4.6 Review

Newborn survival in low resource settings-are we delivering?

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1111/j.1471-0528.2009.02328.x

关键词

Intrapartum-related neonatal deaths; low-income countries; Millennium Development Goal 4; neonatal; neonatal infections; neonatal tetanus; newborn; preterm birth

资金

  1. Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The annual toll of losses resulting from poor pregnancy outcomes include half a million maternal deaths, more than three million stillbirths, of whom at least one million die during labour and 3.8 million neonatal deaths-up to half on the first day of life. Neonatal deaths account for an increasing proportion of child deaths (now 41%) and must be reduced to achieve Millennium Development Goal (MDG) 4 for child survival. Newborn survival is also related to MDG 5 for maternal health as the interventions are closely linked. This article reviews current progress for newborn health globally, with a focus on the countries where most deaths occur. Three major causes of neonatal deaths (infections, complications of preterm birth, intrapartum-related neonatal deaths) account for almost 90% of all neonatal deaths. The highest impact interventions to address these causes of neonatal death are summarised with estimates of potential for lives saved. Two priority opportunities to address newborn deaths through existing maternal health programmes are highlighted. First, antenatal steroids are high impact, feasible and yet under-used in low resource settings. Second, with increasing investment to scale up skilled attendance and emergency obstetric care, it is important to include skills and equipment for simple immediate newborn care and neonatal resuscitation. A major gap is care during the early postnatal period for mothers and babies. There are promising models that have been tested mainly in research studies in Asia that are now being adapted and evaluated at scale including through a network of African implementation research trials.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据