Schedules for home visits in the early postpartum period.

BACKGROUND: Maternal complications, including psychological/mental health problems and neonatal morbidity, have commonly been observed in the postpartum period. Home visits by health professionals or lay supporters in the weeks following birth may prevent health problems from becoming chronic, with long-term effects. This is an update of a review last published in 2017. OBJECTIVES: The primary objective of this review is to assess the effects of different home-visiting schedules on maternal and newborn mortality during the early postpartum period. The review focuses on the frequency of home visits (how many home visits in total), the timing (when visits started, e.g. within 48 hours of the birth), duration (when visits ended), intensity (how many visits per week), and different types of home-visiting interventions. SEARCH METHODS: For this update, we searched the Cochrane Pregnancy and Childbirth Group's Trials Register, ClinicalTrials.gov, the WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP) (19 May 2021), and checked reference lists of retrieved studies. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) (including cluster-, quasi-RCTs and studies available only as abstracts) comparing different home-visiting interventions that enrolled participants in the early postpartum period (up to 42 days after birth) were eligible for inclusion. We excluded studies in which women were enrolled and received an intervention during the antenatal period (even if the intervention continued into the postnatal period), and studies recruiting only women from specific high-risk groups (e.g. women with alcohol or drug problems). DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors independently assessed trials for inclusion and risk of bias, extracted data and checked them for accuracy. We used the GRADE approach to assess the certainty of the evidence. MAIN RESULTS: We included 16 randomised trials with data for 12,080 women. The trials were carried out in countries across the world, in both high- and low-resource settings. In low-resource settings, women receiving usual care may have received no additional postnatal care after early hospital discharge. The interventions and controls varied considerably across studies. Trials focused on three broad types of comparisons, as detailed below. In all but four of the included studies, postnatal care at home was delivered by healthcare professionals. The aim of all interventions was broadly to assess the well-being of mothers and babies, and to provide education and support. However, some interventions had more specific aims, such as to encourage breastfeeding, or to provide practical support. For most of our outcomes, only one or two studies provided data, and results were inconsistent overall. All studies had several domains with high or unclear risk of bias. More versus fewer home visits (five studies, 2102 women) The evidence is very uncertain about whether home visits have any effect on maternal and neonatal mortality (very low-certainty evidence). Mean postnatal depression scores as measured with the Edinburgh Postnatal Depression Scale (EPDS) may be slightly higher (worse) with more home visits, though the difference in scores was not clinically meaningful (mean difference (MD) 1.02, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.25 to 1.79; two studies, 767 women; low-certainty evidence). Two separate analyses indicated conflicting results for maternal satisfaction (both low-certainty evidence); one indicated that there may be benefit with fewer visits, though the 95% CI just crossed the line of no effect (risk ratio (RR) 0.96, 95% CI 0.90 to 1.02; two studies, 862 women). However, in another study, the additional support provided by health visitors was associated with increased mean satisfaction scores (MD 14.70, 95% CI 8.43 to 20.97; one study, 280 women; low-certainty evidence). Infant healthcare utilisation may be decreased with more home visits (RR 0.48, 95% CI 0.36 to 0.64; four studies, 1365 infants) and exclusive breastfeeding at six weeks may be increased (RR 1.17, 95% CI 1.01 to 1.36; three studies, 960 women; low-certainty evidence). Serious neonatal morbidity up to six months was not reported in any trial. Different models of postnatal care (three studies, 4394 women) In a cluster-RCT comparing usual care with individualised care by midwives, extended up to three months after the birth, there may be little or no difference in neonatal mortality (RR 0.97, 95% CI 0.85 to 1.12; one study, 696 infants). The proportion of women with EPDS scores ≥ 13 at four months is probably reduced with individualised care (RR 0.68, 95% CI 0.53 to 0.86; one study, 1295 women). One study suggests there may be little to no difference between home visits and telephone screening in neonatal morbidity up to 28 days (RR 0.97, 95% CI 0.85 to 1.12; one study, 696 women). In a different study, there was no difference between breastfeeding promotion and routine visits in exclusive breastfeeding rates at six months (RR 1.47, 95% CI 0.81 to 2.69; one study, 656 women). Home versus facility-based postnatal care (eight studies, 5179 women) The evidence suggests there may be little to no difference in postnatal depression rates at 42 days postpartum and also as measured on an EPDS scale at 60 days. Maternal satisfaction with postnatal care may be better with home visits (RR 1.36, 95% CI 1.14 to 1.62; three studies, 2368 women). There may be little to no difference in infant emergency health care visits or infant hospital readmissions (RR 1.15, 95% CI 0.95 to 1.38; three studies, 3257 women) or in exclusive breastfeeding at two weeks (RR 1.05, 95% CI 0.93 to 1.18; 1 study, 513 women). AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: The evidence is very uncertain about the effect of home visits on maternal and neonatal mortality. Individualised care as part of a package of home visits probably improves depression scores at four months and increasing the frequency of home visits may improve exclusive breastfeeding rates and infant healthcare utilisation. Maternal satisfaction may also be better with home visits compared to hospital check-ups. Overall, the certainty of evidence was found to be low and findings were not consistent among studies and comparisons. Further well designed RCTs evaluating this complex intervention will be required to formulate the optimal package.

