Dataset Information

Measuring postnatal care contacts for mothers and newborns: An analysis of data from the MICS and DHS surveys.

ABSTRACT: The postnatal period represents a vulnerable phase for mothers and newborns where both face increased risk of morbidity and death. WHO recommends postnatal care (PNC) for mothers and newborns to include a first contact within 24 hours following the birth of the child. However, measuring coverage of PNC in household surveys has been variable over time. The two largest household survey programs in low and middle-income countries, the UNICEF-supported Multiple Indicator Cluster Surveys (MICS) and USAID-funded Demographic and Health Surveys (DHS), now include modules that capture these measures. However, the measurement approach is slightly different between the two programs. We attempt to assess the possible measurement differences that might affect comparability of coverage measures.We first review the standard questionnaires of the two survey programs to compare approaches to collecting data on postnatal contacts for mothers and newborns. We then illustrate how the approaches used can affect PNC coverage estimates by analysing data from four countries; Bangladesh, Ghana, Kygyz Republic, and Nepal, with both MICS and DHS between 2010-2015.We found that tools implemented todate by MICS and DHS (up to MICS round 5 and up to DHS phase 6) have collected PNC information in different ways. While MICS dedicated a full module to PNC and distinguishes immediate vs later PNC, DHS implemented a more blended module of pregnancy and postnatal and did not systematically distinguish those phases. The two survey programs differred in the way questions on postnatal care for mothers and newbors were framed. Subsequently, MICS and DHS surveys followed different methodological approach to compute the global indicator of postnatal contacts for mothers and newborns within two days following delivery. Regardless of the place of delivery, MICS estimates for postnatal contacts for mothers and newbors appeared consistently higher than those reported in DHS. The difference was however, far more pronounced in case of newborns.Difference in questionnaires and the methodology adopted to measure PNC have created comparability issues in the coverage levels. Harmonization of survey instruments on postnatal contacts will allow comparable and better assessment of coverage levels and trends.

SUBMITTER: Amouzou A

PROVIDER: S-EPMC5804502 | biostudies-literature | 2017 Dec

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Measuring postnatal care contacts for mothers and newborns: An analysis of data from the MICS and DHS surveys.

Amouzou Agbessi A Mehra Vrinda V Carvajal-Aguirre Liliana L Khan Shane M SM Sitrin Deborah D Vaz Lara Me LM

Journal of global health 20171201 2

<h4>Background</h4>The postnatal period represents a vulnerable phase for mothers and newborns where both face increased risk of morbidity and death. WHO recommends postnatal care (PNC) for mothers and newborns to include a first contact within 24 hours following the birth of the child. However, measuring coverage of PNC in household surveys has been variable over time. The two largest household survey programs in low and middle-income countries, the UNICEF-supported Multiple Indicator Cluster S ...[more]

PMID: 29423179

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundInfant immunization coverage worldwide has plateaued at about 85%. Using existing survey data to conduct analyses beyond estimating coverage may help immunization programmes better tailor strategies to reach un- and under-immunized children. The Demographic and Health Survey (DHS) and the Multiple Indicators Cluster Survey (MICS), routinely conducted in low and middle-income countries (LMICs), collect immunization data, yet vaccination coverage is often the only indicator reported and used. We conducted a review of published immunization-related analyses to characterize and quantify immunization secondary analyses done using DHS and MICS databases.MethodsWe conducted a systematic search of the literature, of immunization-related secondary analyses from DHS or MICS published between 2006 and August 2018. We searched 15 electronic databases without language restrictions. For the articles included, relevant information was extracted and analyzed to summarize the characteristics of immunization-related secondary analyses. Results are presented following the PRISMA guidelines.ResultsAmong 1411 papers identified, 115 met our eligibility criteria; additionally, one article was supplemented by the Pan American Health Organization. The majority were published since 2012 (77.6%), and most (68.9%) had a first or corresponding author affiliated with institutions in high-income countries (as opposed to LMICs where these surveys are conducted). The median delay between survey implementation and publication of the secondary analysis was 5.4 years, with papers with authors affiliated to institutions in LMIC having a longer median publication delay (p < 0.001). Over 80% of the published analyses looked at factors associated with a specific vaccine or with full immunization. Quality proxies, such as reporting percent of immunization data from cards vs recall; occurrence and handling of missing data; whether survey analyses were weighted; and listing of potential biases or limitations of the original survey or analyses, were infrequently mentioned.ConclusionOur review suggests that more needs to be done to increase the increase the utilization of existing DHS and MICS datasets and improve the quality of the analyses to inform immunization programmes. This would include increasing the proportion of analyses done in LMICs, reducing the time lag between survey implementation and publication of additional analyses, and including more qualitative information about the survey in the publications to better interpret the results.

