RESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Annually, infections contribute to approximately 25% of the 2.8 million neonatal deaths worldwide. Over 95% of sepsis-related neonatal deaths occur in low- and middle-income countries. Hand hygiene is an inexpensive and cost-effective method of preventing infection in neonates, making it an affordable and practicable intervention in low- and middle-income country settings. Therefore, hand hygiene practices may hold strong prospects for reducing the occurrence of infection and infection-related neonatal death. OBJECTIVES: To determine the effectiveness of different hand hygiene agents for preventing neonatal infection in both community and health facility settings. SEARCH METHODS: Searches were conducted without date or language limits in December 2022 in the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, Embase and Cumulated Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL), clinicaltrials.gov and International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP) trial registries. The reference lists of retrieved studies or related systematic reviews were screened for studies not identified by the searches. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included randomized controlled trials (RCTs), cross-over trials, and cluster trials that included pregnant women, mothers, other caregivers, and healthcare workers who received interventions within either the community setting or in health facility settings, and the neonates in the neonatal care units or community settings. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: We used standard methodological procedures expected by Cochrane and the GRADE approach to assess the certainty of evidence. Primary outcomes were incidence of suspected infection (author-defined in study) within the first 28 days of life, bacteriologically confirmed infection within the first 28 days of life, all-cause mortality within the first seven days of life (early neonatal death), and all-cause mortality from the 8th to the 28th day of life (late neonatal death). MAIN RESULTS: Our review included six studies: two RCTs, one cluster-RCT, and three cross-over trials. Three studies involved 3281 neonates; the remaining three did not specify the actual number of neonates included in their study. Three studies involved 279 nurses working in neonatal intensive care units (NICUs). The number of nurses included was not specified by one study. A cluster-RCT included 103 pregnant women of over 34 weeks gestation from 10 villages in a community setting (sources of data: 103 mother-neonate pairs) and another community-based study included 258 married pregnant women at 32 to 34 weeks of gestation (the trial reported adverse events on 258 mothers and 246 neonates). Studies examined the effectiveness of different hand hygiene practices for the incidence of suspected infection (author-defined in study) within the first 28 days of life. Three studies were rated as having low risk for allocation bias, two studies were rated as unclear risk, and one was rated as having high risk. One study was rated as having a low risk of bias for allocation concealment, one study was rated as unclear risk, and four werw rated as having high risk. Two studies were rated as having low risk for performance bias and two were rated as having low risk for attrition bias. One class of agent versus another class of agent: 2% chlorhexidine gluconate (CHG) compared to alcohol hand sanitiser (61% alcohol and emollients) For this comparison, no study assessed the effect of the intervention on the incidence of suspected infection within the first 28 days of life. Two percent chlorhexidine gluconate (CHG) probably reduces the risk of all infection in neonates compared to 61% alcohol hand sanitiser in regard to the incidence of all bacteriologically confirmed infection within the first 28 days of life (RR 0.79, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.66 to 0.93; 2932 participants, 1 study; moderate-certainty evidence), number needed to treat for an additional beneficial outcome (NNTB): 385. The adverse outcome was reported as mean self-reported skin change and mean observer-reported skin change. There may be little to no difference between the effects of 2% CHG on nurses' skin compared to alcohol hand sanitiser, based on very low-certainty evidence for mean self-reported skin change (mean difference (MD) -0.80, 95% CI -1.59 to 0.01; 119 participants, 1 study) and on mean observer reported skin change (MD -0.19, CI -0.35 to -0.03; 119 participants, 1 study), respectively. We identified no study that reported on all-cause mortality and other outcomes for this comparison. None of the included studies assessed all-cause mortality within the first seven days of life nor the duration of hospital stay. One class of agent versus two or more other classes of agent: CHG compared to plain liquid soap + hand sanitiser We identified no studies that reported on our primary and secondary outcomes for this comparison except for author-defined adverse events. We are very uncertain whether plain soap plus hand sanitiser is better than CHG for nurses' skin based on very low-certainty evidence (MD -1.87, 95% CI -3.74 to -0.00; 16 participants, 1 study; very low-certainty evidence). One agent versus standard care: alcohol-based handrub (hand sanitiser) versus usual care The evidence is very uncertain whether alcohol-based handrub is better than 'usual care' in the prevention of suspected infections, as reported by mothers (RR 0.98, CI 0.69 to 1.39; 103 participants, 1 study, very low-certainty evidence). We are uncertain whether alcohol-based hand sanitiser is better than 'usual care' in reducing the occurrence of early and late neonatal mortality (RR 0.29, 95% CI 0.01 to 7.00; 103 participants, 1 study; very low-certainty evidence) and (RR 0.29, CI 0.01 to 7.00; 103 participants, 1 study; very low-certainty evidence), respectively. We identified no studies that reported on other outcomes for this comparison. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: We found a paucity of data that would allow us to reach meaningful conclusions pertaining to the superiority of one form of antiseptic hand hygiene agent over another for the prevention of neonatal infection. Also, the sparse available data were of moderate- to very low-certainty. We are uncertain as to the superiority of one hand hygiene agent over another because this review included very few studies with very serious study limitations.
