Care during labor and birth for the prevention of intrapartum-related neonatal deaths: a systematic review and Delphi estimation of mortality effect

  • Anne CC Lee1, 2Email author,

    Affiliated with

    • Simon Cousens3,

      Affiliated with

      • Gary L Darmstadt1, 4,

        Affiliated with

        • Hannah Blencowe3,

          Affiliated with

          • Robert Pattinson5,

            Affiliated with

            • Neil F Moran6,

              Affiliated with

              • G Justus Hofmeyr7,

                Affiliated with

                • Rachel A Haws1,

                  Affiliated with

                  • Shereen Zulfiqar Bhutta8 and

                    Affiliated with

                    • Joy E Lawn9

                      Affiliated with

                      BMC Public Health201111(Suppl 3):S10

                      DOI: 10.1186/1471-2458-11-S3-S10

                      Published: 13 April 2011

                      Abstract

                      Background

                      Our objective was to estimate the effect of various childbirth care packages on neonatal mortality due to intrapartum-related events (“birth asphyxia”) in term babies for use in the Lives Saved Tool (LiST).

                      Methods

                      We conducted a systematic literature review to identify studies or reviews of childbirth care packages as defined by United Nations norms (basic and comprehensive emergency obstetric care, skilled care at birth). We also reviewed Traditional Birth Attendant (TBA) training. Data were abstracted into standard tables and quality assessed by adapted GRADE criteria. For interventions with low quality evidence, but strong GRADE recommendation for implementation, an expert Delphi consensus process was conducted to estimate cause-specific mortality effects.

                      Results

                      We identified evidence for the effect on perinatal/neonatal mortality of emergency obstetric care packages: 9 studies (8 observational, 1 quasi-experimental), and for skilled childbirth care: 10 studies (8 observational, 2 quasi-experimental). Studies were of low quality, but the GRADE recommendation for implementation is strong. Our Delphi process included 21 experts representing all WHO regions and achieved consensus on the reduction of intrapartum-related neonatal deaths by comprehensive emergency obstetric care (85%), basic emergency obstetric care (40%), and skilled birth care (25%). For TBA training we identified 2 meta-analyses and 9 studies reporting mortality effects (3 cRCT, 1 quasi-experimental, 5 observational). There was substantial between-study heterogeneity and the overall quality of evidence was low. Because the GRADE recommendation for TBA training is conditional on the context and region, the effect was not estimated through a Delphi or included in the LiST tool.

                      Conclusion

                      Evidence quality is rated low, partly because of challenges in undertaking RCTs for obstetric interventions, which are considered standard of care. Additional challenges for evidence interpretation include varying definitions of obstetric packages and inconsistent measurement of mortality outcomes. Thus, the LiST effect estimates for skilled birth and emergency obstetric care were based on expert opinion. Using LiST modelling, universal coverage of comprehensive obstetric care could avert 591,000 intrapartum-related neonatal deaths each year. Investment in childbirth care packages should be a priority and accompanied by implementation research and further evaluation of intervention impact and cost.

                      Funding

                      This work was supported by the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation through a grant to the US Fund for UNICEF, and to Saving Newborn Lives Save the Children, through Save the Children US.

                      Background

                      The remarkable decline in neonatal mortality rates in the middle of the 20th century in high income countries has been commonly credited to the advent of hygienic childbirth practices and modern obstetric care [1], with additional reductions since the 1970s attributed to increasingly intensive neonatal care. In low income countries, where skilled professionals attend fewer than half of deliveries, and each year 60 million births occur outside facilities [2], the burden of neonatal morbidity and mortality related to childbirth remains very high [3]. Intrapartum-related events in term babies associated with hypoxic injury (previously loosely termed “birth asphyxia”) are responsible for an estimated 814,000 neonatal deaths [4] and also one million stillbirths [5] each year, with perhaps one million disabled survivors with long-term neuro-developmental injury, including cerebral palsy, mental retardation, blindness, long term intellectual impairment and behavioral problems [6, 7]. Childbirth is also the time of greatest risk for maternal deaths with at least 42% of the annual estimated 352,000 maternal deaths occurring during labor and the first 2 days after birth [3, 8, 9].

                      While skilled attendance at delivery and emergency obstetric care are the basis of modern obstetrics, there is remarkably limited impact evaluation. This gap is related both to methodological challenges such as the large sample sizes required for meaningful statistical comparisons, and also because many obstetric interventions were in routine practice before the advent of randomized controlled trials (RCTs), making it unethical, for example, to undertake a RCT of the impact of Caesarean section [10]. Estimates of the effectiveness of intrapartum care in reducing maternal and neonatal mortality and stillbirths are needed to inform healthcare planning and prioritization in low resource countries.

                      In this paper, we assess the evidence for effect on neonatal mortality of health service delivery packages during labor and childbirth. The terminology around childbirth care has been through various transitions in the last decade, and at times even different United Nations (UN) agencies use the same term differently [11]. Here, we have taken the latest UN consensus and reviewed the terminology for clarity (Table 1). Comprehensive emergency obstetric care ( CEmOC ) is the standard full package of obstetric care including Caesarean section and blood transfusion [12, 13]. Basic emergency obstetric care ( BEmOC ) includes the six signal functions that should be available at first-level facilities which provide childbirth care: parenteral antibiotics, parenteral oxytoxics, parenteral anticonvulsants for pre-eclampsia or eclampsia, assisted vaginal delivery (including vacuum or forceps assistance for delivery, episiotomy, advanced skills for manual delivery of shoulder dystocia, skilled vaginal delivery of the breech infant), manual removal of the placenta, and removal of retained products [1214]. Skilled childbirth care is defined by WHO as care provided by “an accredited health professional – such as a midwife, doctor or nurse – who has been educated and trained to proficiency in the skills needed to manage normal (uncomplicated) pregnancies, childbirth and the immediate postnatal period, and in the identification, management and referral of complications in women and newborns.” [12, 13] For the purpose of these estimates, the effect of skilled attendance is considered as the attendant without additional obstetric care functions (BEmOC or CEmOC). We also reviewed the evidence for childbirth care by community cadres providing care at birth, such as a Traditional Birth Attendant ( TBA ), defined by WHO as a person who “assists the mother during childbirth and who initially acquired her skills by delivering babies herself or though an apprenticeship to other TBAs” [15].
                      Table 1

                      Definitions of interventions and packages for care during labor and childbirth

                      Comprehensive Emergency Obstetric Care(CEmOC)

                      Full package of CEmOC as per UN definitions [12, 14], includes all six BEmOC functions PLUS:

                      • Caesarean section

                      • Blood transfusion

                      Basic Emergency Obstetric Care ( BEmOC )

                      UN definition of the 6 signal functions of BEmOC [12, 14]

                      • IV/IM antibiotics

                      • IV/IM uterotonic drugs/oxytoxics

                      • IV/IM anticonvulsants for pre-eclampsia and eclampsia (ie. magnesium sulfate)

                      • Manual removal of placenta

                      • Assisted vaginal delivery (episiotomy, instrumental delivery (forceps or vacuum extraction), advanced skills for manual delivery of shoulder dystocia, breech)

                      • Removal of retained products (manual vacuum extraction, dilation and curettage)

                      * Assuming no access to Caesarean section or blood transfusion

                      Skilled childbirth care

                      Skilled birth attendant defined by WHO, ICM, and FIGO as “an accredited health professional – such as a midwife, doctor or nurse – who has been educated and trained to proficiency in the skills needed to manage normal (uncomplicated) pregnancies, childbirth and the immediate postnatal period, and in the identification, management and referral of complications in women and newborns.” [13]

                      The core intrapartum skills that should be provided include:

                      • Clean delivery care

                      • Monitoring onset and progress of labor with partograph

                      • Monitoring maternal and fetal well-being during labor, identify maternal/fetal distress and taking appropriate action including referral

                      • Manage normal vaginal delivery (including releasing a cord around the neck, delivery of shoulders, assisting a breech delivery)

                      • Active management of third stage of labor

                      • First line management of hemorrhage and hypertension in labor, referral as needed

                      • Pain relief, hydration

                      * For the purposes of this estimate assuming no access to instrumental delivery (forceps or vacuum extraction), Caesarean section or blood transfusion

                      Trained Traditional Birth Attendant

                      Traditional birth attendant defined by WHO as “a person who assists the mother during childbirth and who initially acquired her skilled by delivering babies herself or through an apprenticeship to other TBAs”[15]. A “trained TBA” is “any TBA who has received a short course of training through the modern health sector to upgrade her skills” [61]. TBAs may range from family members attending only occasional births to women with considerable expertise attending 20+ births/year. TBAs are not usually salaried, and typically not civil servants or employed by Ministry of Health.

                      Timing of intervention and effect:

                      These packages include care provided during labor and birth, but in order to be effective, the care may have been initiated during the antenatal period (e.g., screening for abnormal lie and decision for elective Caesarean section, or screening and management of hypertensive disease of pregnancy/eclampsia). Some interventions are primarily intrapartum in timing such as management of acute intrapartum events including antepartum hemorrhage, cord prolapse and obstructed labor.

                      Not included in these effect estimates:

                      The effects on neonatal survival of specific interventions after birth for the baby are not included here as they are treated as single additional interventions in LiST and have been considered in detail in other reviews:

                      - Stimulation and neonatal resuscitation at birth,

                      - Postnatal healthy practices (breastfeeding, hygienic cord and skin care, thermal care).

                      In addition, a few specific obstetric interventions which are in LiST but affect other neonatal causes of death have been considered in detail in other reviews including the following:

                      - Corticosteroids for preterm labor (affects preterm deaths),

                      - Antibiotics for preterm premature rupture of membranes (affects deaths from infections).

                      Emergency obstetric care coverage remains extremely low, especially in rural areas: only 5% of births in rural South Asia and 1% in rural Sub-Saharan Africa are by Caesarean section [10]. Ensuring equitable coverage of skilled attendance may have been under resourced because it is considered complex and expensive [16]. If the impact of more complex childbirth care is high, then even given higher cost, the cost-effectiveness ratio may still be very favorable. There is a critical need for data regarding lives saved in order to inform investment choices and design effective programs. Skilled attendance coverage in Sub-Saharan Africa has increased little in the last decade. The Lives Saved Tool (LiST) has been designed to enable national (or sub-national) planning based on estimation of lives saved for mothers, neonates and children (http://​www.​jhsph.​edu/​dept/​ih/​IIP/​list/​index.​html). The tool comes with a menu of interventions that are linked to mortality effects, and the user can increase coverage of each intervention from a baseline rate to compare the impact and cost of different interventions at varying levels of coverage.

                      Objective

                      The objective of this review is to estimate the effect of different packages of care during labor and birth on intrapartum-related neonatal deaths in term babies, for inclusion in the Lives Saved Tool (LiST).