Schedules for home visits in the early postpartum period.

BACKGROUND: Maternal complications including psychological and mental health problems and neonatal morbidity have been commonly observed in the postpartum period. Home visits by health professionals or lay supporters in the weeks following the birth may prevent health problems from becoming chronic with long-term effects on women, their babies, and their families. OBJECTIVES: To assess outcomes for women and babies of different home-visiting schedules during the early postpartum period. The review focuses on the frequency of home visits, the duration (when visits ended) and intensity, and on different types of home-visiting interventions. SEARCH METHODS: We searched the Cochrane Pregnancy and Childbirth Group's Trials Register (28 January 2013) and reference lists of retrieved articles. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) (including cluster-RCTs) comparing different types of home-visiting interventions enrolling participants in the early postpartum period (up to 42 days after birth). We excluded studies in which women were enrolled and received an intervention during the antenatal period (even if the intervention continued into the postnatal period) and studies recruiting only women from specific high-risk groups. (e.g. women with alcohol or drug problems). DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Study eligibility was assessed by at least two review authors. Data extraction and assessment of risk of bias were carried out independently by at least two review authors. Data were entered into Review Manager software. MAIN RESULTS: We included data from 12 randomised trials with data for more than 11,000 women. The trials were carried out in countries across the world, and in both high- and low-resource settings. In low-resource settings women receiving usual care may have received no additional postnatal care after early hospital discharge.The interventions and control conditions varied considerably across studies with trials focusing on three broad types of comparisons: schedules involving more versus fewer postnatal home visits (five studies), schedules involving different models of care (three studies), and home versus hospital clinic postnatal check-ups (four studies). In all but two of the included studies, postnatal care at home was delivered by healthcare professionals. The aim of all interventions was broadly to assess the wellbeing of mothers and babies, and to provide education and support, although some interventions had more specific aims such as to encourage breastfeeding, or to provide practical support.For most of our outcomes only one or two studies provided data, and overall results were inconsistent.There was no evidence that home visits were associated with improvements in maternal and neonatal mortality, and no consistent evidence that more postnatal visits at home were associated with improvements in maternal health. More intensive schedules of home visits did not appear to improve maternal psychological health and results from two studies suggested that women receiving more visits had higher mean depression scores. The reason for this finding was not clear. In a cluster randomised trial comparing usual care with individualised care by midwives extended up to three months after the birth, the proportions of women with Edinburgh postnatal depression scale (EPDS) scores ≥ 13 at four months was reduced in the individualised care group (RR 0.68, 95% CI 0.53 to 0.86). There was some evidence that postnatal care at home may reduce infant health service utilisation in the weeks following the birth, and that more home visits may encourage more women to exclusively breastfeed their babies. There was some evidence that home visits are associated with increased maternal satisfaction with postnatal care. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Increasing the number of postnatal home visits may promote infant health and maternal satisfaction and more individualised care may improve outcomes for women, although overall findings in different studies were not consistent. The frequency, timing, duration and intensity of such postnatal care visits should be based upon local and individual needs. Further well designed RCTs evaluating this complex intervention will be required to formulate the optimal package.

