Family-centered care for newborns: a global perspective and review.

Person-centered models of care built on newborn and family needs and rights, such as nonseparation immediately after birth and during the care process, can address the complex needs of the newborn, family, and health system. This is particularly important in low- and middle-income countries, where cost-effective modalities are highly needed to accelerate the survival of newborn babies. We conducted a systematic review to explore country experiences on implementation and challenges to implement and scale-up family-centered newborn care models of care. MEDLINE, CINAHL, EMBASE, and PsycINFO databases were searched to identify studies on patient-centered care and newborns between 1990 and 2023. Studies meeting our predefined inclusion criteria were quality assessed and relevant data extracted. We utilized the World Health Organization framework on integrated people-centered health services to summarize and analyze findings while highlighting patterns. Forty-one studies were included for review (including approximately 60% from low- and middle-income countries). Different research conducted over time highlighted how immediate and uninterrupted skin-to-skin care facilitates a series of critical processes for newborns, parents, and health system, including breastfeeding initiation and exclusivity rates, reduced incidence of post-partum depression, and prevention of infection and hospitalization. Thanks to the close contact of the kangaroo position or skin-to-skin contact, parents recount becoming more and more attached to and familiar with their baby, easily establishing a relationship. Overall, countries could transform the newborn care service in terms of family center care by adopting three simple rules: (i) minimizing mother-child separation; (ii) involving fathers; (iii) empowering parents from the time of birth. A paradigm shift is required to change the conventional model of provider-centric care to one of person-centered neonatal health care. Such an approach is feasible in diverse country settings and should be facilitated through political commitment and policies enabling early focus on the maternal-infant relationship. This could, in turn, help achieve improved dignity of care and help create a more efficient and responsive health system and society.

COVID-19 Vaccine Effectiveness Studies against Symptomatic and Severe Outcomes during the Omicron Period in Four Countries in the Eastern Mediterranean Region.

Vaccine effectiveness (VE) studies provide real-world evidence to monitor vaccine performance and inform policy. The WHO Regional Office for the Eastern Mediterranean supported a regional study to assess the VE of COVID-19 vaccines against different clinical outcomes in four countries between June 2021 and August 2023. Health worker cohort studies were conducted in 2707 health workers in Egypt and Pakistan, of whom 171 experienced symptomatic laboratory-confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection. Test-negative design case-control studies were conducted in Iran and Jordan in 4017 severe acute respiratory infection (SARI) patients (2347 controls and 1670 cases) during the Omicron variant dominant period. VE estimates were calculated for each study and pooled by study design for several vaccine types (BBIBP-CorV, AZD1222, BNT162b2, and mRNA-1273, among others). Among health workers, VE against symptomatic infection of a complete primary series could only be computed compared to partial vaccination, suggesting a benefit of providing an additional dose of mRNA vaccines (VE: 88.9%, 95%CI: 15.3-98.6%), while results were inconclusive for other vaccine products. Among SARI patients, VE against hospitalization of a complete primary series with any vaccine compared to non-vaccinated was 20.9% (95%CI: 4.5-34.5%). Effectiveness estimates for individual vaccines, booster doses, and secondary outcomes (intensive care unit admission and death) were inconclusive. Future VE studies will need to address challenges in both design and analysis when conducted late during a pandemic and will be able to utilize the strengthened capacities in countries.

Risk as catalyst for positive change: lessons learnt from public health readiness for cholera in Jordan.

This case study highlights how a looming health crisis was leveraged as drivers for positive change for the health sector, in line with the health security agenda. In Jordan, several authorities are mandated by law to manage health emergencies. Following the declaration of outbreaks of cholera in Iraq, Lebanon and Syria, health authorities in Jordan called for a series of emergency meetings during September 2022 to discuss implications around travel and trade as well as shared waters. WHO was part of the consultations and provided guidance on the application of the International Health Regulations 2005. As the risk for cholera importation persisted, the Ministry of Health assumed its leadership role for the overall health sector response while the Jordanian Center for Disease Control assumed a coordinating function. Roles and responsibilities were enshrined in the National Cholera Preparedness and Response Plan. In consideration of the vulnerability of refugee camps and settlements towards Cholera, the existing Jordan humanitarian coordination platforms such as the Health Sector Working Group were used to share information and to coordinate activities. A whole-of-government risk assessment during December 2022 was complemented by a field visit at Zaatari refugee camp. This helped assess the risk and readiness for a cholera outbreak in Jordan and informed priority activities, such as the establishment of a national risk communication and community engagement working group as well as training on case management.