                      Methods

                      We followed a standard approach to searches, abstraction and evaluation of evidence as set out by the Child Health Epidemiology Group (CHERG) for effect estimates to be used in the LiST model [17]. More details of the review methods, the adaptation of GRADE, the rules for attribution of mortality effect, and the LiST model, are published elsewhere [17, 18].

                      Searches for intervention evidence

                      We undertook systematic searches of published literature from 1980 until March 2010. The original search was part of two parallel comprehensive literature reviews assessing the impact of intrapartum childbirth care on stillbirth [1921] and intrapartum-related neonatal mortality [10]. The following databases were searched without language restrictions until March 2009: PubMed, POPLINE, Cochrane, EMRO, LILACS, and AIM (figures 1, 2). The search terms included MESH combinations of “skilled birth attendant,” “midwifery,” “basic/comprehensive emergency obstetric care,” “traditional birth attendant,” AND “birth asphyxia,” “asphyxia neonatorum,” or “neonatal-perinatal mortality.” A second updated search was conducted in March 2010 that required “skilled birth attendant,” “midwifery,” “emergency obstetric care,” “traditional birth attendant” AND “neonatal OR perinatal mortality.” Snowball searching, whereby literature referenced in key papers was included, was also employed.
                      http://static-content.springer.com/image/art%3A10.1186%2F1471-2458-11-S3-S10/MediaObjects/12889_2011_2946_Fig1_HTML.jpg
                      Figure 1

                      Search strategies and results. Skilled Birth Attendance and Emergency Obstetric Care and Intrapartum-Related Neonatal Deaths

                      http://static-content.springer.com/image/art%3A10.1186%2F1471-2458-11-S3-S10/MediaObjects/12889_2011_2946_Fig2_HTML.jpg
                      Figure 2

                      Search strategies and results. Traditional Birth Attendants

                      Inclusion/exclusion criteria

                      Data from studies meeting the inclusion criteria were extracted using a standard form (Additional File 1). We assessed the quality of each study using a standard approach developed by the Child Health Epidemiology Reference Group (CHERG) [17].

                      We applied the PICO format (Patient, Intervention, Comparison, and Outcome) to define the studies to be included as follows. The population of interest was pregnant women, or those in labor.

                      Intervention definitions and those not considered in this review

                      The interventions considered are childbirth care packages and TBA training, as defined in Table 1. The study intervention was considered to meet package criteria [22] if 1) the authors directly described the intervention using package terminology (eg. BEmOC or CEmOC), or 2) the majority of package functions were reported to have been provided.

                      The effects of other interventions around childbirth are considered in separate reviews. While specific interventions, such as clean delivery practices and neonatal resuscitation, are considered essential elements of skilled birth attendance and emergency obstetric care, the effects are estimated separately in the LiST tool and reviewed in other papers [23, 24] . The effects of individual childbirth interventions (such as fetal monitoring, partograph, labor induction, or Caesarean section), were reviewed separately in two concurrent supplement reviews published elsewhere and are not detailed again here [10, 20, 21]. In addition, those interventions specifically targeting the prevention of deaths due to preterm complications, even if provided during the intrapartum period, are not considered here, such as corticosteroids for prevention of preterm labor and antibiotics for preterm PROM) [25, 26].

                      Comparison group

                      In LiST the counterfactual is no care at all. Clearly a randomised trial with no skilled care provided at birth would be considered unethical, and most evaluations are non-randomised where the comparison is with standard practice. Hence we included studies with other comparison groups, such as before/after studies of improvements to existing services, cross-sectional and case-control studies, and historical data that reported mortality impact over several decades, recognizing that the majority of these studies did not control for confounders and were thus potentially subject to substantial bias.

                      Outcome definitions

                      A neonatal death was defined as a death in the first 28 days of life, early neonatal death as death in the first 7 days of life, and perinatal death as a stillbirth (>1000 gms, > 28 weeks gestation) or death in the first 7 days of life. Deaths due to any cause are referred to as all cause mortality and intrapartum-related neonatal death classifies babies who die from childbirth related hypoxic events, (ie. what was previously referred to as “birth asphyxia”). While the term “birth asphyxia” has been used to describe babies who do not breathe at birth, the term is no longer recommended for epidemiological use in cause-of-death attribution [5, 27]. Intrapartum-related neonatal mortality is defined by CHERG, based on ICD 10 rules and recent global consensus statements, as term babies who die after neonatal encephalopathy, or death prior to onset of neonatal encephalopathy, with evidence of intrapartum injury or acute intrapartum events [5, 27]. Neonatal encephalopathy (NE) may directly result from intrapartum hypoxia and is considered a predictive marker of long term morbidity and mortality [3]. NE is defined as a “disturbance of neurological function in the earliest days of life in the term infant manifested by difficulty initiating and maintaining respiration, depression of tone and reflexes, abnormal level of consciousness and often by seizures [28, 29].” Hypoxic Ischemic Encephalopathy is the condition of neonatal encephalopathy following severe hypoxic injury, however, is not recommended unless there is clear evidence of sufficient hypoxemia to account for impaired brain function [30].

                      We also examined studies that reported all cause neonatal mortality or specific morbidity, notably NE. We did not examine Apgar score as an outcome since our goal was to establish mortality effect estimates and the Apgar score is considered to be an unreliable indicator of mortality [31]. The effects of intrapartum care on stillbirths and maternal outcomes are also important and are reviewed elsewhere in this supplement [32].

                      Ecologic analysis of variation in neonatal encephalopathy incidence

                      Given the paucity of direct evidence of package impact, we also conducted an ecological analysis to examine the relationship between NE incidence and coverage of childbirth care, drawing on a systematic review for the Global Burden of Disease Project, undertaken with the Child Health Epidemiology Reference Group [33]. In brief, PubMed, POPLINE, Cochrane, EMRO, EMBASE, LILACS, and AIM databases were searched using the terms “neonatal encephalopathy” and “hypoxic ischemic/ischemic encephalopathy” (figure 3). All titles were reviewed and articles were retrieved that had data on incidence, case fatality rates or chronic impairment. Potentially relevant country covariates, including % skilled attendance, % facility delivery, and % Caesarean section, were obtained from UN databases [2]. The natural log of the neonatal encephalopathy incidence rate was regressed on each obstetric indicator of interest using simple linear regression.
                      http://static-content.springer.com/image/art%3A10.1186%2F1471-2458-11-S3-S10/MediaObjects/12889_2011_2946_Fig3_HTML.jpg
                      Figure 3

                      Search strategies and results. Incidence of neonatal encephalopathy

                      Delphi Process for establishing expert consensus

                      For interventions with low or very low quality evidence but strong recommendation for program implementation [34, 35], as per CHERG rules for LiST effect estimates, we sought expert consensus via the Delphi method [36]. We invited a panel of experts in obstetrics, gynecology and newborn health from all WHO regions and including multiple disciplines - program management, research, clinical obstetrics, and general paediatrics. The questionnaire was developed by JL, ACL, NM and GLD through several rounds of pilot testing. The survey was sent by email and included the background and aims of the Delphi process, evidence identified, and requested seven different effect estimates (Additional File 2). Respondents were allowed the option of anonymous response. The median response and range were determined for each question. Consensus was defined a priori as having been achieved when the inter-quartile range of responses to a given question was < 30%. For those estimates not reaching consensus on the first round, the results were electronically distributed to the panel, virtual discussion allowed, and a second round of email questionnaires sent.

                      Analyses and summary measures

                      We conducted meta-analyses for mortality outcomes [neonatal mortality rate (NMR), perinatal mortality rate (PNMR), and early neonatal mortality rate (ENMR)] of observational before-after studies of community-based skilled birth attendants. Studies were considered for inclusion in the meta-analysis that had comparable intervention, study design, and outcome of interest. Statistical analyses were performed using STATA 10.0. The Mantel-Haenszel pooled risk ratio (RR)—or where there was evidence of heterogeneity (p<0.05), the DerSimonian-Laird pooled RR—and 95% confidence interval (CI) were calculated. For the Delphi panels, expert estimates were entered in an Excel spreadsheet and simple descriptive statistics were produced.

                      Results

                      The search strategies and results are summarised in figures 1, 2. From the combined searches for skilled birth attendance and emergency obstetric care, which yielded around 15,000 abstracts, we retrieved 92 papers, reports or conference abstracts for full text review. From these, 17 studies reporting outcomes and comparisons of interest were identified. For the combined searches for traditional birth attendants, a total of around 3000 abstracts were identified, yielding 11 articles of interest.

                      Results of literature review

                      Emergency obstetric care

                      Overall, few studies presented comparisons of childbirth care packages consistent with the UN definitions (table 1). The 9 studies of emergency obstetric care packages reporting neonatal mortality outcomes identified for this review were low quality and heterogeneous in terms of intervention content (Table 2), and not suitable for meta-analysis or for the LiST mortality effect estimation.
                      Table 2

                      Studies of the effect of Basic or Comprehensive Emergency Obstetric Care on perinatal-neonatal mortality or intrapartum-related outcomes

                      Author

                      Study Years

                      Setting

                      Study Design

                      Intervention definition

                      Concurrent interventions

                      Intervention Coverage

                      Total Births

                      A) Endline

                      B) Baseline

                      Outcomes

                      Effect on outcome

                      RR/OR

                      (95% CI)

                      Ronsmans 2010[37]

                      1987-2005

                      Matlab, Bangladesh

                      Observational cross-sectional

                      1987-1996: skilled home birth care w/midwives providing antenatal care, basic obstetric care (labor monitoring), essential newborn care; 1996 onwards facility based birth with BEmOC (partograph, active management 3rd stage, antibiotics, management preeclampsia). Highest level care received (BEmOC, CEmOC, vs no skilled care)

                      Antepartum care, Essential newborn care, Strengthening of referral and transport systems

                      CEmOC 0.5% in 1987 to 11.7% in 2005

                      BEmOC 4.7% in 1987 to 40.9% in 2005

                      CEmOC 3084;

                      BEmOC 9954;

                      No skilled Care 40177

                      1) ENMR

                      2) Stillbirth

                      1)CEmOC aOR 2.69 (2.16-3.37)

                      BEmOC aOR 1.47 (1.27-3.37)

                      2) CEmOC aOR 6.61(5.62-7.79)

                      BEmOC aOR 1.51(1.31-1.73)

                      Berglund 2010[44]

                      2003-2004

                      3 Maternity Hospitals; Ukraine

                      Observational before-after

                      Training all maternity staff (obstetricians, neonataologists, midwives, anesthesiologists) in 2 week WHO "Effective Perinatal Care" program, including use of partogram, emergency obstetric and neonatal care (resuscitation).