Schedules for home visits in the early postpartum period.

BACKGROUND: Maternal complications including psychological and mental health problems and neonatal morbidity have been commonly observed in the postpartum period. Home visits by health professionals or lay supporters in the weeks following the birth may prevent health problems from becoming chronic with long-term effects on women, their babies, and their families. OBJECTIVES: To assess outcomes for women and babies of different home-visiting schedules during the early postpartum period. The review focuses on the frequency of home visits, the duration (when visits ended) and intensity, and on different types of home-visiting interventions. SEARCH METHODS: We searched the Cochrane Pregnancy and Childbirth Group's Trials Register (28 January 2013) and reference lists of retrieved articles. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) (including cluster-RCTs) comparing different types of home-visiting interventions enrolling participants in the early postpartum period (up to 42 days after birth). We excluded studies in which women were enrolled and received an intervention during the antenatal period (even if the intervention continued into the postnatal period) and studies recruiting only women from specific high-risk groups. (e.g. women with alcohol or drug problems). DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Study eligibility was assessed by at least two review authors. Data extraction and assessment of risk of bias were carried out independently by at least two review authors. Data were entered into Review Manager software. MAIN RESULTS: We included data from 12 randomised trials with data for more than 11,000 women. The trials were carried out in countries across the world, and in both high- and low-resource settings. In low-resource settings women receiving usual care may have received no additional postnatal care after early hospital discharge.The interventions and control conditions varied considerably across studies with trials focusing on three broad types of comparisons: schedules involving more versus fewer postnatal home visits (five studies), schedules involving different models of care (three studies), and home versus hospital clinic postnatal check-ups (four studies). In all but two of the included studies, postnatal care at home was delivered by healthcare professionals. The aim of all interventions was broadly to assess the wellbeing of mothers and babies, and to provide education and support, although some interventions had more specific aims such as to encourage breastfeeding, or to provide practical support.For most of our outcomes only one or two studies provided data, and overall results were inconsistent.There was no evidence that home visits were associated with improvements in maternal and neonatal mortality, and no strong evidence that more postnatal visits at home were associated with improvements in maternal health. More intensive schedules of home visits did not appear to improve maternal psychological health and results from two studies suggested that women receiving more visits had higher mean depression scores. The reason for this finding was not clear. There was some evidence that postnatal care at home may reduce infant health service utilisation in the weeks following the birth, and that more home visits may encourage more women to exclusively breastfeed their babies. There was some evidence that home visits are associated with increased maternal satisfaction with postnatal care. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Overall, findings were inconsistent. Postnatal home visits may promote infant health and maternal satisfaction. However, the frequency, timing, duration and intensity of such postnatal care visits should be based upon local needs. Further well designed RCTs evaluating this complex intervention will be required to formulate the optimal package.

Long-term effects of earlier initiated continuous Kangaroo Mother Care (KMC) for low-birth-weight (LBW) infants in Madagascar.

AIM: To examine the long-term effects of earlier initiated continuous Kangaroo Mother Care (KMC) for relatively stable low-birth-weight (LBW) infants in a resource-limited country. METHODS: A randomized controlled trial with long-term follow-up was performed in LBW infants in Madagascar. Earlier continuous KMC (intervention group) was initiated as soon as possible within 24 h postbirth, and later continuous KMC (control group: conventional care) was initiated after complete stabilization. Outcome measures were mortality or readmission, nutritional indicators at 6-12 months postbirth and feeding condition at 6 months postbirth (ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT00531492). RESULTS: A total of 72 infants were followed for mortality or readmission at 6-12 months postbirth. There was no difference between the two groups (7/36 vs. 7/36, Risk ratio (RR), 1.00; 95% CIs, 0.39-2.56; p = 1.00). The proportion of exclusive breast feeding (EBF) at 6 months postbirth was significantly higher with earlier KMC than later KMC (12/29 vs. 4/26; RR 2.69; 95% CIs, 1.00-7.31; p = 0.04). There were no differences in nutritional indicators between the two groups at 6-12 months postbirth. CONCLUSION: Earlier initiated continuous KMC results in a significantly higher proportion of EBF at 6 months postbirth. Further larger-scale long-term evaluations of earlier initiated continuous KMC for LBW infants are needed.