The risk of perinatal mortality following short inter-pregnancy intervals-insights from 692 402 pregnancies in 113 Demographic and Health Surveys from 46 countries: a population-based analysis.

BACKGROUND: Inter-pregnancy interval has been identified as a potentially modifiable risk factor to improve perinatal outcomes. We examined the WHO recommended interval of at least 24 months after a livebirth to next pregnancy, and its recommendation of waiting for at least 6 months after a pregnancy loss to improve subsequent pregnancy outcomes. We aimed to estimate the association between inter-pregnancy interval and perinatal mortality using the Demographic and Health Survey reproductive and contraceptive calendar. METHODS: For this population-based analysis, we extracted data for pregnancies with gestational age and pregnancy outcomes from 113 publicly available Demographic and Health Surveys conducted between 2000 and 2022 in 46 countries that included a reproductive or contraceptive calendar module. The primary outcome was perinatal mortality (stillbirth and early neonatal death) while the inter-pregnancy interval was the exposure of interest, grouped into categories of less than 6 months, 6-11 months, 12-17 months, 18-23 months, and 24-59 months. The analysis was stratified by preceding pregnancy outcome (livebirths, stillbirths, or abortions). The Kaplan-Meier method and Cox proportional hazard model were used to calculate the cumulative probability of perinatal mortality and the hazard ratios (HRs). FINDINGS: The analysis sample comprised of 692 402 pregnancies contributed by 570 145 women with a mean age of 28·4 years (SD 5·96). The overall HR of perinatal death was 2·72 (95% CI 2·52-2·93) times higher for an inter-pregnancy interval of less than 6 months compared with the WHO recommended optimal waiting time of 18-23 months following a livebirth. Overall HRs followed a context-related pattern, with the highest ratio of 2·95 (95% CI 2·67-3·25) in sub-Saharan Africa and the lowest of 1·98 (1·47-2·66) in north Africa, west Asia, and Europe. Inter-pregnancy intervals of less than 3 months, 6 months, and 12 months following stillbirth or abortion (spontaneous or induced) do not pose a higher risk for perinatal death in subsequent pregnancy. INTERPRETATION: Our study reaffirms the WHO recommendation on optimal interval between the last livebirth and the next pregnancy of at least 24 months and avoiding pregnancy before 18 months. However, our analysis does not support the WHO recommendation of delaying the next pregnancy for at least 6 months after a pregnancy loss for improved perinatal survival. FUNDING: None.

Participatory Mathematical Modeling Approach for Policymaking during the First Year of the COVID-19 Crisis, Jordan.

We engaged in a participatory modeling approach with health sector stakeholders in Jordan to support government decision-making regarding implementing public health measures to mitigate COVID-19 disease burden. We considered the effect of 4 physical distancing strategies on reducing COVID-19 transmission and mortality in Jordan during March 2020-January 2021: no physical distancing; intermittent physical distancing where all but essential services are closed once a week; intermittent physical distancing where all but essential services are closed twice a week; and a permanent physical distancing intervention. Modeling showed that the fourth strategy would be most effective in reducing cases and deaths; however, this approach was only marginally beneficial to reducing COVID-19 disease compared with an intermittently enforced physical distancing intervention. Scenario-based model influenced policy-making and the evolution of the pandemic in Jordan confirmed the forecasting provided by the modeling exercise and helped confirm the effectiveness of the policy adopted by the government of Jordan.

Supportive public health leadership for COVID-19 response in Jordan.