                      Anesthesia; neonatal resuscitation & special care, thermoregulation

                      All maternity staff in 3 hospitals

                      A) 1696

                      B) 2439

                      1) ENMR

                      No significant effect

                      Hounton

                      2008[38, 39, 52]

                      2001-2005

                      Rural Ouargaye and Diapaga districts, Burkina Faso

                      Quasi-experimental

                      Upgrading of hospital, health centers in intervention area. Mid-level, referral facilities: emergency obstetric care training. First-level centers: training in prevention of complications and early detection -referral for emergencies. Quality improvement infrastructure upgrading, equipment and supplies

                      National policies and guidelines;

                      Mobilising/educating communities to plan for and use maternal health services

                      Training in 1 district hospital and 13/19 health centers

                      18,658 births intervention district 2004-5;

                      21,788 births comparison district 2004-5

                      1) PMR

                      1) OR 0.75(0.70-0.80)

                      Draycott 2006 [41]

                      1998-2003

                      South Mead Hospital, UK

                      Before-after

                      EOC training course: CTG interpretation, course of action, obstetric emergency drills (dystocia, PPH, eclampsia, twins, breech, resuscitation)

                       

                      Mandatory course for all midwives

                      A) 11030

                      B) 8430

                      1) HIE (MacLennan):

                      1) RR 0.50(0.26-0.95)

                      Edmond 2002[42]

                      1995-1998

                      Natal, Northeast Brazil

                      Observational before-after

                      Opening of primary maternity facilities at polyclinic to serve low risk deliveries in the community. Pre-booking of deliveries of high risk pregnancies at Maternity hospital with CEmOC capacity.

                      ANC, community health agents training in community health clinics

                      Deliveries at maternity clinics increased from 0% to 51%

                      A) 536

                      B) 679

                      1) ENMR

                      2) Stillbirth

                      3) PMR

                      1) RR 0.12 (0.04-0.40)

                      2) RR 0.66 (0.47-0.94)

                      3) RR 0.52 (0.37-0.73)

                      McCord 2001[43]

                      1996-1999

                      Rural Maharashtra, India

                      Cross-sectional

                      Comparison of perinatal mortality among births occurring at home vs. in hospital, some with CEmOC

                       

                      85% home births, 15% in hospital.

                      Home: 2436

                      Hospital: 425

                      1) PMR

                      PMR 27.1 (home births) vs 87 (hospital deliveries)

                      Koblinsky 1999[40]

                      1957-1990s

                      Malaysia

                      Historical-ecological

                      1960 s Training of professional village midwives, linking to regional clinics, referral to district hospitals; 1980's shift to facility births with BEmOC

                      3 decades of perinatal care and obstetric care upgrading

                      95% of births by midwives (1996); 80% of risk deliveries in hospital (1998)

                      NS

                      1) NMR

                      NMR from 75.5 (1957) to 14.8 (1991)

                      Korhonen 1994[45]

                      1986-1991

                      Helsinki, Finland

                      Cross-sectional

                      Emergency Caesarean Team in Hospital vs. On call (out of hospital, 10 minute average delay)

                       

                      NS

                      60 in hospital;

                      41 on call

                      1) Fetal Death;

                      2) HIE

                      3 in utero fetal deaths and 1 HIE in control (on-call) group vs 0 hospital

                      Piekkala 1985[1]

                      1968-1982

                      University Hospital, Turku Finland

                      Historical

                      15 year improvement in obstetric management: Cesearean rate increase from 4-12%; vaginal breech delivery from 4 to 1%; implementation of antepartum CTG (monitoring increase from 0 to 90%)

                      Corticosteroids, Neonatal intensive care, respiratory therapy, fluid-nutritional therapy

                      Referral hospital for 10% of population

                      A) 5,410

                      B) 5,996

                      1) PMR

                      2) Intrapartum mortality

                      1) RR 0.39

                      2) RR 0.29

                      We identified one study that compared basic and comprehensive emergency obstetric care with no skilled care with respect to neonatal mortality outcomes [37]. Ronsmans and colleagues analyzed health and demographic surveillance system data from 1987-2005 in Matlab, Bangladesh to examine the relationship between the use of BEmOC and CEmOC with early neonatal mortality and stillbirth [37]. They found that women receiving BEmOC and CEmOC had a higher risk of early neonatal mortality (BEmOC aOR 1.47, 95% CI 1.27-1.69; CEmOC aOR 2.69, 95% CI 2.16-3.37) compared to mothers delivering at home without skilled care. However this observational study is prone to selection bias, as skilled care/emergency obstetric care was likely sought for higher-risk, complicated deliveries, and thus the observed association is unlikely to reflect the population effect of the intervention [37].

                      The Skilled Care Initiative in Burkina Faso involved multiple activities to increase access to skilled birth care, including improving availability and quality of CEmOC by upgrading hospital capacity, equipment, and training in CEmOC at the district hospital (Table 2) [38, 39]. At the end of the intervention period the PMR was 27.5/1000 in the intervention district compared with 33/1000 in the control district (OR 0.75, 95% CI 0.70-0.80) [38]. However, it is unclear how similar PMRs were in the intervention and control districts at the beginning of the intervention, and CEmOC was just one component of a complex intervention that also included community mobilization and education.

                      We identified historical reports from Malaysia [40] and Finland [1] that reported NMR trends coinciding with improvements in obstetric and neonatal care. In Malaysia, over three decades (1960-1990s), a national strategy to increase skilled birth attendance was implemented which included training professional village midwives (1970-80s), establishing links with district and referral hospitals, and a gradual shift to births in facilities with capacity for basic emergency obstetric care (1985-1990s). By 1995, institutional delivery had increased to 88% and the national NMR had declined from 75.5 in 1957 to 14.8 in 1991 [40]. In a Finnish university hospital, multiple obstetric and neonatal care improvements were instituted from 1968-1982 (including increased intrapartum monitoring, Caesarean section, corticosteroid therapy, amniotic fluid surfactant determination, and reduction in vaginal breech deliveries). Over the same time period, a 71% reduction in intrapartum-related neonatal mortality and a 61% reduction in all-cause perinatal mortality was observed. However, the effect of improved neonatal intensive care is likely to have played a major additional role in this mortality reduction.

                      In a tertiary care hospital in the UK, following an EmOC training course (cardiotocography interpretation; emergency drills for dystocia postpartum hemorrhage, eclampsia, breech delivery, and neonatal resuscitation) for obstetricians and midwives, a 50% reduction in hypoxic ischemic encephalopathy (95% CI: 0.26-0.95) was observed [41]. However, baseline care was likely substantially more complex than in the ‘average’ low-income country setting, and thus, this may underestimate the effect compared with no care. In addition the observed mortality reduction includes the effect of training in neonatal resuscitation, which is a separate intervention in LiST. Additional studies which provide supporting evidence of package effect are shown in Table 2, [4245].

                      Our ecological analysis of the association between NE incidence and the proportion of institutional births is shown in Figure 4. The modelled incidence of neonatal encephalopathy when 10% of deliveries take place in health facilities was 18.6/1000 live births. Given a neonatal case fatality ratio of 25% using the median neonatal case fatality in high mortality level settings (NMR>15) from the literature review [33], the neonatal encephalopathy mortality rate would be around 4.7/1000 live births. When 90% of births take place in a facility, the modelled incidence of neonatal encephalopathy is 4.7/1000 live births (figure 4). Given a case fatality ratio of 15% [33], this results in a neonatal encephalopathy mortality rate of 0.7/1000 live births, which is around the reported rate for associated obstetric factors in the UK[46]. Thus, comparing 10% facility birth and 90% facility births, there is approximately a 75% reduction in the incidence of neonatal encephalopathy and an 85% reduction in neonatal encephalopathy-related mortality. This reduction, however, assumes that facility birth equates to prompt access to emergency obstetric care, and includes the effect of neonatal resuscitation and ongoing facility-based neonatal care, both of which may not be available in many facilities in low-resource settings. Hence this effect size (85%) may be expected to be above the upper limit of the effect of comprehensive obstetric care, not including resuscitation or ongoing neonatal care.
                      http://static-content.springer.com/image/art%3A10.1186%2F1471-2458-11-S3-S10/MediaObjects/12889_2011_2946_Fig4_HTML.jpg
                      Figure 4

                      Variation of the incidence of neonatal encephalopathy (NE) with the natural log of the proportion of institutional deliveries.

                      Legend: Each dot represents NE incidence data reported by a single study. For some countries more than one incidence was reported. The regression line is modeled as: lnNE=2.237 – 0.311 * logit (% Institutional Delivery) R2=0.50 According to this model, when increasing from settings with very low proportion of births in facilities (10%) to settings with high proportions of facility deliveries (90%), the incidence of neonatal encephalopathy decreases by 75%. When applying case fatality rates for neonatal encephalopathy based on the respective mortality setting, mortality from neonatal encephalopathy is reduced by 85% when facility birth is increased from 10% to 90%.

                      Skilled childbirth care

                      For a delivery attendant alone, provider training may avert hypoxic brain injury by primary prevention via early recognition and referral for childbirth complications, or by secondary prevention, via managing the non-breathing baby with essential newborn care and neonatal resuscitation. The focus of this current review is on primary prevention, as neonatal resuscitation and thermal care are reviewed separately for LiST [24, 47]. The evidence with respect to home-based skilled childbirth care has been reviewed in detail elsewhere [35]. We identified 10 studies reporting the impact of community-based skilled birth attendants on intrapartum-related perinatal or neonatal mortality (Tables 3 and 4): 2 quasi-experimental studies, 4 before-after studies, and 4 observational historical studies. Nine studies were from low- or middle-income settings.
                      Table 3

                      Studies of the impact of community skilled birth attendants on perinatal-neonatal mortality

                      Author

                      Study Years

                      Country

                      Setting

                      Study Design

                      Primary Intervention

                      Concurrent Interventions

                      Intervention Coverage

                      Total N

                      A) Intervention

                      B) Comparison

                      Outcomes Measured

                      Effect on outcome (95% CI)

                      Ronsmans 2008[50]

                      1975-1999

                      Matlab, Bangladesh

                      Rural, 1987-1996 SBA at home

                      Quasi-experimental

                      (†use of before-after data in pooled anlaysis)

                      Posting of midwives in villages to increase skilled home birth (antenatal, basic obstetric, care including labor monitoring, essential newborn care) until 1996. After 1996, facility based strategy with upgrading of health centers in basic obstetric care (partograph use, active management 3rd stage, antibiotics, magnesium)

                      Strengthening referral systems, Transport to BEMOC or CEmOC

                      25% of births attended by SBA during home birth period

                      A) 19085 (ICDDR,B 1989-1995)

                      B) 22821

                      (ICDDR,B 1982-1988)

                      1) IPR-NMR

                      2) NMR †

                      3) ENMR†

                      4) PMR†

                      1) 0.78 (NS)

                      2) 0.83 (0.76-0.91)

                      3) 0.89 (0.80-0.97)

                      4) 0.92 (0.84-0.98)

                      Yan 1989[48]

                      1983-1986

                      Shunyi, China

                      Rural Shunyi County, 7 of 29 townships

                      Before-after

                      Village doctors-midwives identify risk and either manage (external cephalic version, blood pressure monitoring) or refer mothers to county hospital

