Article

Maternal mortality: who, when, where, and why.

Department of Epidemiology and Population Health, London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, London, UK.
The Lancet (Impact Factor: 39.21). 10/2006; 368(9542):1189-200. DOI: 10.1016/S0140-6736(06)69380-X
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT The risk of a woman dying as a result of pregnancy or childbirth during her lifetime is about one in six in the poorest parts of the world compared with about one in 30 000 in Northern Europe. Such a discrepancy poses a huge challenge to meeting the fifth Millennium Development Goal to reduce maternal mortality by 75% between 1990 and 2015. Some developed and transitional countries have managed to reduce their maternal mortality during the past 25 years. Few of these, however, began with the very high rates that are now estimated for the poorest countries-in which further progress is jeopardised by weak health systems, continuing high fertility, and poor availability of data. Maternal deaths are clustered around labour, delivery, and the immediate postpartum period, with obstetric haemorrhage being the main medical cause of death. Local variation can be important, with unsafe abortion carrying huge risk in some populations, and HIV/AIDS becoming a leading cause of death where HIV-related mortaliy rates are high. Inequalities in the risk of maternal death exist everywhere. Targeting of interventions to the most vulnerable--rural populations and poor people--is essential if substantial progress is to be achieved by 2015.

1 Bookmark
 · 
277 Views
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Background In June of 2010, an antenatal ultrasound program was introduced to perform basic screening examinations at a health care clinic in rural Uganda. The impact of the program on the existing antenatal care infrastructure including the proportion and number of women receiving recommended antenatal care at clinic visits was unknown. The aim of this study was to investigate the relationship between the advent of the ultrasound program and the proportion of women receiving recommended antenatal interventions at their clinic visits. Change in the absolute numbers of antenatal services provided was also assessed.Methods Records at the Nawanyago clinic were reviewed to determine the total numbers of women receiving specific interventions before and after the advent of the ultrasound program including HIV testing, intermittent preventive therapy for malaria, presumptive anti-parasitic treatment, and provision of iron and folate for anemia. The rate at which these interventions were provided (number of interventions per clinic visit) was also assessed. The differences in absolute numbers of antenatal interventions before and after the introduction of the ultrasound program were assessed using the Wilcoxon rank-sum test. Differences in intervention rate were assessed using negative binomial regression modeling.ResultsThe mean monthly numbers of women receiving each of these interventions increased significantly with the greatest increase seen in numbers of women receiving anemia and deworming treatments at +113% and +102% respectively (p¿<¿0.001). The intervention rate increased for anemia treatment, deworming treatment, and 2nd dose of intermittent preventive therapy for malaria. A slight decrease in intervention rate was observed for 1st dose of malaria treatment with a rate ratio of 0.88 (0.79 - 0.98, 95% CI). Intervention rate for HIV testing was not significantly changed.Conclusion The introduction of a low-cost antenatal ultrasound program at a health care clinic in rural Uganda was associated with increases in the number of women receiving specific recommended antenatal care interventions. Effect on intervention rates was mixed but showed an overall increase. The use of ultrasound in this context may provide a benefit to the maternal and neonatal health of the community.
    BMC Pregnancy and Childbirth 12/2014; 14(1):424. DOI:10.1186/s12884-014-0424-9 · 2.15 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Background Of the 287 000 maternal deaths every year, 99% happen in low- and middle-income countries. The vast majority could be averted with timely access to appropriate emergency obstetric care (EmOC). The proportion of women with complications of pregnancy or childbirth who actually receive treatment is reported as ‘Met need for EmOC’.Objective To estimate the global met need for EmOC and to examine the correlation between met need, maternal mortality ratio and other indicators.Search strategyA systematic review was performed according to the PRISMA guidelines. Searches were made in PubMed, EMBASE and Google Scholar.Selection criteriaStudies containing data on met need in EmOC were selected.Data collection and analysisAnalysis was performed with data extracted from 62 studies representing 51 countries. World Bank data were used for univariate and multiple linear regression.Main resultsGlobal met need for EmOC was 45% (IQR: 28–57%), with significant disparity between low- (21% [12–31%]), middle- (32% [15-56%]), and high-income countries (99% [99–99%]), (P = 0.041). This corresponds to 11.4 million (8.8–14.8) untreated complications yearly and 951 million (645–1174 million) women without access to EmOC. We found an inverse correlation between met need and maternal mortality ratio (r = −0.42, P < 0.001). Met need was significantly correlated with the proportion of births attended by skilled birth attendants (β = 0.53 [95% CI 0.41–0.65], P < 0.001).Authors’ conclusionsThe results suggest a considerable inadequacy in global met need for EmOC, with vast disparities between countries of different income levels. Met need is a powerful indicator of the response to maternal mortality and strategies to improve EmOC act in synergy with the expansion of skilled birth attendance.
    BJOG An International Journal of Obstetrics & Gynaecology 01/2015; 122(2). DOI:10.1111/1471-0528.13230 · 3.76 Impact Factor
  • Source

Preview

Download
27 Downloads
Available from