Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25843498›Full record

Trial reportGlobal health action2015

Effect of the Uganda Newborn Study on care-seeking and care practices: a cluster-randomised controlled trial.

Peter Waiswa, George Pariyo, Karin Kallander, Joseph Akuze, Gertrude Namazzi, Elizabeth Ekirapa-Kiracho, Kate Kerber, Hanifah Sengendo, Patrick Aliganyira, Joy E Lawn and 2 more

Abstract readComparative StudyRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in Global health action, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 64 papers, 12 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
64citing papers in PubMed, 12 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

64 citing papers in PubMed, 12 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Pooled it
  7. Pooled it
  8. Pooled it
  9. Pooled it
  10. Pooled it
  11. Kangaroo mother care: a systematic review of barriers and enablers.Bulletin of the World Health Organization · 2016
    Pooled it
  12. Pooled it
  13. Trial
  14. Trial
  15. Trial
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article

4 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

12 authors.

Peter WaiswaDepartment of Health Policy, Planning and Management, School of Public Health, College of Health Science, Makerere University, Kampala, Uganda.
George PariyoDepartment of Health Policy, Planning and Management, School of Public Health, College of Health Science, Makerere University, Kampala, Uganda.
Karin KallanderDepartment of Health Policy, Planning and Management, School of Public Health, College of Health Science, Makerere University, Kampala, Uganda.
Joseph AkuzeDepartment of Health Policy, Planning and Management, School of Public Health, College of Health Science, Makerere University, Kampala, Uganda.
Gertrude NamazziDepartment of Health Policy, Planning and Management, School of Public Health, College of Health Science, Makerere University, Kampala, Uganda.
Elizabeth Ekirapa-KirachoDepartment of Health Policy, Planning and Management, School of Public Health, College of Health Science, Makerere University, Kampala, Uganda.
Kate KerberSave the Children, Cape Town, South Africa.
Hanifah SengendoSave the Children, Cape Town, South Africa.
Patrick AliganyiraSave the Children, Cape Town, South Africa.
Joy E LawnMARCH Unit, London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, London, UK.
Stefan PetersonDepartment of Health Policy, Planning and Management, School of Public Health, College of Health Science, Makerere University, Kampala, Uganda.
Uganda Newborn Study Team

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundCare for women and babies before, during, and after the time of birth is a sensitive measure of the functionality of any health system. Engaging communities in preventing newborn deaths is a promising strategy to achieve further progress in child survival in sub-Saharan Africa.

objectiveTo assess the effect of a home visit strategy combined with health facility strengthening on uptake of newborn care-seeking, practices and services, and to link the results to national policy and scale-up in Uganda.

designThe Uganda Newborn Study (UNEST) was a two-arm cluster-randomised controlled trial in rural eastern Uganda. In intervention villages volunteer community health workers (CHWs) were trained to identify pregnant women and make five home visits (two during pregnancy and three in the first week after birth) to offer preventive and promotive care and counselling, with extra visits for sick and small newborns to assess and refer. Health facility strengthening was done in all facilities to improve quality of care. Primary outcomes were coverage of key essential newborn care behaviours (breastfeeding, thermal care, and cord care). Analyses were by intention to treat. This study is registered as a clinical trial, number ISRCTN50321130.

resultsThe intervention significantly improved essential newborn care practices, although many interventions saw major increases in both arms over the study period. Immediate breastfeeding after birth and exclusive breastfeeding were significantly higher in the intervention arm compared to the control arm (72.6% vs. 66.0%; p=0.016 and 81.8% vs. 75.9%, p=0.042, respectively). Skin-to-skin care immediately after birth and cord cutting with a clean instrument were marginally higher in the intervention arm versus the control arm (80.7% vs. 72.2%; p=0.071 and 88.1% vs. 84.4%; p=0.023, respectively). Half (49.6%) of the mothers in the intervention arm waited more than 24 hours to bathe the baby, compared to 35.5% in the control arm (p<0.001). Dry umbilical cord care was also significantly higher in intervention areas (63.9% vs. 53.1%, p<0.001). There was no difference in care-seeking for newborn illness, which was high (around 95%) in both arms. Skilled attendance at delivery increased in both the intervention (by 21%) and control arms (by 19%) between baseline and endline, but there was no significant difference in coverage across arms at endline (79.6% vs. 78.9%; p=0.717). Home visits were pro-poor, with more women in the poorest quintile visited by a CHW compared to families in the least poor quintile, and more women who delivered at home visited by a CHW after birth (73.6%) compared to those who delivered in a hospital or health facility (59.7%) (p<0.001). CHWs visited 62.8% of women and newborns in the first week after birth, with 40.2% receiving a visit on the critical first day of life.

conclusionConsistent with results from other community newborn care studies, volunteer CHWs can be effective in changing long-standing practices around newborn care. The home visit strategy may provide greater benefit to poorer families. However, CHW strategies require strong linkages with and concurrent improvement of quality through health system strengthening, especially in settings with high and increasing demand for facility-based services.

Indexed as

House CallsAdolescentAdultChild Health ServicesCluster AnalysisCommunity Health ServicesDeveloping CountriesFemaleHumansInfantInfant CareInfant, NewbornMaleMaternal Health ServicesMiddle AgedPatient Acceptance of Health Carecommunity health workershealth system strengtheningkangaroo mother carematernal careneonatal mortalitynewborn carerandomised controlled trialUganda

Identifiers

PMID25843498
PMCPMC4385212

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.