                      Improvement of neonatal ward in county hospital

                      96% of pregnant women seen by village doctor-midwife

                      A) 2335

                      B) 2212

                      1) PMR

                      2) EMR

                      3) IP-PMR

                      1) 0.66 (0.44-0.98)

                      2) 0.77 (0.43-1.36)

                      3) 0.73 (*)

                      Ibrahim 1992[49]

                      1985-1988

                      Khartoum, Sudan

                      Rural, 91% home delivery

                      Before-after

                      Training and upgrading of skills of village midwives (antenatal care, monitoring in labor)

                      Data collection maternal-perinatal outcomes, referral system to hospital

                      91% of births delivered by village midwives

                      A) 2298

                      B) 3977

                      1) NMR

                      2) ENMR

                      3) SBR

                      1) 0.68 (0.48-0.97)

                      2) 0.78 (0.61-1.01)

                      3) 0.85 (0.60-1.19)

                      Alisjahbana 1995[51]

                      1992-1993

                      West Java, Indonesia

                      Rural villages, West Java; Tanjungsari district

                      Quasi-experimental (use of before-after data in pooled analysis)

                      Training physicians and village midwives on danger signs, case management in pregnancy, labor, delivery, postpartum; development of birthing homes

                      Training TBAs in pregnancy detection, complications and referral; communications and transportation

                      92% of births with professional provider

                      A) 1176

                      B) 1099

                      1) PMR

                      0.75 (0.51-1.10)

                      Table 4

                      Studies of the impact of community skilled birth attendants on perinatal-neonatal mortality, excluded from meta-analysis

                      Author

                      Study Years

                      Country

                      Setting

                      Study Design

                      Primary Intervention

                      Concurrent Interventions

                      Intervention Coverage

                      Total N

                      A) Intervention

                      B) Comparison

                      Outcome Measured

                      Effect on outcome

                      RR/OR

                      (95% CI)

                      Matthews 2004[59]

                      1999-2002

                      Ghana

                      Rural Brong Ahafo district

                      Before-after

                      Training midwives in health facilities on use of partograph and emergency obstetric skills

                      TBA Training in danger signs, Emergency obstetric transport service

                      NS

                      A) 768

                      B) 575

                      1) PMR

                      NS

                      Andersson 2000[55]

                      1831-1899

                      Sweden

                      18 Parishes Northern Sweden

                      Historical

                      1829 Training of midwives in use of forceps, "sharp hooks and perforators"

                      1881 antiseptic techniques

                      73% of home deliveries attended by midwives at endline (43% baseline)

                      NS

                      1) PMR

                      1) 0.71(0.62-0.82)

                      Hatt 2009[56]

                      1986-2002

                      Indonesia

                      National DHS Data

                      Historical

                      Village midwife training program started in 1989, by 1995 50,000 trained. In 1996 competency based training, neonatal resuscitation

                      2 decades of national perinatal care and obstetric care upgrading

                      Proportion of deliveries attended by midwives increased from 12% (1986) to 30% (2002)

                      NS

                      1) ENMR

                      2) First day mortality

                      1) 0.97 (0.95-0.99) per year reduction

                      2) 0.98(0.95-1.02) per year reduction

                      Koblinsky 1999[40]

                      1957-1990s

                      Malaysia

                      National NMR

                      Historical-ecological

                      1960 s Training of professional village midwives, linking to regional clinics, referral to district hospitals; 1980's shift to facility births

                      3 decades of perinatal care and obstetric care upgrading

                      By 1986, 95% of home births by midwives; by 1995, 88% institutional delivery; 90% of women with high risk, 80% moderate risk delivering in hospitals

                      NS

                      1) NMR

                      NMR from 75.5 (1957) to 14.8 (1991)

                      PATH 2006[58]

                      2003-2004

                      Cirebon, Indonesia

                      Rural Cirebon district, west Java, pop 2 mill

                      Before-After

                      Training mid-wives in management of labor, birth asphyxia, tube-mask resuscitation, refresher training/supervision

                       

                      60% of asphyxia cases managed by midwives. Uncertain coverage

                      Est 44000

                      1) IPR-NMR

                      2) NMR

                      3) SBR

                      1) 0.39 (0.31- 0.48)

                      2) 0.60 (0.53-0.68)

                      3) 0.39 (0.31-0.48)

                      Shankar 2008[57]

                      1989-2003

                      Indonesia

                      National NMR

                      Historical

                      Village midwife training program started in 1989, by 1995 50,000 trained. In 1996 competency based training program including neonatal resuscitation

                      2 decades of national perinatal care and obstetric care upgrading

                      In rural areas skilled attendance increased from 22% to 55%

                      NS

                      1) NMR

                      NMR decreased from 32 to 20/1000 over 14 years

                      NS = Not stated in article

                      Four studies met our inclusion criteria and had trained community midwives [4851] or village doctors [48] in intrapartum monitoring and management, with appropriate links to the health system, including referral and or transport to BEmOC or CEmOC facilities. Additional file 1 and Table 5 shows the GRADE table of included studies and their limitations. Only one study reported the effect of training community midwives on intrapartum-related neonatal mortality (RR 0.78, 95% CI 0.64-0.95) [50].
                      Table 5

                      GRADE summary table for the impact of community skilled birth attendants on perinatal-neonatal outcomes

                       

                      Study Quality

                      Summary of Findings

                          

                      Directness

                      Endline

                      Baseline

                       

                      No of studies

                      Design

                      Limitations

                      Consistency

                      Generalizability to Population of Interest

                      Generalizability to intervention of interest

                      Events

                      Births

                      Events

                      Births

                      Relative Risk (95% CI)

                      Neonatal Mortality ( Intrapartum-related ) : Low outcome specific quality

                      1 [50]

                      Quasi-experimental

                      Several interventions simultaneously and changes also in comparison villages

                       

                      Community-setting LIC-MIC, South Asia

                      Yes

                      NS

                      19,085

                      NS

                      22,413

                      0.78 (0.64-0.95)

                      Neonatal Mortality ( All Cause ) : Low outcome specific quality

                      2[49, 50]

                      Observational, before-after

                      Low quality, before-after comparisons

                      No evidence of heterogeneity (p=0.28)

                      Community-setting LIC-MIC

                      Yes

                      794

                      21383

                      1186

                      26798

                      0.82 (0.75-0.90)a

                      Early Neonatal Mortality ( All Cause ) : Low outcome specific quality

                      3 [4850]

                      Observational, before-after

                      Low quality, before-after comparisons

                      No evidence of heterogeneity (p=0.50)

                      Community-setting LIC-MIC

                      Yes

                      597

                      23718

                      837

                      29010

                      0.87 (0.79-0.97)a

                      Perinatal Mortality ( All Cause ) : Low outcome specific quality

                      4 [4851]

                      Observational, before-after

                      Low quality, before-after comparisons

                      Evidence of heterogeneity (p=0.12)

                      Community-setting LIC-MIC

                      Yes

                      670

                      21981

                      909

                      27621

                      0.88 (0.83-.95)b

                      NS= Not Stated

                      a) MH pooled RR; b) D & L pooled RR random effect meta-analysis

                      We undertook meta-analysis for three outcomes (figures 5, 6, 7). The before-after data was used instead of the quasi-experimental comparisons because in one study the control group had different baseline characteristics [52], and in the other, there was contamination of the intervention in the comparison areas [50]. Two studies [49, 50] reported the effect on all-cause neonatal mortality (pooled effect size RR 0.82, 95% CI 0.75-0.90). Three studies [4850] reported the effects on early neonatal mortality (pooled effect size RR 0.87, 95% CI 0.79-0.97), which is more reflective of intrapartum-related mortality than all-cause NMR given that ~90% of “asphyxia” deaths occur in the first week of life [53, 54]. Four studies reported the effect on perinatal mortality; the pooled effect was RR 0.88 (95% CI 0.83-0.95) [4851]. While the data appear to indicate a consistent small protective effect of skilled childbirth care and all of the studies were conducted in low-income countries, the overall quality of the evidence is low by GRADE criteria [17].
                      http://static-content.springer.com/image/art%3A10.1186%2F1471-2458-11-S3-S10/MediaObjects/12889_2011_2946_Fig5_HTML.jpg
                      Figure 5

                      Meta-analysis of effect of skilled birth attendance in the community on neonatal or perinatal outcomes (Effect on all cause Neonatal Mortality Rate)

                      http://static-content.springer.com/image/art%3A10.1186%2F1471-2458-11-S3-S10/MediaObjects/12889_2011_2946_Fig6_HTML.jpg
                      Figure 6

                      Meta-analysis of effect of skilled birth attendance in the community on neonatal or perinatal outcomes (Effect on Early Neonatal Mortality Rate)

                      http://static-content.springer.com/image/art%3A10.1186%2F1471-2458-11-S3-S10/MediaObjects/12889_2011_2946_Fig7_HTML.jpg
                      Figure 7

                      Meta-analysis of effect of skilled birth attendance in the community on neonatal or perinatal outcomes (Effect on Perinatal Mortality Rate)

                      Six studies of community midwives were excluded from these meta-analyses. Of these, four historical studies were excluded due to the very low data quality [40, 5557] . We also excluded a study from PATH Indonesia [58], which was a before-after design that did not accurately determine the denominator of live births and was primarily focused on training for neonatal resuscitation. The Matthews study [59] was excluded as the midwives and EmOC skills training were facility-based, while the community based component involved TBA training only.

                      Traditional birth attendant training

                      The intervention reviewed is the impact of training TBAs in childbirth care, or primary prevention via early recognition and referral for obstetric emergencies, and excludes neonatal resuscitation, which is reviewed separately. The evidence for TBA training has been reviewed in detail elsewhere [35]. We present here a summary of the main findings. We identified one review [60], later adapted as a Cochrane [61], and 9 studies of TBAs with neonatal mortality outcomes (figure 2). Of the 9 studies, 5 studies were excluded as they focused primarily on neonatal resuscitation training versus primary prevention leaving 1 cluster RCT, 2 before-after studies and 1 cross-sectional study of interest (table 6).
                      Table 6

                      Individual studies of the effect of traditional birth attendant training in intrapartum care on perinatal-neonatal mortality

                      Author

                      Study years

                      Setting

                      Study Design

                      Intervention definition

                      Concurrent interventions

                      Intervention Coverage

                      Total N (A=intervention/endline; B=control/baseline)

                      Outcomes

                      Effect on outcome RR/OR (95% CI)

                      O’Rourke[66]

                      1991

                      Rural Guatemala

                      Before-after comparison

                      3-month hospital-based training program for TBAs - identification of obstetric emergency and referral; encouragement to attend hospital deliveries; strengthening relationships between TBAs and hospital staff

                       

                      Studied only those patients who were sucessfully referred

                      A) 465;

                      B) 39

                      1) PMR among referred infants*

                      RR 0.73

                      Greenwood et al. [86]

                      1983

                      Rural Gambia

                      Before-after comparison

                      TBA training in intervention villages within a comprehensive primary care program; 10 week training courseantenatal-postnatal care, referral signs; distribute clean birth kit and malaria prophylaxis

                      Introduction of comprehensive primary health care program, transport improvements

                      65%

                      A) 1159

                      B) 659

                      1) NMR;

                      2) PMR

                      1) RR 0.66;

                      2) RR 0.92

                      Janowitz et al. [74]

                      1984-85

                      Rural NE Brazil

                      Cross-sectional

                      TBA training especially in recognition of childbirth complications and referral. Non-randomized comparison of trained TBAs with high case load (>29 births per year) versus unattended home births

                      Establishment of “mini- maternities” with telephones for TBA births.