Project description:Background:Postnatal care (PNC) for mothers and newborns is essential to monitor risks of morbidity and adverse conditions following delivery. Current estimates of the coverage of PNC show substantial discordance between mothers and newborns. We investigate the sources of this discordance in Demographic and Health Surveys (DHS). Methods:We used DHS data from 48 countries collected since 2011, spanning phases 6 and 7 of the survey program with 32 and 16 surveys, respectively, analyzed. We assessed the distribution of the reported timing of PNC and conducted a sensitivity analysis that excludes/includes PNC reported within 0-1 hour or PNC in the day 2. Agreement in PNC reporting considered four groups: (1) Concordance, neither mother nor newborn received PNC; (2) Concordance, mother and newborn pair received PNC; (3) Discordance, mother received PNC and newborn did not; of (4) Discordance, mother did not receive PNC but the newborn did. We carried out logistic regressions to understand correlates of PNC discordance. All analyses distinguished phase 6 surveys from phase 7. Results:We found substantial differences in the PNC coverage estimated between phase 6 and phase 7 surveys. The phase 7 PNC questions for newborns were improved to increase the understanding of the questions by respondent which probably led to reducing the large PNC gap between mothers and newborns observed in phase 6 surveys. With phase 6 surveys, PNC coverage for mother was estimated on average at 62% compared to only 31% for newborns. No such gap was observed for phase 7 surveys, where for both mothers and newborns, the PNC coverage estimate was similar, at 56%. For both phases, over half of the reported PNC for mothers and newborns occurred during 0-1 hour following delivery, leading to substantial overestimation of PNC coverage, due to confusion between intrapartum care and PNC. There were 37% discordant cases between mother and newborn, largely in favor of the mother in phase 6 surveys, compared to 16% in phase 7 surveys. In phase 6 surveys, discordant PNC cases were observed largely among facility deliveries vs non-facility deliveries (44% compared to 19%). Conclusions:Current estimates of coverage of PNC from DHS phase 6 surveys appears to include substantial level of measurement noises that could explain substantial part of the mother-newborn discordance in PNC. The PNC estimates appear to capture a substantial number of intrapartum care. Current measurement approaches warrant further validation to ensure accurate monitoring of the PNC programs.

Project description:BackgroundA lack of access to sanitation is an important risk factor child health, facilitating fecal-oral transmission of pathogens including soil-transmitted helminthes and various causes of diarrheal disease. We conducted a meta-analysis of cross-sectional surveys to determine the impact that community-level sanitation access has on child health for children with and without household sanitation access.Methodology/principal findingsUsing 301 two-stage demographic health surveys and multiple indicator cluster surveys conducted between 1990 and 2015 we calculated the sanitation access in the community as the proportion of households in the sampled cluster that had household access to any type of sanitation facility. We then conducted exact matching of children based on various predictors of living in a community with high access to sanitation. Using logistic regression with the matched group as a random intercept we examined the association between the child health outcomes of stunted growth, any anemia, moderate or severe anemia, and diarrhea in the previous two weeks and the exposure of living in a community with varying degrees of community-level sanitation access. For children with household-level sanitation access, living in a community with 100% sanitation access was associated with lowered odds of stunting (adjusted odds ratio [AOR] = 0.97, 95%; confidence interval (CI) = 0.94-1.00; n = 14,153 matched groups, 1,175,167 children), any anemia (AOR = 0.73; 95% CI = 0.67-0.78; n = 5,319 matched groups, 299,033 children), moderate or severe anemia (AOR = 0.72, 95% CI = 0.68-0.77; n = 5,319 matched groups, 299,033 children) and diarrhea (AOR = 0.94; 95% CI = 0.91-0.97); n = 16,379 matched groups, 1,603,731 children) compared to living in a community with < 30% sanitation access. For children without household-level sanitation access, living in communities with 0% sanitation access was associated with higher odds of stunting (AOR = 1.04, 95% CI = 1.02-1.06; n = 14,153 matched groups, 1,175,167 children), any anemia (AOR = 1.05, 95% CI = 1.00-1.09; n = 5,319 matched groups, 299,033 children), moderate or severe anemia (AOR = 1.04, 95% CI = 1.00-1.09; n = 5,319 matched groups, 299,033 children) but not diarrhea (AOR = 1.00, 95% CI = 0.98-1.02; n = 16,379 matched groups, 1,603,731 children) compared to children without household-level sanitation access living in communities with 1-30% sanitation access.Conclusions/significanceCommunity-level sanitation access is associated with improved child health outcomes independent of household-level sanitation access. The proportion of children living in communities with 100% sanitation access throughout the world is appallingly low. Ensuring sanitation access to all by 2030 will greatly improve child health.