Asunto(s)
Antiinfecciosos Locales , Higiene de las Manos , Muerte Perinatal , Femenino , Humanos , Recién Nacido , Embarazo , Antiinfecciosos Locales/uso terapéutico , Etanol , JabonesRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Acute bilirubin encephalopathy (ABE) and the other serious complications of severe hyperbilirubinemia in the neonate occur far more frequently in low- and middle-income countries (LMIC). This is due to several factors that place babies in LMIC at greater risk for hyperbilirubinemia, including increased prevalence of hematologic disorders leading to hemolysis, increased sepsis, less prenatal or postnatal care, and a lack of resources to treat jaundiced babies. Hospitals and clinics face frequent shortages of functioning phototherapy machines and inconsistent access to electricity to run the machines. Sunlight has the potential to treat hyperbilirubinemia: it contains the wavelengths of light that are produced by phototherapy machines. However, it contains harmful ultraviolet light and infrared radiation, and prolonged exposure has the potential to lead to sunburn, skin damage, and hyperthermia or hypothermia. OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the efficacy of sunlight administered alone or with filtering or amplifying devices for the prevention and treatment of clinical jaundice or laboratory-diagnosed hyperbilirubinemia in term and late preterm neonates. SEARCH METHODS: We used the standard search strategy of Cochrane Neonatal to search CENTRAL (2019, Issue 5), MEDLINE, Embase, and CINAHL on 2 May 2019. We also searched clinical trials databases, conference proceedings, and the reference lists of retrieved articles for randomized controlled trials (RCTs), quasi-RCTs, and cluster RCTs. We updated the searches on 1 June 2020. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included RCTs, quasi-RCTs, and cluster RCTs. We excluded crossover RCTs. Included studies must have evaluated sunlight (with or without filters or amplification) for the prevention and treatment of hyperbilirubinemia or jaundice in term or late preterm neonates. Neonates must have been enrolled in the study by one-week postnatal age. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: We used standard methodologic procedures expected by Cochrane. We used the GRADE approach to assess the certainty of evidence. Our primary outcomes were: use of conventional phototherapy, treatment failure requiring exchange transfusion, ABE, chronic bilirubin encephalopathy, and death. MAIN RESULTS: We included three RCTs (1103 infants). All three studies had small sample sizes, were unblinded, and were at high risk of bias. We planned to undertake four comparisons, but only found studies reporting on two. Sunlight with or without filters or amplification compared to no treatment for the prevention and treatment of hyperbilirubinemia in term and late preterm neonates One study of twice-daily sunlight exposure (30 to 60 minutes) compared to no treatment reported the incidence of jaundice may be reduced (risk ratio [RR] 0.61, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.45 to 0.82; risk difference [RD] -0.14, 95% CI -0.22 to -0.06; number needed to treat for an additional beneficial outcome [NNTB] 7, 95% CI 5 to 17; 1 study, 482 infants; very low-certainty evidence) and the number of days that an infant was jaundiced may be reduced (mean difference [MD] -2.20 days, 95% CI -2.60 to -1.80; 1 study, 482 infants; very low-certainty evidence). There were no data on safety or potential harmful effects of the intervention. The study did not assess use of conventional phototherapy, treatment failure requiring exchange transfusion, ABE, and long-term consequences of hyperbilirubinemia. The study showed that sunlight therapy may reduce rehospitalization rates within seven days of discharge for treatment for hyperbilirubinemia, but the evidence was very uncertain (RR 0.55, 95% CI 0.27 to 1.11; RD -0.04, -0.08 to 0.01; 1 study, 482 infants; very low-certainty evidence). Sunlight with or without filters or amplification compared to other sources of phototherapy for the treatment of hyperbilirubinemia in infants with confirmed hyperbilirubinemia Two studies (621 infants) compared the effect of filtered-sunlight exposure to other sources of phototherapy in infants with confirmed hyperbilirubinemia. Filtered-sunlight phototherapy (FSPT) and conventional or intensive electric phototherapy led to a similar number of days of effective treatment (broadly defined as a minimal increase of total serum bilirubin in infants less than 72 hours old and a decrease in total serum bilirubin in infants more than 72 hours old on any day that at least four to five hours of sunlight therapy was available). There may be little or no difference in treatment failure requiring exchange transfusion (typical RR 1.00, 95% CI 0.06 to 15.73; typical RD 0.00, 95% CI -0.01 to 0.01; 2 studies, 621 infants; low-certainty evidence). One study reported ABE, and no infants developed this outcome (RR not estimable; RD 0.00, 95% CI -0.02 to 0.02; 1 study, 174 infants; low-certainty evidence). One study reported death as a reason for study withdrawal; no infants were withdrawn due to death (RR not estimable; typical RD 0.00, 95% CI -0.01 to 0.01; 1 study, 447 infants; low-certainty evidence). Neither study assessed long-term outcomes. Possible harms: both studies showed a probable increased risk for hyperthermia (body temperature greater than 37.5 °C) with FSPT (typical RR 4.39, 95% CI 2.98 to 6.47; typical RD 0.30, 95% CI 0.23 to 0.36; number needed to treat for an additional harmful outcome [NNTH] 3, 95% CI 2 to 4; 2 studies, 621 infants; moderate-certainty evidence). There was probably no difference in hypothermia (body temperature less than 35.5 °C) (typical RR 1.06, 95% CI 0.55 to 2.03; typical RD 0.00, 95% CI -0.03 to 0.04; 2 studies, 621 infants; moderate-certainty evidence). AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Sunlight may be an effective adjunct to conventional phototherapy in LMIC settings, may allow for rotational use of limited phototherapy machines, and may be preferable to families as it can allow for increased bonding. Filtration of sunlight to block harmful ultraviolet light and frequent temperature checks for babies under sunlight may be warranted for safety. Sunlight may be effective in preventing hyperbilirubinemia in some cases, but these studies have not demonstrated that sunlight alone is effective for the treatment of hyperbilirubinemia given its sporadic availability and the low or very low certainty of the evidence in these studies.
Asunto(s)
Helioterapia/métodos , Hiperbilirrubinemia Neonatal/terapia , Sesgo , Recambio Total de Sangre , Helioterapia/efectos adversos , Helioterapia/instrumentación , Humanos , Hiperbilirrubinemia Neonatal/epidemiología , Hiperbilirrubinemia Neonatal/prevención & control , Hipertermia/epidemiología , Hipotermia/epidemiología , Incidencia , Recién Nacido , Recien Nacido Prematuro , Ictericia Neonatal/prevención & control , Ictericia Neonatal/terapia , Readmisión del Paciente/estadística & datos numéricos , Ensayos Clínicos Controlados Aleatorios como Asunto , Insuficiencia del TratamientoRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Although the use of prenatal ultrasound services has increased in low- income and lower middle-income countries, there has not been a concurrent improvement in perinatal mortality. It remains unknown whether individual ultrasound findings in this setting are associated with neonatal death or the need for resuscitation at delivery. If associations are identified by ultrasound, they could be used to inform the birth attendant and counsel the family regarding risk, potentially altering delivery preparedness in order to reduce neonatal mortality. METHODS: This was a secondary analysis of data collected from a prospective cohort. Data was gathered at Nawanyago Health Centre III in Kamuli District, Uganda. Participants included pregnant women who received second and third trimester prenatal ultrasound scans and delivered at that center between July 2010 and August 2018. All ultrasounds were performed at Nawanyago and deliveries were attended solely by midwives or nurses. Predictor variables included the following ultrasound findings: fetal number, fetal presentation, and amniotic fluid volume. The primary outcome was bag-mask ventilation (BMV) of the neonate at delivery. The secondary outcome was stillbirth or neonatal death in the delivery room. RESULTS: Primary outcome data was available for 1105 infants and secondary outcome data was available for 1098 infants. A total of 33 infants received BMV at delivery. The odds of receiving BMV at delivery was significantly increased if amniotic fluid volume was abnormal (OR 4.2, CI 1.2-14.9) and there were increased odds for multiple gestation (OR 1.9, CI 0.7-5.4) and for non-vertex fetal presentation (OR 1.4, CI 0.6-3.2) that were not statistically significant. Stillbirth or neonatal death in the delivery room was diagnosed for 20 infants. Multiple gestation (OR 4.7, CI 1.6-14.2) and abnormal amniotic fluid volume (OR 4.8, CI 1.0-22.1) increased the odds of stillbirth or neonatal death in the delivery room, though only multiple gestation was statistically significant. CONCLUSION: Common findings that are easily identifiable on ultrasound in low- and lower middle-income countries are associated with adverse perinatal outcomes. Education could lead to improved delivery preparedness, with the potential to reduce perinatal mortality. This was a preliminary study; larger prospective studies are needed to confirm these findings.
