Search

BackgroundIn 2013, an estimated 2.8 million newborns died and 2.7 million were stillborn. A much greater number suffer from long term impairment associated with preterm birth, intrauterine growth restriction, congenital anomalies, and perinatal or infectious causes. With the approaching deadline for the achievement of the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) in 2015, there was a need to set the new research priorities on newborns and stillbirth with a focus not only on survival but also on health, growth and development. We therefore carried out a systematic exercise to set newborn health research priorities for 2013-2025.MethodsWe used adapted Child Health and Nutrition Research Initiative (CHNRI) methods for this prioritization exercise. We identified and approached the 200 most productive researchers and 400 program experts, and 132 of them submitted research questions online. These were collated into a set of 205 research questions, sent for scoring to the 600 identified experts, and were assessed and scored by 91 experts.ResultsNine out of top ten identified priorities were in the domain of research on improving delivery of known interventions, with simplified neonatal resuscitation program and clinical algorithms and improved skills of community health workers leading the list. The top 10 priorities in the domain of development were led by ideas on improved Kangaroo Mother Care at community level, how to improve the accuracy of diagnosis by community health workers, and perinatal audits. The 10 leading priorities for discovery research focused on stable surfactant with novel modes of administration for preterm babies, ability to diagnose fetal distress and novel tocolytic agents to delay or stop preterm labour.ConclusionThese findings will assist both donors and researchers in supporting and conducting research to close the knowledge gaps for reducing neonatal mortality, morbidity and long term impairment. WHO, SNL and other partners will work to generate interest among key national stakeholders, governments, NGOs, and research institutes in these priorities, while encouraging research funders to support them. We will track research funding, relevant requests for proposals and trial registers to monitor if the priorities identified by this exercise are being addressed.

BackgroundIn 2013, an estimated 2.8 million newborns died and 2.7 million were stillborn. A much greater number suffer from long term impairment associated with preterm birth, intrauterine growth restriction, congenital anomalies, and perinatal or infectious causes. With the approaching deadline for the achievement of the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) in 2015, there was a need to set the new research priorities on newborns and stillbirth with a focus not only on survival but also on health, growth and development. We therefore carried out a systematic exercise to set newborn health research priorities for 2013-2025.MethodsWe used adapted Child Health and Nutrition Research Initiative (CHNRI) methods for this prioritization exercise. We identified and approached the 200 most productive researchers and 400 program experts, and 132 of them submitted research questions online. These were collated into a set of 205 research questions, sent for scoring to the 600 identified experts, and were assessed and scored by 91 experts.ResultsNine out of top ten identified priorities were in the domain of research on improving delivery of known interventions, with simplified neonatal resuscitation program and clinical algorithms and improved skills of community health workers leading the list. The top 10 priorities in the domain of development were led by ideas on improved Kangaroo Mother Care at community level, how to improve the accuracy of diagnosis by community health workers, and perinatal audits. The 10 leading priorities for discovery research focused on stable surfactant with novel modes of administration for preterm babies, ability to diagnose fetal distress and novel tocolytic agents to delay or stop preterm labour.ConclusionThese findings will assist both donors and researchers in supporting and conducting research to close the knowledge gaps for reducing neonatal mortality, morbidity and long term impairment. WHO, SNL and other partners will work to generate interest among key national stakeholders, governments, NGOs, and research institutes in these priorities, while encouraging research funders to support them. We will track research funding, relevant requests for proposals and trial registers to monitor if the priorities identified by this exercise are being addressed.

ObjectiveRegulatory bodies and insurers evaluate hospital quality using obstetrical outcomes, however meaningful comparisons should take preexisting patient characteristics into account. Furthermore, if risk-adjusted outcomes are consistent within a hospital, fewer measures and resources would be needed to assess obstetrical quality. Our objective was to establish risk-adjusted models for 5 obstetric outcomes and assess hospital performance across these outcomes.Study designWe studied a cohort of 115,502 women and their neonates born in 25 hospitals in the United States from March 2008 through February 2011. Hospitals were ranked according to their unadjusted and risk-adjusted frequency of venous thromboembolism, postpartum hemorrhage, peripartum infection, severe perineal laceration, and a composite neonatal adverse outcome. Correlations between hospital risk-adjusted outcome frequencies were assessed.ResultsVenous thromboembolism occurred too infrequently (0.03%; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.02-0.04%) for meaningful assessment. Other outcomes occurred frequently enough for assessment (postpartum hemorrhage, 2.29%; 95% CI, 2.20-2.38, peripartum infection, 5.06%; 95% CI, 4.93-5.19, severe perineal laceration at spontaneous vaginal delivery, 2.16%; 95% CI, 2.06-2.27, neonatal composite, 2.73%; 95% CI, 2.63-2.84). Although there was high concordance between unadjusted and adjusted hospital rankings, several individual hospitals had an adjusted rank that was substantially different (as much as 12 rank tiers) than their unadjusted rank. None of the correlations between hospital-adjusted outcome frequencies was significant. For example, the hospital with the lowest adjusted frequency of peripartum infection had the highest adjusted frequency of severe perineal laceration.ConclusionEvaluations based on a single risk-adjusted outcome cannot be generalized to overall hospital obstetric performance.

Objective The aim of the study is to compare perinatal outcomes for women with greater social needs, as identified by the Community Health Needs Assessment, to those of women living in other areas of the county. Study Design This was a retrospective cohort study of pregnant women delivering at a large inner-city county hospital. Perinatal outcomes were analyzed for women living within a target area with substantial health disparities and social needs, and compared with those women living outside the target area. Statistical analysis included student's t -test, Chi square, and logistic regression. Results Between January 2015 and July 2020, 66,936 women delivered at Parkland hospital. Of these, 7,585 (11%) resided within the target area. These women were younger (26.8 ± 6.5 vs. 27.9 ± 6.4 years, p < 0.001), more likely to be black (37 vs. 13%, p < 0.001), and had a higher body mass index or BMI (33.3 ± 7.0 vs. 32.6 ± 6.4 kg/m 2 , p < 0.001). All women were likely to access prenatal care, with 7,320 (96.5%) in the target area and 57,677 (97.2%) outside the area attending at least one visit. Adverse perinatal outcomes were increased for women living within the target area, which persisted after adjustment for age, race, and BMI. This included an increased risk of preeclampsia (adjusted risk ratio [aRR] 1.1, 95% confidence interval or CI [1.03, 1.2]) and abruption (aRR 1.3, 95% CI [1.1, 1.7]), as well as preterm birth before both 34 weeks (aRR 1.3, 95% CI [1.2, 1.5]) and 28 weeks (aRR 1.3, 95% CI [1.02,1.7]). It follows that neonatal ICU admission (aRR 2.1, 95% CI [1.3, 3.4]) and neonatal death (aRR 1.2, 95% CI [1.1, 1.3]) were increased within the target area. Interestingly, rate of postpartum visit attendance was higher in the target area (57 vs. 48%), p < 0.001. Conclusion Even among vulnerable populations, women in areas with worse health disparities and social needs are at greater risk of adverse perinatal outcomes. Efforts to achieve health equity will need to address social disparities. Key Points At a county hospital, 97% of women accessed prenatal care. Greater social needs were associated with adverse perinatal outcomes. Differences persisted with adjustment for age, race, and BMI. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]