                      55%

                      A) 906;

                      B) 118

                      1) NMR

                      RR 0.60

                      Jokhio et al. [65]

                      1998

                      Rural Pakistan, Larkana,

                      Cluster RCT

                      TBA training in antepartum, intrapartum, postpartum, and neonatal care; distribution of clean delivery kits; referral for emergency obstetrical care.

                      Lady health workers also trained to support TBA and link community-health center services.

                      74%

                      A) 10114;

                      B) 9443

                      1) PMR;

                      2) NMR;

                      3) SBR

                      1) aOR 0.71 (0.62-0.83);

                      2) aOR 0.70 (0.59-0.82);

                      3) aOR 0.69 (0.57-0.83)

                      Excluded from present review --Primary intervention was neonatal resuscitation

                      Carlo et al[68].

                      2005-2007

                      Argentina, DR Congo, Guatamala, India, Pakistan, Zambia

                      Before-after study

                      training of community birth attendants (TBAs, nurses) in WHO Essential Newborn Care , including basic resuscitation with bag-mask in 6 countries

                      Clean delivery, thermal protection, breastfeeding, kangaroo care

                      78% of births (post)

                      A) 22,626;

                      B) 35,017

                      1) PMR;

                      2) SBR;

                      3) ENMR

                      1) RR 0.85 (0.70-1.02);

                      2) RR 0.69 (0.54-0.88);

                      3) RR 0.99 (0.81-1.22)

                      Kumar et al[63]

                      ns

                      Rural India

                      Quasi-experimental

                      TBAs trained in "advanced" resuscitation with suction and bag-mask vs. usual mouth-mouth resuscitation

                       

                      TBAs delivered 92% of babies at home

                      A) 964;

                      B) 884

                      1)"asphyxia" mortality;

                      2)PMR

                      1) RR 0.30 (0.11-0.81);

                      2) RR 0.82 (0.56-1.19)

                      Daga et al[87]

                      1988

                      Rural India

                      Before-after

                      TBA training in basic mouth-to -mouth breathing

                      Management of low birth weight, hypothermia; transport and referral of high risk babies to hospital

                      90%

                      A) 321;

                      B) 660

                      1) PMR;

                      2) NMR;

                      3) SBR

                      1) RR 0.59 (0.32-1.09);

                      2) RR 0.39 (0.21-0.69);

                      3) RR 0.49 (0.16, 1.50)

                      Gill et al[67]

                      2006

                      Rural Zambia

                      Cluster RCT

                      Training of TBAs in a modified neonatal resuscitation program (NRP) w/resuscitator facemask

                      prevention of hypothermia, antibiotic treatment and facilitated referral for presumptive neonatal sepsis

                      uncertain

                      A) 2007

                      B) 1552

                      1) NMR;

                      2) “asphyxia” mortality

                      1) aRR 0.55 (0.33-0.90);

                      2) aRR 0.37(0.17-0.81)

                      Azad et al [88]

                      2004

                      Rural Bangladesh

                      Cluster RCT, factorial design

                      Intervention arm: Training of TBAs in neonatal resuscitation with bag-valve mask, with subsequent retraining; Control arm: Training of TBAs in mouth-to-mouth resuscitation

                      Intervention and control: Clean delivery, danger signs, emergency preparedness, facility referral. Women’s participatory groups in half of clusters

                      ~20% of home deliveries in both study arms

                      A) 13195; B) 12519

                      ENMR

                      1) RR 0.95, (0.75 - 1.21)

                      Sibley and Sipe [60] conducted a meta-analysis in 2004 of 17 studies (n=15 286 in treatment vs 12 786 in control) and reported a 6% reduction in all-cause perinatal or neonatal deaths in the areas served by trained TBAs. TBA training was heterogeneous between studies, however, and included both primary and secondary prevention measures (neonatal resuscitation). In their pooled analysis of 3 studies (n=6217 neonates in the treatment group vs 5170 controls), TBA training was associated with an 11% reduction in “birth asphyxia” mortality, though this effect estimate also captures the effect of TBA training in neonatal resuscitation as it included 3 sites with TBA resuscitation (the SEARCH trial during the TBA training phase [62], Chandigarh, India [63], and Ethiopia [64]).
                      Table 7

                      GRADE summary table for the impact of traditional birth attendant training in intrapartum care on perinatal-neonatal outcomes

                       

                      Study Quality

                      Summary of Findings

                          

                      Directness

                      Endline/Intervention

                      Baseline/Control

                       

                      No of studies

                      Design

                      Limitations

                      Consistency

                      Generalizability to Population of Interest

                      Generalizability of intervention of interest

                      Events

                      Births

                      Events

                      Births

                      Relative Risk (95% CI)

                      Neonatal Mortality ( All Cause ) : Low outcome specific quality

                      1 [65]

                      Cluster RCT

                        

                      Direct, rural LIC

                      Yes

                      340

                      9710

                      439

                      8989

                      aOR 0.70 (0.59-0.82)

                      1[74]

                      Cross-sectional

                      Low quality

                       

                      Direct, rural LIC

                      Yes

                      23

                      909

                      34

                      119

                      RR 0.60 (NS)

                      1 [86]

                      Before-after

                      Low quality before-after, improved surveillance post

                       

                      Direct, rural LIC

                       

                      15

                      445

                      23

                      383

                      RR 0.66 (NS)

                      Perinatal Mortality ( All Cause ) : Low outcome specific quality

                      1 [65]

                      Cluster RCT

                        

                      Direct, rural LIC

                      Yes

                      823

                      9710

                      1077

                      8989

                      aOR 0.71 (0.62-0.83)

                      1 [86]

                      Before-after

                      Low quality before-after, improved surveillance post

                       

                      Direct, rural LIC

                      Yes

                      99

                      1220

                      29

                      398

                      RR 0.92 (NS)

                      NS=Not Stated

                      In a Cochrane review conducted by Sibley et al [61], two studies with mortality outcomes met quality inclusion criteria. A large, cluster-randomized, controlled trial (cRCT) was conducted in Sindh, Pakistan, where TBAs in intervention areas were trained to encourage care-seeking, recognize obstetric emergencies, refer for EmOC, use clean delivery kits, and promote essential newborn care [65]. Furthermore, these TBAs were integrated into the health system by improving linkages with Lady Health Workers and community clinics. Pregnant women attended by trained TBAs were more likely to be diagnosed with obstructed labor (RR=1.26, 95% CI 1.03-1.54) and referred for EmOC (RR 1.50, 95% CI 1.19-1.90). PMR was reduced by 30% in intervention clusters (OR 0.70, 95% CI 0.60-0.80), stillbirth rate was reduced by 31% (OR 0.69, 95% CI 0.57-0.83) and NMR by 29% (OR 0.71, 95% CI 0.62-0.83). Intrapartum-related mortality was not reported; however, the concurrent reduction in both stillbirths and neonatal deaths suggests the primary prevention of intrapartum injury. The second study included in the Cochrane review was a before-after assessment of hospital-based TBA training in Guatemala [66]. Following training, there was a 53% reduction in perinatal deaths among those women referred to the hospital for delivery (16/72 pre-training vs. 24/203 post-training). However, given that the outcomes of community-based births are unknown, it was not possible to determine the impact at the population level. The two trials [65, 66] were not pooled in the Cochrane analysis because of differences in study design.

                      Since the Cochrane evaluation [61], 3 additional trials have reported the effects of TBA training on perinatal or neonatal mortality [67, 68, 88] but these trials focused primarily on neonatal resuscitation and are assessed in the paper regarding neonatal resuscitation [24][88].

                      Overall level of evidence

                      The CHERG-adapted GRADE approach and Rules for Evidence Review were applied to assess the overall quality of evidence for packages of childbirth care [17] (tables 5, 7). The quality of evidence for BEmOC or CEmOC was very low. No studies were identified of BEmOC or CEmOC as an isolated package that were usable to estimate a cause-specific neonatal mortality or an all-cause neonatal mortality effect. Nine low-grade observational studies or historical data were identified with information relevant to the effect of emergency obstetric care packages, however, these were insufficient to derive a cause-specific mortality effect. For the effect of skilled birth attendance alone on intrapartum-related neonatal deaths, 10 studies (8 observational, 2 quasi-experimental) were identified of community skilled birth attendants and there were sufficient events meeting CHERG criteria (>50) [17], however, the overall quality of evidence was low, and there were limited cause-specific mortality data. Furthermore, the studies were primarily of community midwife training, and the comparison (baseline) was a setting where skilled birth attendants already provided childbirth care, and did not reflect a counterfactual without any skilled care at birth. Therefore for all three of these intervention packages, expert opinion was obtained to derive effect estimates.

                      For TBA training, there were two previous meta-analyses including one cRCT. The overall level of evidence was low, and the GRADE recommendation was conditional given the limited, heterogeneous evidence, and that the intervention effectiveness is likely to be highly context specific [34, 35]. Therefore no Delphi process was conducted to estimate the effect of TBAs on neonatal mortality.

                      Results of Delphi process

                      In view of the low quality of evidence identified, a Delphi was undertaken [17]. The expert Delphi form included relevant data from the literature review (Additional File 2). A total of 21 experts participated, with representation from South Asia, Africa, Western Europe, North America, and Latin America/Caribbean. Consensus was reached in the first round for three questions (Questions 1, 2, 5), and after the 2nd round for the remaining four questions (Questions 3, 4, 6, 7).

                      The Delphi expert panel consensus was that skilled childbirth care alone would avert 25% (range 5-65%, IQR 15-30%) of intrapartum-related neonatal deaths compared with no skilled care (figure 8). Basic and comprehensive emergency obstetric care was estimated to avert 40% (range 15-85%, IQR 40-52.5%), and 85% (range 55-96.5%, IQR 67.5-87.5%), of neonatal deaths due to intrapartum events, respectively.
                      http://static-content.springer.com/image/art%3A10.1186%2F1471-2458-11-S3-S10/MediaObjects/12889_2011_2946_Fig8_HTML.jpg
                      Figure 8

                      Box plot of Delphi expert opinion effect on intrapartum-related neonatal deaths of: Skilled attendance alone, Basic Emergency Obstetric care and Comprehensive Emergency Obstetric Care (21 experts).