Background: The WHO Regional Office for the Eastern Mediterranean and the United Nations System Staff College (UNSSC) implemented a leadership programme on epidemic and pandemic preparedness and response, specific to the COVID-19 pandemic, during the second half of 2021. Aims: To highlight the leadership role played by the WHO Jordan Country Office during the COVID-19 pandemic in collaboration with UNSSC. Programme: The WHO Jordan country office successfully leveraged the expertise of UNSSC to implement a leadership training to prepare key stakeholders in Jordan for the response to COVID-19 and similar pandemics or outbreaks. The training curriculum included several modules such as leadership in times of crisis, strategic thinking and planning, emotional resilience, preparedness, adopting a system approach to response, and multisectoral partnership-building for pandemic response. The training helped strengthen the generation of evidence for policymaking and promotion of equitable access to health during the COVID-19 pandemic. Conclusion: Leadership capacity strengthening of national counterparts by WHO and partners can help advance efforts at national level to increase the use of evidence for policymaking and response to pandemics and disease outbreaks.

Maintaining Cross-Border Cargo Movements Between Jordan and Saudi Arabia During the COVID-19 Pandemic.

One of Jordan's essential border crossings, the Al-Omari border crossing, is 1 of 3 land crossings between Jordan and Saudi Arabia and is located 160 km west of the capital city of Amman. Given its economic importance and essential role in the functioning of food supply networks across the region, Jordan undertook evidence-driven actions to keep the border crossing safely open during the initial phase of the COVID-19 pandemic. Cross-border coordination and collaboration, specifically with international contact tracing and case management, have been critical elements of Jordan's response. While several bottlenecks and delays led to documented clusters of infections among truck drivers, this case study illustrates the use of evidence to mitigate disease exposure and spread. Plans to manage public health threats need to consider sustainable strengthened surveillance and laboratory capacities coupled with efficient cross-border communication and coordination plans implemented across multiple sectors engaged in cross-country health.

Measuring stillbirth and perinatal mortality rates through household surveys: a population-based analysis using an integrated approach to data quality assessment and adjustment with 157 surveys from 53 countries.

BACKGROUND: In most low-income and middle-income countries (LMICs), national surveys are the main data source for stillbirths and perinatal mortality. Data quality issues such as under-reporting and misreporting have greatly limited the usefulness of such data. We aimed to enhance the use of mortality data in surveys by proposing data quality metrics and exploring adjustment procedures to obtain the best possible measure of perinatal mortality. METHODS: We performed a population-based analysis of data from 157 demographic and health surveys (DHSs) from 1990 to 2020, with reproductive calendar and birth history data from 53 LMICs. Pregnancies terminated before 7 months' gestation were excluded. We examined data quality and compared survey values with reference values obtained from a literature review to assess misreporting of the age at early neonatal death, omission and transference of stillbirths, and very early neonatal deaths. Real cohort life-table rates of stillbirth, early neonatal, and perinatal mortality per 1000 births were calculated. The underlying risks of stillbirth and daily deaths were modelled using modified Gompertz-Makeham models. FINDINGS: Data for 2 008 807 pregnancies of ≥7 months' gestational age were extracted from the reproductive calendar for the analysis period. Age heaping at day 7 occurred in most surveys. The median value for the heaping index of deaths at day 7 was 2·05 (IQR 1·36-2·87). The median ratio of stillbirths to deaths on days 0-1 was 1·15 (0·86-1·51). Of the 157 surveys, 23 (15%) were considered to have plausible ratios, 71 (45%) had probable ratios, and 63 (40%) had improbable ratios. The ratio of deaths on days 0-1 to deaths on days 2-6 varied considerably between surveys and 119 surveys (76%) had ratios of less than 2·4, indicative of under-reporting of very early neonatal deaths in most surveys. The fully adjusted model increased the median stillbirth rates from 12·2 (9·4-15·9) to 25·6 (18·0-33·4) per 1000 births, with a median relative increase of 95·0% (56·6-136·6). The median perinatal mortality rate also increased from 32·6 (23·6-38·3) to 44·8 (32·8-58·0) per 1000 births, with a median relative increase of 47·8% (6·9-61·0). INTERPRETATION: A simultaneous focus on stillbirths and early neonatal mortality facilitates a comprehensive assessment of inaccurate reporting in household surveys and allows for better use of surveys in planning and monitoring of efforts to reduce stillbirths and early neonatal mortality. FUNDING: None.