Asunto(s)
Muerte Perinatal , Resultado del Embarazo/epidemiología , Respiración Artificial/estadística & datos numéricos , Mortinato/epidemiología , Ultrasonografía Prenatal , Adulto , Líquido Amniótico , Puntaje de Apgar , Femenino , Feto/diagnóstico por imagen , Número de Embarazos , Humanos , Recién Nacido , Presentación en Trabajo de Parto , Masculino , Oportunidad Relativa , Embarazo , Población Rural , Uganda/epidemiologíaRESUMEN
OBJECTIVE: The Downes score is a neonatal examination scoring tool frequently used to guide initiation of CPAP, but its ability to predict the need for surfactant has not been assessed. We assessed the extent to which the Downes score predicts the receipt of surfactant. STUDY DESIGN: We calculated a simplified Downes score from nursing admission data for infants (≤ 2000 grams, and ≥ 25 weeks' gestation) admitted on CPAP to a highly resourced level III NICU, to assess the predictive value for the receipt of surfactant. RESULTS: Fifty-three (31.5%) out of 168 infants admitted on CPAP received surfactant. A simplified Downes score of ≥ 4 predicted the receipt of surfactant with 90.6% sensitivity, 52.2% specificity, 46.6% positive predictive value, 92.3% negative predictive value, and 64.3% accuracy. CONCLUSION: The high sensitivity and negative predictive value suggest utility for using the Downes score to help guide clinical decision making regarding surfactant therapy.
RESUMEN
Helping Babies Breathe (HBB) is an evidence-based neonatal resuscitation program designed for implementation in low-resource settings. While HBB reduces rates of early neonatal mortality and stillbirth, maintenance of knowledge and skills remains a challenge. The extent to which the inclusion of educational clinical videos impacts learners' knowledge and skills acquisition, and retention is largely unknown. We conducted a cluster-randomized controlled trial at two public teaching hospitals in Addis Ababa, Ethiopia. We randomized small training group clusters of 84 midwives to standard HBB vs. standard HBB training supplemented with exposure to an educational clinical video on newborn resuscitation. Midwives were followed over a 7-month time period and assessed on their knowledge and skills using standard HBB tools. When comparing the intervention to the control group, there was no difference in outcomes across all assessments, indicating that the addition of the video did not influence skill retention. Pass rates for both the control and intervention group on bag and mask skills remained low at 7 months despite frequent assessments. There is more to learn about the use of educational videos along with low-dose, high-frequency training and how it relates to retention of knowledge and skills in learners.
RESUMEN
Quality improvement is driven by benchmarking between and within institutions over time and the collaborative improvement efforts that stem from these comparisons. Benchmarking requires systematic collection and use of standardized data. Low- and middle-income countries (LMIC) have great potential for improvements in newborn outcomes but serious obstacles to data collection, analysis, and implementation of robust improvement methodologies exist. We review the importance of data collection, internationally recommended neonatal metrics, selected methods of data collection, and reporting. The transformation from data collection to data use is illustrated by several select data system examples from LMIC. Key features include aims and measures important to neonatal team members, co-development with local providers, immediate access to data for review, and multidisciplinary team involvement. The future of neonatal care, use of data, and the trajectory to reach global neonatal improvement targets in resource-limited settings will be dependent on initiatives led by LMIC clinicians and experts.