECTION CRITERIA: Published and unpublished randomised controlled trials (RCT), comparing trained versus untrained TBAs, additionally trained versus trained TBAs, or women cared for/living in areas served by TBAs.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Three authors independently assessed study quality and extracted data in the original and first update review. Three authors and one external reviewer independently assessed study quality and two extracted data in this second update.
MAIN RESULTS: Six studies involving over 1345 TBAs, more than 32,000 women and approximately 57,000 births that examined the effects of TBA training for trained versus untrained TBAs (one study) and additionally trained TBA training versus trained TBAs (five studies) are included in this review. These studies consist of individual randomised trials (two studies) and cluster-randomised trials (four studies). The primary outcomes across the sample of studies were perinatal deaths, stillbirths and neonatal deaths (early, late and overall).
Trained TBAs versus untrained TBAs: one cluster-randomised trial found a significantly lower perinatal death rate in the trained versus untrained TBA clusters (adjusted odds ratio (OR) 0.70, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.59 to 0.83), lower stillbirth rate (adjusted OR 0.69, 95% CI 0.57 to 0.83) and lower neonatal death rate (adjusted OR 0.71, 95% CI 0.61 to 0.82). This study also found the maternal death rate was lower but not significant (adjusted OR 0.74, 95% CI 0.45 to 1.22).
Additionally trained TBAs versus trained TBAs: three large cluster-randomised trials compared TBAs who received additional training in initial steps of resuscitation, including bag-valve-mask ventilation, with TBAs who had received basic training in safe, clean delivery and immediate newborn care. Basic training included mouth-to-mouth resuscitation (two studies) or bag-valve-mask resuscitation (one study). There was no significant difference in the perinatal death rate between the intervention and control clusters (one study, adjusted OR 0.79, 95% CI 0.61 to 1.02) and no significant difference in late neonatal death rate between intervention and control clusters (one study, adjusted risk ratio (RR) 0.47, 95% CI 0.20 to 1.11). The neonatal death rate, however, was 45% lower in intervention compared with the control clusters (one study, 22.8% versus 40.2%, adjusted RR 0.54, 95% CI 0.32 to 0.92).
We conducted a meta-analysis on two outcomes: stillbirths and early neonatal death. There was no significant difference between the additionally trained TBAs versus trained TBAs for stillbirths (two studies, mean weighted adjusted RR 0.99, 95% CI 0.76 to 1.28) or early neonatal death rate (three studies, mean weighted adjusted RR 0.83, 95% CI 0.68 to 1.01). 
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: The results are promising for some outcomes (perinatal death, stillbirth and neonatal death). However, most outcomes are reported in only one study. A lack of contrast in training in the intervention and control clusters may have contributed to the null result for stillbirths and an insufficient number of studies may have contributed to the failure to achieve significance for early neonatal deaths. Despite the additional studies included in this updated systematic review, there remains insufficient evidence to establish the potential of TBA training to improve peri-neonatal mortality.
OBJECTIVE: To assess the effectiveness of strategies incorporating training and support of traditional birth attendants on the outcomes of perinatal, neonatal, and maternal death in developing countries.
DESIGN: Systematic review with meta-analysis.
DATA SOURCES: Medline, Embase, the Allied and Complementary Medicine database, British Nursing Index, Cochrane Library, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature, BioMed Central, PsycINFO, Latin American and Caribbean Health Sciences Literature database, African Index Medicus, Web of Science, Reproductive Health Library, and Science Citation Index (from inception to April 2011), without language restrictions. Search terms were "birth attend*", "traditional midwife", "lay birth attendant", "dais", and "comadronas". Review methods We selected randomised and non-randomised controlled studies with outcomes of perinatal, neonatal, and maternal mortality. Two independent reviewers undertook data extraction. We pooled relative risks separately for the randomised and non-randomised controlled studies, using a random effects model.
RESULTS: We identified six cluster randomised controlled trials (n=138 549) and seven non-randomised controlled studies (n=72 225) that investigated strategies incorporating training and support of traditional birth attendants. All six randomised controlled trials found a reduction in adverse perinatal outcomes; our meta-analysis showed significant reductions in perinatal death (relative risk 0.76, 95% confidence interval 0.64 to 0.88, P<0.001; number needed to treat 35, 24 to 70) and neonatal death (0.79, 0.69 to 0.88, P<0.001; 98, 66 to 170). Meta-analysis of the non-randomised studies also showed a significant reduction in perinatal mortality (0.70, 0.57 to 0.84, p<0.001; 48, 32 to 96) and neonatal mortality (0.61, 0.48 to 0.75, P<0.001; 96, 65 to 168). Six studies reported on maternal mortality and our meta-analysis showed a non-significant reduction (three randomised trials, relative risk 0.79, 0.53 to 1.05, P=0.12; three non-randomised studies, 0.80, 0.44 to 1.15, P=0.26).