                      Legend: Inter-quartile range indicated by top and bottom of shaded boxes. Median value indicated by

                      Discussion

                      There are 2 million deaths each year resulting from childbirth - 814,000 intrapartum related neonatal deaths, over 1 million intrapartum stillbirths and a significant proportion of the world’s 352,000 maternal deaths. Skilled childbirth care is recommended as a universal right to reduce these deaths, yet there is limited mortality evidence of the effect of childbirth care packages. The mismatch between the size of the problem and the quality of the useable evidence is stark. Our primary finding, and the main limitation of our review, is the lack of high or even moderate quality evidence of the effect of childbirth care on neonatal mortality, particularly in low and middle-income countries where the impact would be the greatest. There are a number of reasons for this low level of evidence including the challenges of ethical approval for RCTs testing care that is already considered standard, variations in obstetric packages evaluated, and inconsistencies in outcome measurement.

                      The variation in terminology surrounding “birth asphyxia” is a key limitation. Consistent case definitions are required; we have used the terminology “intrapartum-related” to classify neonatal deaths due to childbirth-related complications in term infants, however despite recent improvements in clarity, many of the studies identified were older and outcome definitions varied. Furthermore, in settings where the majority of neonatal deaths occur in homes, and outside of vital registration, ascertaining cause of death must often rely on verbal autopsy, which varies with respect to tools , definitions, and hierarchies used. Consistent use of such verbal autopsy tools, and more importantly the hierarchies, is critical [69]. Finally there is a paucity of data from resource-limited settings on intrapartum-related neonatal morbidity, such as neonatal encephalopathy, which requires regular neurologic assessment and is not possible for the majority of newborns in LMIC who are born at home.

                      The skilled birth attendance studies which we identified were heterogeneous with varying coverage and provider skill levels, and likely underestimated the effect for several reasons. First, the results for the before-after studies reflect that of additional midwife training, since at baseline midwives were already conducting deliveries in the community and attending deliveries, so the baseline effect is not zero. In Matlab, Bangladesh, the magnitude of the effect in the intervention vs. comparison villages was diluted by the low coverage of midwives at birth (only 25%)[50]. Furthermore, in many communities, formally trained midwives are only sought for complicated deliveries where the baby is already compromised and could only have been saved by emergency obstetric care, which may not be available.

                      Given the lack of cause-specific mortality evidence, we followed the LiST rules based on GRADE, and the effect of the 3 obstetric care packages was estimated using Delphi expert consensus [17]. We included a variety of experts with wide geographic representation (geographic region, low-middle and high income settings) and range of expertise and background (clinical, epidemiology, obstetrics, neonatology). Consensus was reached within an IQR of 30%. However, any expert opinion process is clearly limited, and far from ideal.

                      Nonetheless, the potential for major mortality reductions with skilled intrapartum care, particularly due to intrapartum-related neonatal deaths, is widely accepted and consistent with historical data from the UK, Finland[1], and Malaysia[40]. Whilst the lack of RCT evidence for the provision or non-provision of childbirth care is understandable, given that it would be unethical to conduct such trials, the dearth of observational studies of quality improvement of childbirth care assessing its effect on neonatal mortality is disappointing and a clear priority for more research. The few significant, large intervention trials of direct relevance for establishing mortality effect estimates were those of community midwife training, EmOC training, and individual interventions to improve labor monitoring and interventions (such as use of the partograph or fetal monitoring) that are reviewed in detail in two other publication supplements [10, 20, 21]. In some studies, there were specific missed opportunities to collect relevant perinatal outcome data. The QUARITE trial, a cluster-randomized trial of quality improvement in obstetric care via emergency obstetric care training (ALARM) and maternal death reviews, is presently underway and has perinatal-neonatal mortality as a secondary outcome [70]. This, and hopefully many more such evaluations, will help to fill a critical information gap.

                      For the 60 million women who deliver at home world-wide, achieving universal skilled birth attendance may require decades, and in the meantime many preventable deaths occur each year, primarily at community level [71]. TBAs attend up to 40% of births in South Asia, while the majority of home births in Africa are unattended [35]. The evidence for TBA training programs is of low quality and heterogeneous [60, 61, 72, 73] and their role remains controversial. However one recent cRCT which emphasized partnership of TBAs with community health workers and links with the formal health system yielded promising reductions in stillbirth and neonatal mortality [65]. Early recognition of obstetric complications, including obstructed labor, and higher referral rates for emergency obstetric care were observed in this trial, and would presumably be associated with reductions in intrapartum-related injury. Several other studies have evaluated the impact of TBA training on obstetric danger sign recognition and referral [66, 74] ; a meta-analysis reported a small, positive association between training and TBA referral-maternal health service utilization [72]. Given that the skills, role and training of the TBA may vary widely between regions and communities, and that the quality of evidence regarding training effectiveness is low and heterogeneous, the GRADE recommendation for implementation is presently conditional [35] and we did not attempt to estimate the effect size. However, the potential for TBAs to integrate and partner with the formal health system is promising, and requires further evaluation at scale and in varying contexts.

                      During the 1990s, the coverage of skilled birth attendance in Sub-Saharan Africa and South Asia increased little, but recent years have seen increases in a few countries. A contributor to the increasing coverage has included demand-side financing (eg voucher schemes or conditional cash transfers in India [75, 76]), eliminating user fees (eg Ghana [77] and South Africa [78]) and the introduction of health insurance schemes (eg, Mauritania [79]), as reviewed recently [80]. Furthermore, innovative strategies to increase the supply of obstetric care have emerged, including task-shifting and the use of non-physician clinicians [10]. In Mozambique, assistant medical officers (técnicos de cirurgia) perform Caesarean section with no difference in complications or mortality rates compared to obstetricians [81, 82]. Training of non-physician clinicians has been prioritized in Ethiopia, Malawi, Zambia and Mozambique, in order to fill the human resource gap. In South Asia, task shifting has involved training general practitioners, nurses and medical officers in obstetrics and anesthesia to expand coverage of EmOC [10]. Increasing the coverage of skilled obstetric care, particularly to reach the poorest, requires creative demand and supply side strategies, with sustained political and financial commitment by governments.

                      Conclusion

                      While skilled obstetrical care is the standard of care in high income countries, the quality of evidence of the impact of childbirth care packages on intrapartum-related neonatal mortality applicable to low-income settings is low. Given the lack of epidemiologic evidence, expert opinion was used and is rated as very low quality. Our results suggest the following effectiveness on intrapartum-related neonatal deaths: 1) skilled childbirth care alone, 25%; 2) BEmOC, 40%; 3) CEmOC, 85% (table 8). Using LiST with these effect estimates, we estimate that a total of 591,000 lives of those currently dying from intrapartum related causes (“birth asphyxia”, 814,000) could be saved by providing universal access to comprehensive obstetric care. This estimate is conservative as comprehensive obstetric care would also be expected to reduce deaths from other causes of neonatal death, notably infections and preterm birth. In addition a significant proportion of maternal deaths and 1 million stillbirths could likely be saved with intrapartum interventions [32, 8385]
                      Table 8

                      Cause-specific mortality effect and GRADE of the estimates for obstetric care packages on intrapartum-related neonatal deaths

                      Effect of Comprehensive Emergency Obstetric Care

                      Cause specific mortality to act on:

                      Intrapartum related neonatal deaths

                      Quality of input evidence:

                      Very Low – effect estimates derived from Delphi panel consensus

                      Low quality supporting evidence (8 observational, 1 quasi-experimental)

                      GRADE recommendation

                      Strong, based on clear biological mechanism

                      Cause specific effect and range:

                      Reduction in intrapartum related neonatal deaths: 85%; IQR 67.5-87.5%

                      Limitations of the evidence:

                      Evidence without cause-specific mortality effect, and with varying content of packages and varying contexts for evaluation. Only one quasi experimental design study identified

                      Effect of Basic Emergency Obstetric Care

                      Cause specific mortality to act on:

                      Intrapartum related neonatal deaths

                      Quality of input evidence:

                      Very Low – effect estimates derived from Delphi panel consensus

                      No studies identified specifically of BEmOC with perinatal health outcomes reported

                      GRADE recommendation

                      Strong based on clear biological mechanism

                      Cause specific effect and range:

                      Reduction in intrapartum related neonatal deaths: 40%; IQR 40-52.5%

                      Limitations of the evidence:

                      No evidence available regarding effect of this specific package, even from observational designs.

                      Effect of Skilled Childbirth Care

                      Cause specific mortality to act on:

                      Intrapartum related neonatal deaths

                      Quality of input evidence:

                      Very low – effect estimates derived from Delphi panel consensus

                      Low quality supporting evidence (2 Quasi-experimental, 8 observational)

                      GRADE recommendation

                      Strong

                      Cause specific effect and range:

                      Reduction in intrapartum related neonatal deaths: 25%; IQR 15-30%

                      Limitations of the evidence:

                      Single study with cause-specific mortality effect. For the studies identified the content of the packages tested and the contexts for evaluation and evaluation designs were variable

                      Effect of Trained Traditional Birth Attendants

                      Quality of input evidence:

                      Low quality supporting evidence (3 cRCT, 1 quasi-experimental, 5 observational)

                      GRADE recommendation

                      Conditional, dependent on local context and health system

                      Cause specific effect and range:

                      Not estimated for LiST since GRADE recommendation is conditional

                      Limitations of the evidence:

                      Supporting evidence without cause-specific mortality effect, and with varying content of packages and varying contexts for evaluation. 5 studies primarily of TBA training in neonatal resuscitation that is NOT included as part of the estimate for childbirth care package

                      The potential for major mortality impact emphasizes the urgent need to invest in childbirth care, improving services for those already giving birth in facilities, and reaching the 60 million women giving birth outside facilities. Roles and impact of training other cadres, such as TBAs, to link mothers with obstetric care requires further evaluation. The lack of data, even descriptive studies, to assess the effectiveness of these UN recommended packages of childbirth care highlights the need for more evaluation. Programmatic planning is required to assess the impact and cost of various packages and implementation strategies in varying contexts, and to strategize how best to close equity gaps for rural, poor families and how to close quality gaps that cost the lives of many women and babies at birth.

                      Authors’ contributions

                      ACL, JL, GLD, RH undertook the searches and abstraction. ACL, SC, JL, GLD, and HB undertook the meta analyses. ACL, JL, HB, NM, SB and GLD organised the Delphi process. ACL and JL provided the initial draft of the paper and all authors contributed. All authors read and approved the final manuscript.

                      List of abbreviations used

                      BEmOC: 

                      Basic Emergency Obstetric Care

                      CEmOC: 

                      Comprehensive Emergency Obstetric Care

                      SBA: 

                      Skilled Birth Attendant

                      TBA: 

                      Traditional Birth Attendant

                      WHO: 

                      World Health Organization

                      CHERG: 

                      Child Health Epidemiology Reference Group

                      GBD: 

                      Global Burden of Disease

                      PMR: 

                      perinatal mortality rate

                      NMR : 

                      neonatal mortality rate

                      ENMR: 

                      early neonatal mortality rate

                      Declarations

                      Acknowledgements and funding

                      We thank the members of the Delphi Expert Consensus team (alphabetical order) J Belizan, S Bergstrom, S Bhutta, E Bocaletti, G Darmstadt, S Fawcus, R Goldenberg, J Hofmeyr, H Blencowe, J Lawn, AC Lee, M Mathai, N Moran, P Okong, R Pattinson, B Peterson, C Ronsmans, W Steinberg, G Theron, A Weeks, and S Zaidi.

