11.09.2013 Views

Full Report - Research for Development - Department for ...

Full Report - Research for Development - Department for ...

Full Report - Research for Development - Department for ...

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.

Synthesis results<br />

of settings were also identified as a cause of non-implementation of breastfeeding<br />

and obstetric care. One example of this was the practice in some countries of new<br />

mothers sequestering themselves from most people during a culturally determined<br />

period after delivery, as in parts of India (Lim et al., 2010). Micronutrient shortage<br />

in pregnant women in LICs linked to low birthweight <strong>for</strong> infants was associated with<br />

morbidity and mortality (Kaestel et al., 2005).<br />

Cultural barriers remain a key determinant to lack of access to services (Lim et al.,<br />

2010) and to the implementation of appropriate health services/interventions<br />

(Jakobsen et al., 2008). Only one study (Lim et al., 2010) highlighted the<br />

inequalities in access to care to explain high rates of maternal mortality.<br />

The root causes of infant and neonatal negative outcomes were identified as<br />

pneumonia and diarrhoea mainly because of delays in vaccination (Martins et al.,<br />

2008), lack of antenatal care (Munjanja et al., 1996), and general lack of guidelines<br />

in breastfeeding <strong>for</strong> HIV positive women (Becquet et al., 2007; Kumwenda et al.,<br />

2008). Children born prematurely had compromised barrier functions which<br />

increased their risk of infection and of hypothermia (Darmstadt et al., 2008).<br />

4.2.2 Impact on health outcomes<br />

Only 7 out of the 21 studies reported a positive impact on health outcomes (Cobra et<br />

al., 1997; Taha et al., 1997; Dumont et al., 2005; Dumont et al., 2006; Darmstadt et<br />

al., 2008; Richard et al., 2008; Lim et al., 2010), of which five were related to<br />

maternal outcomes and three to infant and neonatal ones. The interventions<br />

included: skin barrier methods (Darmstadt et al,. 2008); death reviews and financial<br />

regulations (Dumont et al., 2005; Dumont et al., 2006; Richard et al., 2008 ); oral<br />

iodine supplementation <strong>for</strong> infants (Cobra et al., 1997); cash transfer schemes to<br />

improve institutionalised deliveries (Lim et al., 2010); and birth canal cleansing to<br />

reduce infections (Taha et al., 1997). Although we consider Kumwenda et al. (2008)<br />

as an overall neutral study, some of the clinical interventions did result in a positive<br />

impact on postnatal mortality.<br />

The range of interventions and specificity of the settings shows that no general<br />

conclusion can be reached on successful impact on health. Vaccination remains a key<br />

determinant of curbing infant mortality rates in resource poor settings. However<br />

what still needs to be further studied is the timing of vaccination. Martins Cesario et<br />

al. (2008) found no significant reduction in post-natal mortality in infants vaccinated<br />

be<strong>for</strong>e 9 months of age in resource-poor settings. However they suggested that an<br />

early two-dose strategy providing Edmonston-Zagreb vaccination (measles) as early<br />

as 4.5 months of age might be used in humanitarian emergencies or during outbreaks<br />

with a high risk of measles infection. A few studies suggested that there was<br />

insufficient evidence that changes in feeding practices did significantly reduce<br />

infection rates, as overall the effects might be counterbalanced (Kuhn et al., 2008) .<br />

However Becquet (2008) stressed that given appropriate nutritional counselling and<br />

care, access to clean water, and a supply of breastmilk substitutes, these<br />

alternatives to prolonged breastfeeding could be safe interventions to prevent<br />

mother-to-child transmission of HIV in urban African settings.<br />

4.2.3 Poverty and impact (sustainability)<br />

One study looked at the sustainability of intervention in low-resource urban settings<br />

(Figures 4.1 and 4.2): one controlled trial in Bangladesh identified a low-cost<br />

intervention that could be funded if necessary through out-of-pocket payments, <strong>for</strong><br />

emollient skin barrier therapy, although this still needs further testing (Darmstadt et<br />

al., 2008). Other interventions such as vaginal wash (Taha et al., 1997) were<br />

deemed to be low cost and sustainable, although this study is now over a decade<br />

old.<br />

What are the effects of different models of delivery <strong>for</strong> improving maternal and infant health<br />

outcomes <strong>for</strong> poor people in urban areas in low income and lower middle income countries? 47

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!