Potential impact of midwives in preventing and reducing maternal and neonatal mortality and stillbirths: a Lives Saved Tool modelling study.

BACKGROUND: Strengthening the capacity of midwives to deliver high-quality maternal and newborn health services has been highlighted as a priority by global health organisations. To support low-income and middle-income countries (LMICs) in their decisions about investments in health, we aimed to estimate the potential impact of midwives on reducing maternal and neonatal deaths and stillbirths under several intervention coverage scenarios. METHODS: For this modelling study, we used the Lives Saved Tool to estimate the number of deaths that would be averted by 2035, if coverage of health interventions that can be delivered by professional midwives were scaled up in 88 countries that account for the vast majority of the world's maternal and neonatal deaths and stillbirths. We used four scenarios to assess the effects of increasing the coverage of midwife-delivered interventions by a modest amount (10% every 5 years), a substantial amount (25% every 5 years), and the amount needed to reach universal coverage of these interventions (ie, to 95%); and the effects of coverage attrition (a 2% decrease every 5 years). We grouped countries in three equal-sized groups according to their Human Development Index. Group A included the 30 countries with the lowest HDI, group B included 29 low-to-medium HDI countries, and group C included 29 medium-to-high HDI countries. FINDINGS: We estimated that, relative to current coverage, a substantial increase in coverage of midwife-delivered interventions could avert 41% of maternal deaths, 39% of neonatal deaths, and 26% of stillbirths, equating to 2·2 million deaths averted per year by 2035. Even a modest increase in coverage of midwife-delivered interventions could avert 22% of maternal deaths, 23% of neonatal deaths, and 14% of stillbirths, equating to 1·3 million deaths averted per year by 2035. Relative to current coverage, universal coverage of midwife-delivered interventions would avert 67% of maternal deaths, 64% of neonatal deaths, and 65% of stillbirths, allowing 4·3 million lives to be saved annually by 2035. These deaths averted would be particularly concentrated in the group B countries, which currently account for a large proportion of the world's population and have high mortality rates compared with group C. INTERPRETATION: Midwives can help to substantially reduce maternal and neonatal mortality and stillbirths in LMICs. However, to realise this potential, midwives need to have skills and competencies in line with recommendations from the International Confederation of Midwives, to be part of a team of sufficient size and skill, and to work in an enabling environment. Our study highlights the potential of midwives but there are many challenges to the achievement of this potential. If increased coverage of midwife-delivered interventions can be achieved, health systems will be better able to provide effective coverage of essential sexual, reproductive, maternal, newborn, and adolescent health interventions. FUNDING: New Venture Fund.

The projected effect of scaling up midwifery.

We used the Lives Saved Tool (LiST) to estimate deaths averted if midwifery was scaled up in 78 countries classified into three tertiles using the Human Development Index (HDI). We selected interventions in LiST to encompass the scope of midwifery practice, including prepregnancy, antenatal, labour, birth, and post-partum care, and family planning. Modest (10%), substantial (25%), or universal (95%) scale-up scenarios from present baseline levels were all found to reduce maternal deaths, stillbirths, and neonatal deaths by 2025 in all countries tested. With universal coverage of midwifery interventions for maternal and newborn health, excluding family planning, for the countries with the lowest HDI, 61% of all maternal, fetal, and neonatal deaths could be prevented. Family planning alone could prevent 57% of all deaths because of reduced fertility and fewer pregnancies. Midwifery with both family planning and interventions for maternal and newborn health could avert a total of 83% of all maternal deaths, stillbirths, and neonatal deaths. The inclusion of specialist care in the scenarios resulted in an increased number of deaths being prevented, meaning that midwifery care has the greatest effect when provided within a functional health system with effective referral and transfer mechanisms to specialist care.

The impact and cost of scaling up midwifery and obstetrics in 58 low- and middle-income countries.

BACKGROUND AND METHODS: To guide achievement of the Millennium Development Goals, we used the Lives Saved Tool to provide a novel simulation of potential maternal, fetal, and newborn lives and costs saved by scaling up midwifery and obstetrics services, including family planning, in 58 low- and middle-income countries. Typical midwifery and obstetrics interventions were scaled to either 60% of the national population (modest coverage) or 99% (universal coverage). FINDINGS: Under even a modest scale-up, midwifery services including family planning reduce maternal, fetal, and neonatal deaths by 34%. Increasing midwifery alone or integrated with obstetrics is more cost-effective than scaling up obstetrics alone; when family planning was included, the midwifery model was almost twice as cost-effective as the obstetrics model, at $2,200 versus $4,200 per death averted. The most effective strategy was the most comprehensive: increasing midwives, obstetricians, and family planning could prevent 69% of total deaths under universal scale-up, yielding a cost per death prevented of just $2,100. Within this analysis, the interventions which midwifery and obstetrics are poised to deliver most effectively are different, with midwifery benefits delivered across the continuum of pre-pregnancy, prenatal, labor and delivery, and postpartum-postnatal care, and obstetrics benefits focused mostly on delivery. Including family planning within each scope of practice reduced the number of likely births, and thus deaths, and increased the cost-effectiveness of the entire package (e.g., a 52% reduction in deaths with midwifery and obstetrics increased to 69% when family planning was added; cost decreased from $4,000 to $2,100 per death averted). CONCLUSIONS: This analysis suggests that scaling up midwifery and obstetrics could bring many countries closer to achieving mortality reductions. Midwives alone can achieve remarkable mortality reductions, particularly when they also perform family planning services--the greatest return on investment occurs with the scale-up of midwives and obstetricians together.

Patterns in coverage of maternal, newborn, and child health interventions: projections of neonatal and under-5 mortality to 2035.

BACKGROUND: Urgent calls have been made for improved understanding of changes in coverage of maternal, newborn, and child health interventions, and their country-level determinants. We examined historical trends in coverage of interventions with proven effectiveness, and used them to project rates of child and neonatal mortality in 2035 in 74 Countdown to 2015 priority countries. METHODS: We investigated coverage of all interventions for which evidence was available to suggest effective reductions in maternal and child mortality, for which indicators have been defined, and data have been obtained through household surveys. We reanalysed coverage data from 312 nationally-representative household surveys done between 1990 and 2011 in 69 countries, including 58 Countdown countries. We developed logistic Loess regression models for patterns of coverage change for each intervention, and used k-means cluster analysis to divide interventions into three groups with different historical patterns of coverage change. Within each intervention group, we examined performance of each country in achieving coverage gains. We constructed models that included baseline coverage, region, gross domestic product, conflict, and governance to examine country-specific annual percentage coverage change for each group of indicators. We used the Lives Saved Tool (LiST) to predict mortality rates of children younger than 5 years (henceforth, under 5) and in the neonatal period in 2035 for Countdown countries if trends in coverage continue unchanged (historical trends scenario) and if each country accelerates intervention coverage to the highest level achieved by a Countdown country with similar baseline coverage level (best performer scenario). RESULTS: Odds of coverage of three interventions (antimalarial treatment, skilled attendant at birth, and use of improved sanitation facilities) have decreased since 1990, with a mean annual decrease of 5·5% (SD 2·7%). Odds of coverage of four interventions--all related to the prevention of malaria--have increased rapidly, with a mean annual increase of 27·9% (7·3%). Odds of coverage of other interventions have slowly increased, with a mean annual increase of 5·3% (3·5%). Rates of coverage change varied widely across countries; we could not explain the differences by measures of gross domestic product, conflict, or governance. On the basis of LiST projections, we predicted that the number of Countdown countries with an under-5 mortality rate of fewer than 20 deaths per 1000 livebirths per year would increase from four (5%) of the 74 in 2010, to nine (12%) by 2035 under the historical trends scenario, and to 15 (20%) under the best performer scenario. The number of countries with neonatal mortality rates of fewer than 11 per 1000 livebirths per year would increase from three (4%) in 2010, to ten (14%) by 2035 under the historical trends scenario, and 67 (91%) under the best performer scenario. The number of under-5 deaths per year would decrease from an estimated 7·6 million in 2010, to 5·4 million (28% decrease) if historical trends continue, and to 2·3 million (71% decrease) under the best performer scenario. INTERPRETATION: Substantial reductions in child deaths are possible, but only if intensified efforts to achieve intervention coverage are implemented successfully within each of the Countdown countries. FUNDING: The Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation.

Stillbirths: what difference can we make and at what cost?

Worldwide, 2·65 million (uncertainty range 2·08 million to 3·79 million) stillbirths occur yearly, of which 98% occur in countries of low and middle income. Despite the fact that more than 45% of the global burden of stillbirths occur intrapartum, the perception is that little is known about effective interventions, especially those that can be implemented in low-resource settings. We undertook a systematic review of randomised trials and observational studies of interventions which could reduce the burden of stillbirths, particularly in low-income and middle-income countries. We identified several interventions with sufficient evidence to recommend implementation in health systems, including periconceptional folic acid supplementation or fortification, prevention of malaria, and improved detection and management of syphilis during pregnancy in endemic areas. Basic and comprehensive emergency obstetric care were identified as key effective interventions to reduce intrapartum stillbirths. Broad-scale implementation of intervention packages across 68 countries listed as priorities in the Countdown to 2015 report could avert up to 45% of stillbirths according to a model generated from the Lives Saved Tool. The overall costs for these interventions are within the general estimates of cost-effective interventions for maternal care, especially in view of the effects on outcomes across maternal, fetal, and neonatal health.

Scaling up diarrhea prevention and treatment interventions: a Lives Saved Tool analysis.

BACKGROUND: Diarrhea remains a leading cause of mortality among young children in low- and middle-income countries. Although the evidence for individual diarrhea prevention and treatment interventions is solid, the effect a comprehensive scale-up effort would have on diarrhea mortality has not been estimated. METHODS AND FINDINGS: We use the Lives Saved Tool (LiST) to estimate the potential lives saved if two scale-up scenarios for key diarrhea interventions (oral rehydration salts [ORS], zinc, antibiotics for dysentery, rotavirus vaccine, vitamin A supplementation, basic water, sanitation, hygiene, and breastfeeding) were implemented in the 68 high child mortality countries. We also conduct a simple costing exercise to estimate cost per capita and total costs for each scale-up scenario. Under the ambitious (feasible improvement in coverage of all interventions) and universal (assumes near 100% coverage of all interventions) scale-up scenarios, we demonstrate that diarrhea mortality can be reduced by 78% and 92%, respectively. With universal coverage nearly 5 million diarrheal deaths could be averted during the 5-year scale-up period for an additional cost of US$12.5 billion invested across 68 priority countries for individual-level prevention and treatment interventions, and an additional US$84.8 billion would be required for the addition of all water and sanitation interventions. CONCLUSION: Using currently available interventions, we demonstrate that with improved coverage, diarrheal deaths can be drastically reduced. If delivery strategy bottlenecks can be overcome and the international community can collectively deliver on the key strategies outlined in these scenarios, we will be one step closer to achieving success for the United Nations' Millennium Development Goal 4 (MDG4) by 2015.