                      This work was supported by the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation through a grant to US Fund for UNICEF for work on LiST and to Saving Newborn Lives programme of Save the Children.

                      This article has been published as part of BMC Public Health Volume 11 Supplement 3, 2011: Technical inputs, enhancements and applications of the Lives Saved Tool (LiST). The full contents of the supplement are available online at http://​www.​biomedcentral.​com/​1471-2458/​11?​issue=​S3.

                      Authors’ Affiliations

                      (1)
                      Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, Department of International Health
                      (2)
                      Department of Newborn Medicine, Brigham and Women’s Hospital
                      (3)
                      London School of Tropical Medicine and Hygiene
                      (4)
                      Family Health Division, Global Health Program, Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation
                      (5)
                      MRC Maternal and Infant Health Care Strategies Research unit, University of Pretoria
                      (6)
                      Grey’s Hospital
                      (7)
                      East London Hospital Complex, South Africa, University of the Witwatersrand
                      (8)
                      Jinnah Postgraduate Medical Center, The Aga Khan University
                      (9)
                      Saving Newborn Lives/Save the Children

                      References

                      1. Piekkala P, Erkkola R, Kero P, Tenovuo A, Sillanpaa M: Declining perinatal mortality in a region of Finland, 1968–82. Am J Public Health 1985,75(2):156–160.PubMedView Article
                      2. Unicef: State of the World's Children 2009. In Maternal and Newborn Health. New York, NY: UNICEF; 2009.
                      3. Lawn JE, Lee AC, Kinney M, Sibley L, Carlo WA, Paul VK, Pattinson R, Darmstadt GL: Two million intrapartum-related stillbirths and neonatal deaths: where, why, and what can be done? Int J Gynaecol Obstet 2009,107(Suppl 1):S5–18-S19.
                      4. Child Health Epidemiology Reference Group of WHO and UNICEF, Black RE, C S, Johnson HL, Lawn JE, Rudan I, Bassani DG, Jha P, Campbell H, Walker CF, Cibulskis R, Eisele T, Liu L, Mathers C: Global, regional, and national causes of child mortality in 2008: a systematic analysis. Lancet 2010,375(9730):1969–1987.PubMedView Article
                      5. Lawn J, Shibuya K, Stein C: No cry at birth: global estimates of intrapartum stillbirths and intrapartum-related neonatal deaths. Bull World Health Organ 2005,83(6):409–417.PubMed
                      6. Organization WH: The World Health Report 2005- make every mother and child count. Geneva, Switzerland: World Health Organization; 2005.
                      7. Maulik PK, Darmstadt GL: Childhood disability in low- and middle-income countries: overview of screening, prevention, services, legislation, and epidemiology. Pediatrics 2007,120(Suppl 1):S1–55.PubMedView Article
                      8. Hogan MC, FK K, Naghavi M, Ahn SY, Wang M, Makela SM, Lopez AD, Lozano R, Murray CJ: Maternal mortality for 181 countries, 1980–2008: a systematic analysis of progress towards Millennium Development Goal 5. Lancet 2010,375(9726):1609–1623.PubMedView Article
                      9. Li XF, F J, Kotelchuck M, Glover LH: The postpartum period: the key to maternal mortality. IJGO 1996,54(1):1–10.
                      10. Hofmeyr GJ, Haws RA, Bergstrom S, Lee AC, Okong P, Darmstadt GL, Mullany LC, Oo EK, Lawn JE: Obstetric care in low-resource settings: what, who, and how to overcome challenges to scale up? Int J Gynaecol Obstet 2009,107(Suppl 1):S21–44-S44–25.
                      11. Hussein J, C S: Message in a bottle: sinking in a sea of safe motherhood concepts. Health Policy Plan 2005, 73:294–302.
                      12. Safe Motherhood: Providing Emergency Obstetric and Neonatal Care to All in Need [http://​www.​unfpa.​org/​public/​home/​mothers/​pid/​4385]
                      13. WHO, ICM, FIGO: Making pregnancy safer: the critical role of the skilled attendant. Edited by: WHO DoRHaR. Geneva: World Health Organization; 2004.
                      14. WHO, Unicef, AMDD: Monitoring emergency obstetric care: a handbook. Geneva, Switzerland: WHO; 2009:1–164.
                      15. Organization WH: Traditional birth attendants: a joint WHO/UNICEF/UNFPA statement. Geneva: World Health Organization; 1992.
                      16. Campbell OM, G W, LMSSsg: Strategies for reducing maternal mortality: getting on with what works. Lancet 2006, 368:1284–1299.PubMedView Article
                      17. Walker N, Fischer-Walker C, Bryce J, Bahl R, Cousens S, CHERG Review Groups on Intervention Effects: Standards for CHERG reviews of intervention effects on child survival. Int J Epidemiol 2010,39(Supplement 1):i21–31.PubMedView Article
                      18. Schunemann HJ, Oxman AD, Brozek J, Glasziou P, Bossuyt P, Chang S, Muti P, Jaeschke R, Guyatt GH: GRADE: assessing the quality of evidence for diagnostic recommendations. ACP J Club 2008,149(6):2.PubMed
                      19. Bhutta ZA, Darmstadt GL, Haws RA, Yakoob MY, Lawn JE: Delivering interventions to reduce the global burden of stillbirths: improving service supply and community demand. BMC Pregnancy Childbirth 2009,9(Suppl 1):S7.PubMedView Article
                      20. Darmstadt GL, Yakoob MY, Haws RA, Menezes EV, Soomro T, Bhutta ZA: Reducing stillbirths: interventions during labour. BMC Pregnancy Childbirth 2009,9(Suppl 1):S6.PubMedView Article
                      21. Haws RA, Yakoob MY, Soomro T, Menezes EV, Darmstadt GL, Bhutta ZA: Reducing stillbirths: screening and monitoring during pregnancy and labour. BMC Pregnancy Childbirth 2009,9(Suppl 1):S5.PubMedView Article
                      22. Haws RA, Thomas AL, Bhutta ZA, Darmstadt GL: Impact of packaged interventions on neonatal health: a review of the evidence. Health Policy Plan 2007,22(4):193–215.PubMedView Article
                      23. Blencowe Hannah, C S, Mullany Luke C, Lee Anne CC, Kerber Kate, Wall Steve, Darmstadt Gary L, Lawn Joy E: Clean birth and postnatal care practices to reduce neonatal deaths from sepsis and tetanus. BMC Pregnancy Childbirth 2010. Submitted for publication
                      24. Lee AC, Wall S, Cousens S, Carlo W, Niermeyer S, Keenan W, Darmstadt G, Bhutta Z, Lawn JE: Neonatal resuscitation and simple immediate newborn care for the prevention of neonatal deaths. BMC Public Health 2011. Submitted for publication
                      25. Cousens S, B H, Gravett M, Lawn JE: Antibiotics for pre-term pre-labour rupture of membranes: prevention of neonatal deaths due to complications of pre-term birth and infection. Int J Epidemiol 2010,39(Supp 1):i134–143.PubMedView Article
                      26. Mwansa-Kambafwile J, C S, Hansen T, Lawn JE: Antenatal steroids in preterm labour for the prevention of neonatal deaths due to complications of preterm birth. Int J Epidemiol 2010,39(Suppl 1):i122–133.PubMedView Article
                      27. Lawn JE, Wilczynska-Ketende K, Cousens SN: Estimating the causes of 4 million neonatal deaths in the year 2000. Int J Epidemiol 2006,35(3):706–718.PubMedView Article
                      28. Sarnat HB, Sarnat MS: Neonatal encephalopathy following fetal distress. A clinical and electroencephalographic study. Arch Neurol 1976,33(10):696–705.PubMed
                      29. Finer NN, Robertson CM, Richards RT, Pinnell LE, Peters KL: Hypoxic-ischemic encephalopathy in term neonates: perinatal factors and outcome. J Pediatr 1981,98(1):112–117.PubMedView Article
                      30. Leviton A, Nelson KB: Problems with definitions and classifications of newborn encephalopathy. Pediatr Neurol 1992,8(2):85–90.PubMedView Article
                      31. Committee on Fetus and Newborn AAoP, Committee on Obstetric Practice, American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists: Use and Abuse of the Apgar Score. Pediatrics 1996, 98:141–142.
                      32. Yakoob MY, Ali MA, Ali MU, Lawn JE, Bhutta ZA: The effect of providing obstetric care services (skilled birth attendants, basic and comprehensive emergency obstetric care) in preventing stillbirths and perinatal mortality. BMC Public Health 2011. Submitted for publication
                      33. Lee A, Lawn J: CHERG Global Burden of Disease Neonatal Encephalopathy Estimates 2009. Boston MA; 2009.
                      34. Lawn JE, Kinney M, Lee AC, Chopra M, Donnay F, Paul VK, Bhutta ZA, Bateman M, Darmstadt GL: Reducing intrapartum-related deaths and disability: can the health system deliver? Int J Gynaecol Obstet 2009,107(Suppl 1):S123–140-S140–122.
                      35. Darmstadt GL, Lee AC, Cousens S, Sibley L, Bhutta ZA, Donnay F, Osrin D, Bang A, Kumar V, Wall SN, et al.: 60 Million non-facility births: who can deliver in community settings to reduce intrapartum-related deaths? Int J Gynaecol Obstet 2009,107(Suppl 1):S89–112.PubMedView Article
                      36. Dalkey N: DELPHI. In Edited by: Organization R. 1967, 10.
                      37. Ronsmans C, Chowdhury ME, Koblinsky M, Ahmed A: Care seeking at time of childbirth, and maternal and perinatal mortality in Matlab, Bangladesh. Bull World Health Organ 2010,88(4):289–296.PubMedView Article
                      38. Hounton S, Byass P, Brahima B: Towards reduction of maternal and perinatal mortality in rural Burkina Faso: communities are not empty vessels. Glob Health Action 2009, 2.
                      39. Hounton S, Sombie I, Meda N, Bassane B, Byass P, Stanton C, De Brouwere V: Methods for evaluating effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of a Skilled Care Initiative in rural Burkina Faso. Trop Med Int Health 2008,13(Suppl 1):14–24.PubMedView Article
                      40. Koblinsky M, Campbell O, Heichelheim J: Organizing delivery care: what works for safe motherhood? Bull World Health 1999, 77:399–406.
                      41. Draycott T, Sibanda T, Owen L, Akande V, Winter C, Reading S, Whitelaw A: Does training in obstetric emergencies improve neonatal outcome? Bjog 2006,113(2):177–182.PubMed
                      42. Emond A, Pollock J, Da Costa N, Maranhao T, Macedo A: The effectiveness of community-based interventions to improve maternal and infant health in the Northeast of Brazil. Rev Panam Salud Publica 2002,12(2):101–110.PubMedView Article