Schedules for home visits in the early postpartum period.

BACKGROUND: Maternal complications including psychological and mental health problems and neonatal morbidity have been commonly observed in the postpartum period. Home visits by health professionals or lay supporters in the weeks following the birth may prevent health problems from becoming chronic with long-term effects on women, their babies, and their families. OBJECTIVES: To assess outcomes for women and babies of different home-visiting schedules during the early postpartum period. The review focuses on the frequency of home visits, the duration (when visits ended) and intensity, and on different types of home-visiting interventions. SEARCH METHODS: We searched the Cochrane Pregnancy and Childbirth Group's Trials Register (28 January 2013) and reference lists of retrieved articles. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) (including cluster-RCTs) comparing different types of home-visiting interventions enrolling participants in the early postpartum period (up to 42 days after birth). We excluded studies in which women were enrolled and received an intervention during the antenatal period (even if the intervention continued into the postnatal period) and studies recruiting only women from specific high-risk groups. (e.g. women with alcohol or drug problems). DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Study eligibility was assessed by at least two review authors. Data extraction and assessment of risk of bias were carried out independently by at least two review authors. Data were entered into Review Manager software. MAIN RESULTS: We included data from 12 randomised trials with data for more than 11,000 women. The trials were carried out in countries across the world, and in both high- and low-resource settings. In low-resource settings women receiving usual care may have received no additional postnatal care after early hospital discharge. The interventions and control conditions varied considerably across studies with trials focusing on three broad types of comparisons: schedules involving more versus fewer postnatal home visits (five studies), schedules involving different models of care (three studies), and home versus hospital clinic postnatal check-ups (four studies). In all but two of the included studies, postnatal care at home was delivered by healthcare professionals. The aim of all interventions was broadly to assess the wellbeing of mothers and babies, and to provide education and support, although some interventions had more specific aims such as to encourage breastfeeding, or to provide practical support. For most of our outcomes only one or two studies provided data, and overall results were inconsistent. There was no evidence that home visits were associated with improvements in maternal and neonatal mortality, and no strong evidence that more postnatal visits at home were associated with improvements in maternal health. More intensive schedules of home visits did not appear to improve maternal psychological health and results from two studies suggested that women receiving more visits had higher mean depression scores. The reason for this finding was not clear. There was some evidence that postnatal care at home may reduce infant health service utilisation in the weeks following the birth, and that more home visits may encourage more women to exclusively breastfeed their babies. There was some evidence that home visits are associated with increased maternal satisfaction with postnatal care. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Overall, findings were inconsistent. Postnatal home visits may promote infant health and maternal satisfaction. However, the frequency, timing, duration and intensity of such postnatal care visits should be based upon local needs. Further well designed RCTs evaluating this complex intervention will be required to formulate the optimal package.

Provider-initiated HIV testing and counselling for TB in low HIV prevalence settings: is it worthwhile?

BACKGROUND: We assessed the HIV-positive yield of offering provider-initiated HIV testing and counselling (PITC) for TB and the costs, in Madagascar, which has a low HIV prevalence and a high TB burden. METHODS: A cross-sectional study of routinely collected records from January 2010 to June 2011. RESULTS: A total of 37 596 TB patients were registered in 205 TB centres. HIV testing was available in 95 (46%) of centres where 7524 (40%) of those offered testing accepted it. Only 35 (0.5%) individuals were found HIV positive. Initial costs were about US$1.4 million and annual recurrent costs about US$0.1 million. CONCLUSION: There are concerns of cost investment for countrywide introduction of PITC in a low HIV prevalence setting.