CONCLUSION: Perinatal and neonatal deaths are significantly reduced with strategies incorporating training and support of traditional birth attendants.
The Lancet Neonatal Survival Series categorized neonatal health interventions into 3 service delivery modes: "Outreach," "Family-Community Care," and "Facility-based Clinical Care." Family-Community Care services generally have a greater potential impact on neonatal health than Outreach services, with similar costs. Combining interventions from all 3 service delivery modes is ideal for achievement of high impact. However, access to clinical care is limited in resource-poor settings with weak health systems. The current trend for those settings is to combine neonatal interventions into community-based intervention packages (CBIPs), which can be integrated into the local health care system. In this article, we searched several large databases to identify all published, large-scale, controlled studies that were implemented in a rural setting, included a control group, and reported neonatal and/or perinatal mortality as outcomes. We identified only 9 large-scale studies that fit these criteria. Several conclusions can be reached. (1) Family-Community Care interventions can have a substantial effect on neonatal and perinatal mortality. (2) Several important common strategies were used across the studies, including community mobilization, health education, behavior change communication sessions, care seeking modalities, and home visits during pregnancy and after birth. However, implementation of these interventions varied widely across the studies. (3) There is a need for additional, large-scale studies to test evidence-based CBIPs in developing countries, particularly in Africa, where no large-scale studies were identified. (4) We need to establish consistent, clearly defined terminology and protocols for designing trials and reporting outcomes so that we are able to compare results across different settings. (5) There is an urgent need to invest in research and program development focusing on neonatal health in urban areas. (6) It is crucial to integrate CBIPs in rural and urban settings into the already existing health care system to facilitate sustainability of the program and for scaling up. It is also important to evaluate the packages and to demonstrate the health impact of large-scale implementation. (7) Finally, there is a need for improving the continuum of care between home and facility-based care.
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate whether the inclusion of any specific resuscitation training educational strategy in developing countries improves outcomes.
METHODS: As part of the International Liaison Committee on Resuscitation evidence evaluation process, a systematic review of the literature was conducted. The Cochrane database of systematic reviews; Medline; Google Scholar and EmBASE were searched using multiple search strategies.
RESULTS: Forty-four papers were relevant to review, including 38 studies that provided support for the use of resuscitation training programs in developing countries. All studies that examined self-efficacy (15 studies) and student satisfaction (8 studies) reported improvement. There was no consistent testing method for educational outcomes across studies and few studies examined both educational outcomes and patient outcome (1 of 15 self-efficacy, 0 of 18 cognitive knowledge, 0 of 8 psychomotor skills, 0 of 5 simulated operational performance). Fourteen of 15 studies that examined patient survival were either newborn or trauma resuscitation, 1 adult resuscitation, and none were in pediatric resuscitation. Increased patient survival after resuscitation training was variable, with an absolute risk reduction that ranged from 0% to 34%.
CONCLUSIONS: Resuscitation training in developing countries was well received and viewed as valuable training by the students and local counterparts. Important student, training environment characteristics, educational outcomes and patient outcomes were inconsistently defined and reported. Institution of training in trauma and newborn resuscitation in developing countries has significantly reduced mortality, but this has not been demonstrated with other training programs.
Reducing neonatal mortality rates in low- and lower-middle-income countries (LMICs) requires postnatal interventions to be delivered through an appropriately prepared and supported workforce. This review examines health workforce interventions that deliver integrated packages of postnatal care to improve neonatal outcomes in LMICs. We conducted a structured search of peer-reviewed articles published during 2003-2014 that investigated the delivery of postnatal interventions by formal and lay health workers. We selected 13 studies and analyzed them using a narrative synthesis methodology. This review observed a wide divergence among studies regarding the outcomes as well as the approaches and duration of workforce training and staff supervision. Except 4, all studies observed a significant reduction in neonatal mortality. On the other hand, teams of lay health workers appear to be more effective in improving neonatal outcomes. Further improvement in the performance of health care providers may require emphasis on workforce interventions such as competency assessment, the acquisition of appropriate skills, and supervisory guidelines. Nevertheless, the heterogeneity and limited number of studies do not allow us to arrive at definitive conclusions, and we recommend the need for the harmonization of future studies, with uniformity of outcome measures and cost analyses.