                      43. McCord C, P R, Arole S, Arole R: Efficient and effective emergency obstetric care in a rural Indian community where most deliveries are at home. Int J Gynaecol Obstet 2001, 75:297–307.PubMedView Article
                      44. Berglund A, L-C H, Bacci A, Blyumina A, Lindmark G: Successful implementation of evidence-based routines in Ukrainian maternities. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand 2010,89(2):230–237.PubMedView Article
                      45. Korhonen J, Kariniemi V: Emergency cesarean section: the effect of delay on umbilical arterial gas balance and Apgar scores. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand 1994,73(10):782–786.PubMedView Article
                      46. Center for Maternal and Child Enquiries: Perinatal Mortality 2008: United Kingdom. London; 2010.
                      47. Rosen H, al E: Thermoregulation. BMC Public Health 2010.
                      48. Yan RY: How Chinese clinicians contribute to the improvement of maternity care. Int J Gynaecol Obstet 1989,30(1):23–26.PubMedView Article
                      49. Ibrahim SA, Omer MI, Amin IK, Babiker AG, Rushwan H: The role of the village midwife in detection of high risk pregnancies and newborns. Int J Gynaecol Obstet 1992,39(2):117–122.PubMedView Article
                      50. Ronsmans C, Chowdhury ME, Alam N, Koblinsky M, El Arifeen S: Trends in stillbirths, early and late neonatal mortality in rural Bangladesh: the role of public health interventions. Paediatr Perinat Epidemiol 2008,22(3):269–279.PubMedView Article
                      51. Alisjahbana A, Williams C, Dharmayanti R, Hermawan D, Kwast BE, Koblinsky M: An integrated village maternity service to improve referral patterns in a rural area in West-Java. Int J Gynaecol Obstet 1995,48(Suppl):S83–94.PubMedView Article
                      52. Hounton S, Menten J, Ouedraogo M, Dubourg D, Meda N, Ronsmans C, Byass P, De Brouwere V: Effects of a Skilled Care Initiative on pregnancy-related mortality in rural Burkina Faso. Trop Med Int Health 2008,13(Suppl 1):53–60.PubMedView Article
                      53. Baqui AH, Darmstadt GL, Williams EK, Kumar V, Kiran TU, Panwar D, Srivastava VK, Ahuja R, Black RE, Santosham M: Rates, timing and causes of neonatal deaths in rural India: implications for neonatal health programmes. Bull World Health Organ 2006,84(9):706–713.PubMedView Article
                      54. Edmond KM, Quigley MA, Zandoh C, Danso S, Hurt C, Owusu Agyei S, Kirkwood BR: Aetiology of stillbirths and neonatal deaths in rural Ghana: implications for health programming in developing countries. Paediatr Perinat Epidemiol 2008,22(5):430–437.PubMedView Article
                      55. Andersson T, Hogberg U, Bergstrom S: Community-based prevention of perinatal deaths: lessons from nineteenth-century Sweden. Int J Epidemiol 2000,29(3):542–548.PubMedView Article
                      56. Hatt L, Stanton C, Ronsmans C, Makowiecka K, Adisasmita A: Did professional attendance at home births improve early neonatal survival in Indonesia? Health Policy Plan 2009.
                      57. Shankar A, Sebayang S, Guarenti L, Utomo B, Islam M, Fauveau V, Jalal F: The village-based midwife programme in Indonesia. Lancet 2008,371(9620):1226–1229.PubMedView Article
                      58. Ariawan I: Reducing Birth Asphyxia Through the Bidan di Desa Program in Cirebon, Indonesia. Jakarta, Indonesia: PATH; 2006:1–18.
                      59. Matthews M, Walley R: Working with Midwives to improve Maternal Health in Rural Ghana. Canadian Journal of Midwifery Research and Practice 2004,3(3):24–33.
                      60. Sibley L, Ann Sipe T: What can a meta-analysis tell us about traditional birth attendant training and pregnancy outcomes? Midwifery 2004,20(1):51–60.PubMedView Article
                      61. Sibley LM, Sipe TA, Brown CM, Diallo MM, McNatt K, Habarta N: Traditional birth attendant training for improving health behaviours and pregnancy outcomes. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2007, (3):CD005460.
                      62. Bang AT, Bang RA, Sontakke PG: Management of childhood pneumonia by traditional birth attendants. The SEARCH Team. Bull World Health Organ 1994,72(6):897–905.PubMed
                      63. Kumar R: Effectiveness of training traditional birth attendants for management of asphyxia neonatorum using resuscitation equipment. Prenatal Neonatal Medicine 1998, 3:255–260.
                      64. Okubagzhi GS: Fulfilling the potential of traditional birth attendants. World Health Forum 1988,9(3):426–431.PubMed
                      65. Jokhio AH, Winter HR, Cheng KK: An intervention involving traditional birth attendants and perinatal and maternal mortality in Pakistan. N Engl J Med 2005,352(20):2091–2099.PubMedView Article
                      66. O'Rourke K: The effect of hospital staff training on management of obstetrical patients referred by traditional birth attendants. Int J Gynaecol Obstet 1995,48(Suppl):S95–102.PubMedView Article
                      67. Gill CJ, P-M G, Guerina NG, Kasimba J, Mulenga C, Macleod WB, Waitolo N, Knapp AB, Mirochnick M, Mazimba A, Fox MP, Sabin L, Seidenberg P, Simon JL, Hamer DH: Effect of training traditional birth attendants on neonatal mortality (Lufwanyama Neonatal Survival Project): randomised controlled study. British Medical Journal 2011, 342:d346.PubMedView Article
                      68. Carlo WA, Goudar SS, Jehan I, Chomba E, Tshefu A, Garces A, Parida S, Althabe F, McClure EM, Derman RJ, et al.: Newborn-care training and perinatal mortality in developing countries. N Engl J Med 2010,362(7):614–623.PubMedView Article
                      69. Lawn JE, Osrin D, Adler A, Cousens S: Four million neonatal deaths: counting and attribution of cause of death. Paediatr Perinat Epidemiol 2008,22(5):410–416.PubMedView Article
                      70. Dumont A, F P, Fraser W, Haddad S, Traore M, Diop I, Gueye M, Gaye A, Couturier F, Pasquier JC, Beaudoin F, Lalonde A, Hatem M, Abrahamowicz M.: QUARITE (quality of care, risk management and technology in obstetrics): a cluster-randomized trial of a multifaceted intervention to improve emergency obstetric care in Senegal and Mali. Trials 2009, 10:85.PubMedView Article
                      71. Lawn J, Kinney M, Lee AC, Chopra M, Donnay F, Paul V, Bateman M, Bhutta Z, Darmstadt G: Reducing intrapartum-related deaths and disability: can the health system deliver? International Journal of Gynecology and Obstetrics 2009.
                      72. Sibley L, Sipe TA, Koblinsky M: Does traditional birth attendant training improve referral of women with obstetric complications: a review of the evidence. Soc Sci Med 2004,59(8):1757–1768.PubMedView Article
                      73. Sibley LM, Sipe TA, Koblinsky M: Does traditional birth attendant training increase use of antenatal care? A review of the evidence. J Midwifery Womens Health 2004,49(4):298–305.PubMedView Article
                      74. Janowitz B, Wallace S, Araujo G, Araujo L: Referrals by traditional birth attendants in northeast Brazil. Am J Public Health 1985,75(7):745–748.PubMedView Article
                      75. Bhat R, Mavalankar D, Singh P, Singh N: Maternal Health Financing in Gujarat: Preliminary Results from a Household Survey of Beneficiaries under Chiranjeevi Scheme. Ahmedabad, India: Indian Institute of Management; 2007.
                      76. Lahariya C: Cash incentives for institutional delivery: Linkin with antenatal and postnatal care may ensure 'continuum of care' in India. Indian Journal Community Medicine 2009,34(1):15–18.View Article
                      77. Smith KV, Sulzbach S: Community-based health insurance and access to maternal health services: evidence from three West African countries. Soc Sci Med 2008,66(12):2460–2473.PubMedView Article
                      78. Schneider P, G L: The impact of free maternal health care in South Africa. In Safe Motherhood Initiatives: Critical Issues. Edited by: Berer M DRT. Oxford: Blackwell Science for Reproductive Health Matters; 1999:93–101.
                      79. Renaudin P, Prual A, Vangeenderhuysen C, Ould Abdelkader M, Ould Mohamed Vall M, Ould El Joud D: Ensuring financial access to emergency obstetric care: three years of experience with Obstetric Risk Insurance in Nouakchott, Mauritania. Int J Gynaecol Obstet 2007,99(2):183–190.PubMedView Article
                      80. Lee AC, Lawn JE, Cousens S, Kumar V, Osrin D, Bhutta ZA, Wall SN, Nandakumar AK, Syed U, Darmstadt GL: Linking families and facilities for care at birth: what works to avert intrapartum-related deaths? Int J Gynaecol Obstet 2009,107(Suppl 1):S65–85-S86–68.
                      81. Pereira C, Bugalho A, Bergstrom S, Vaz F, Cotiro M: A comparative study of caesarean deliveries by assistant medical officers and obstetricians in Mozambique. BJOG 1996, 103:508–512.View Article
                      82. Vaz F, Bergstrom S, Vaz M, Langa J, Bugalho A: Training medical assistants for surgery. Bull World Health 1999, 77:688–691.
                      83. Pattinson R, K K, Buchmann E, et al.: Stillbirths: how can health systems deliver for mothers and babies? Lancet 2011. online March 9, 2011
                      84. Lawn JE, B B, Pattinson R, et al.: Where? When? Why? How to make the data count? Lancet 2011. March 9 online
                      85. Bhutta ZA, Y M, Lawn JE, et al.: Stillbirths: how much difference can we make and at what cost? Lancet 2011. March 9 online
                      86. Greenwood A, B AK, Byass P, Greenwood BM, Snow RW, Bennett S, Hatib-N'Jie AB: Evaluation of a primary health care programme in The Gambia. Journal of tropical Medicine and hygiene 1990,93(1):58–66.PubMed
                      87. Daga SR, Daga AS, Dighole RV, Patil RP, Dhinde HL: Rural neonatal care: Dahanu experience. Indian Pediatr 1992,29(2):189–193.PubMed
                      88. Azad K, Barnett S, Banerjee B, Shaha S, Khan K, Rego AR, Barua S, Flatman D, Pagel C, Prost A, Ellis M, Costello A: Effect of scaling up women's groups on birth outcomes in three rural districts in Bangladesh: a cluster-randomised controlled trial. Lancet 2010,375(9721):1193–1202.PubMedView Article

                      Copyright

                      © Lee et al; licensee BioMed Central Ltd. 2011

                      This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://​creativecommons.​org/​licenses/​by/​2.​0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.