Project description:BackgroundMeasurement of Emergency Obstetric Care capability is common, and measurement of newborn and overall routine childbirth care has begun in recent years. These assessments of facility capabilities can be used to identify geographic inequalities in access to functional health services and to monitor improvements over time. This paper develops an approach for monitoring the childbirth environment that accounts for the delivery caseload of the facility.MethodsWe used data from the Kenya Service Provision Assessment to examine facility capability to provide quality childbirth care, including infrastructure, routine maternal and newborn care, and emergency obstetric and newborn care. A facility was considered capable of providing a function if necessary tracer items were present and, for emergency functions, if the function had been performed in the previous three months. We weighted facility capability by delivery caseload, and compared results with those generated using traditional "survey weights".ResultsOf the 403 facilities providing childbirth care, the proportion meeting criteria for capability were: 13% for general infrastructure, 6% for basic emergency obstetric care, 3% for basic emergency newborn care, 13% and 11% for routine maternal and newborn care, respectively. When the new caseload weights accounting for delivery volume were applied, capability improved and the proportions of deliveries occurring in a facility meeting capability criteria were: 51% for general infrastructure, 46% for basic emergency obstetric care, 12% for basic emergency newborn care, 36% and 18% for routine maternal and newborn care, respectively. This is because most of the caseload was in hospitals, which generally had better capability. Despite these findings, fewer than 2% of deliveries occurred in a facility capable of providing all functions.ConclusionReporting on the percentage of facilities capable of providing certain functions misrepresents the capacity to provide care at the national level. Delivery caseload weights allow adjustment for patient volume, and shift the denominator of measurement from facilities to individual deliveries, leading to a better representation of the context in which facility births take place. These methods could lead to more standardized national datasets, enhancing their ability to inform policy at a national and international level.

Project description:BackgroundThe Demographic and Health Surveys (DHS) and Multiple Indicator Cluster Surveys (MICS) are the major data sources in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) for evaluating health service coverage. For certain maternal and child health (MCH) indicators, the two surveys use different recall periods: 5 years for DHS and 2 years for MICS.ObjectiveWe explored whether the different recall periods for DHS and MICS affect coverage trend analyses as well as missing data and coverage estimates.DesignsWe estimated coverage, using proportions with 95% confidence intervals, for four MCH indicators: intermittent preventive treatment of malaria in pregnancy, tetanus vaccination, early breastfeeding and postnatal care. Trends in coverage were compared using data from 1) standard 5-year DHS and 2-year MICS recall periods (unmatched) and 2) DHS restricted to 2-year recall to match the MICS 2-year recall periods (matched). Linear regression was used to explore the relationship between length of recall, missing data and coverage estimates.ResultsDifferences in coverage trends were observed between matched and unmatched data in 7 of 18 (39%) comparisons performed. The differences were in the direction of the trend over time, the slope of the coverage change or the significance levels. Consistent trends were seen in 11 of the 18 (61%) comparisons. Proportion of missing data was inversely associated with coverage estimates in both short (2 years) and longer (5 years) recall of the DHS (r=-0.3, p=0.02 and r=-0.4, p=0.004, respectively). The amount of missing information was increased for longer recall compared with shorter recall for all indicators (significant odds ratios ranging between 1.44 and 7.43).ConclusionsIn a context where most LMICs are dependent on population-based household surveys to derive coverage estimates, users of these types of data need to ensure that variability in recall periods and the proportion of missing data across data sources are appropriately accounted for when trend analyses are conducted.

Project description:Aside from breastfeeding, there are little data on use of essential newborn care practices, such as thermal protection and hygienic cord care, in high mortality countries. These practices have not typically been measured in national household surveys, often the main source for coverage data in these settings. The Every Newborn Action Plan proposed early breastfeeding as a tracer for essential newborn care due to data availability and evidence for the benefits of breastfeeding. In the past decade, a few national surveys have added questions on other practices, presenting an opportunity to assess the performance of early breastfeeding initiation as a tracer indicator.We identified twelve national surveys between 2005-2014 that included at least one indicator for immediate newborn care in addition to breastfeeding. Because question wording and reference populations varied, we standardized data to the extent possible to estimate coverage of newborn care practices, accounting for strata and multistage survey design. We assessed early breastfeeding as a tracer by: 1) examining associations with other indicators using Pearson correlations; and 2) stratifying by early breastfeeding to determine differences in coverage of other practices for initiators vs non-initiators in each survey, then pooling across surveys for a meta-analysis, using the inverse standard error as the weight for each observation.Associations between pairs of coverage indicators are generally weak, including those with breastfeeding. The exception is drying and wrapping, which have the strongest association of any two interventions in all five surveys where measured; estimated correlations for this range from 0.47 in Bangladesh's 2007 DHS to 0.83 in Nepal's 2006 DHS. The contrast in coverage for other practices by early breastfeeding is generally small; the greatest absolute difference was 6.7%, between coverage of immediate drying for newborns breastfed early compared to those who were not.Early initiation of breastfeeding is not a high performing tracer indicator for essential newborn care practices measured in previous national surveys. To have informative data on whether newborns are getting life-saving services, standardized questions about specific practices, in addition to breastfeeding initiation, need to be added to surveys.

Dataset Information

Measuring postnatal care contacts for mothers and newborns: An analysis of data from the MICS and DHS surveys.

Publications

Measuring postnatal care contacts for mothers and newborns: An analysis of data from the MICS and DHS surveys.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets