Dr Tesfalidet Beyene

Background Short inter-pregnancy or birth interval is associated with an increased risk of adverse perinatal outcomes. However, some emerging evidence questions this association and there are also inconsistencies among the existing findings. This study aimed to systematically review the evidence regarding the effect of short inter-pregnancy or birth intervals on adverse perinatal outcomes in the Asia-Pacific region. Methods A comprehensive search of five databases was conducted targeting studies published between 2000 to 2023. Studies that reported on short inter-pregnancy or birth interval and examined adverse perinatal outcomes, such as low birthweight (LBW) preterm birth (PTB), small for gestational age (SGA), and neonatal mortality were included and appraised for methodological quality using the Joanna Briggs Institute critical appraisal tools. Three reviewers independently screened the studies and performed data extraction. Narrative synthesis and meta-analyses were conducted to summarise the key findings. Results A total of 41 studies that fulfilled the inclusion criteria were included. A short-interpregnancy interval was associated with an increased risk of low birthweight (odds ratio [OR] = 1.65; 95%CI:1.39, 1.95), preterm birth (OR = 1.50; 95%CI: 1.35, 1.66), and small for gestational age (OR = 1.24; 95%CI:1.09, 1.41). We also found elevated odds of early neonatal mortality (OR = 1.91; 95%CI: 1.11, 3.29) and neonatal mortality (OR = 1.78; 95%CI: 1.25, 2.55) among women with short birth intervals. Conclusion This review indicates that both short inter-pregnancy and birth interval increased the risk of adverse perinatal outcomes. This underscores the importance of advocating for and implementing strategies to promote optimal pregnancy and birth spacing to reduce the occurrence of adverse perinatal outcomes. Reproductive health policies and programs need to be further strengthened and promote access to comprehensive family planning services and increase awareness about the importance of optimal pregnancy and birth spacing.

Landscape fires are increasing in frequency and severity globally. In Australia, extreme bushfires cause a large and increasing health and socioeconomic burden for communities and governments. People with asthma are particularly vulnerable to the effects of landscape fire smoke (LFS) exposure. Here, we present a position statement from the Thoracic Society of Australia and New Zealand. Within this statement we provide a review of the impact of LFS on adults and children with asthma, highlighting the greater impact of LFS on vulnerable groups, particularly older people, pregnant women and Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples. We also highlight the development of asthma on the background of risk factors (smoking, occupation and atopy). Within this document we present advice for asthma management, smoke mitigation strategies and access to air quality information, that should be implemented during periods of LFS. We promote clinician awareness, and the implementation of public health messaging and preparation, especially for people with asthma.

Background: Little is known about the physical and mental health impact of exposure to landscape fire smoke in women with asthma. This study examined the health impacts and information-seeking behaviours of women with asthma exposed to the 2019/2020 Australian fires, including women who were pregnant. Methods: Women with asthma were recruited from the Breathing for Life Trial in Australia. Following the landscape fire exposure period, self-reported data were collected regarding symptoms (respiratory and non-respiratory), asthma exacerbations, wellbeing, quality of life, information seeking, and landscape fire smoke exposure mitigation strategies. Participants' primary residential location and fixed site monitoring was used to geolocate and estimate exposure to landscape fire-related fine Particulate Matter (PM2.5). Results: The survey was completed by 81 pregnant, 70 breastfeeding and 232 non-pregnant and non-breastfeeding women with asthma. Participants had a median daily average of 17 µg/m3 PM2.5 and 105 µg/m3 peak PM2.5 exposure over the fire period (October 2019 to February 2020). Over 80% of participants reported non-respiratory and respiratory symptoms during the fire period and 41% reported persistent symptoms. Over 82% reported asthma symptoms and exacerbations of asthma during the fire period. Half the participants sought advice from a health professional for their symptoms. Most (97%) kept windows/doors shut when inside and 94% stayed indoors to minimise exposure to landscape fire smoke. Over two in five (43%) participants reported that their capacity to participate in usual activities was reduced due to prolonged smoke exposure during the fire period. Participants reported greater anxiety during the fire period than after the fire period (mean (SD) = 53(13) versus 39 (13); p < 0.001). Two in five (38%) pregnant participants reported having concerns about the effect of fire events on their pregnancy. Conclusion: Prolonged landscape fire smoke exposure during the 2019/2020 Australian fire period had a significant impact on the health and wellbeing of women with asthma, including pregnant women with asthma. This was despite most women taking actions to minimise exposure to landscape fire smoke. Effective and consistent public health messaging is needed during landscape fire events to guard the health of women with asthma.

Background: For every neonate who dies, many others experience a near miss event that could have but did not result in death. Neonatal near miss is three to eight times more frequent than neonatal deaths and, therefore, is more useful for assessing the determinants of adverse neonatal outcomes. The aim of this study was to assess the incidence and determinants of neonatal near miss in south Ethiopia. Methods: A facility-based prospective study was conducted among 2704 neonates between 12 July to 26 November 2018. The neonates were followed from the time of admission to hospital discharge or seven postpartum days if the newborn stayed in the hospital. The data were collected by interviewer-administered questionnaire and medical record review. Logistic regression was employed to identify the distant, intermediate and proximal factors associated with neonatal near miss. The independent variables were analysed in three hierarchical blocks. Adjusted odds ratios (AORs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were used to determine the strength of the associations. Results: The incidences of neonatal near miss and neonatal death were 45.1 (95% CI = 37.7-53.8) and 17.4 (95% CI = 13.0-23.3) per 1000 live births, respectively. Of those newborns who experienced neonatal near miss, more than half (59.8%) of their mothers were referred from other health facilities. After adjusting for potential confounders, the odds of neonatal near miss were significantly higher among neonates with a low monthly income (< 79 USD monthly), a birth interval of less than 24 months and where severe maternal complications had occurred. Conclusion: Strategies to improve neonatal survival need a multifaceted approach that includes socio-economic and health-related factors. The findings of this study highlight important implications for policymakers with regard to neonatal near miss. In particular, addressing inequalities by increasing women's income, promoting an optimal birth interval of 24 months or above through postpartum family planning, and preventing maternal complications may improve newborn survival.

Background Newborns are at greatest risk of dying at and shortly after the time of birth. Newborn mortality remains an urgent concern and is an important indicator of child health, development and well-being. Studies examining the effectiveness of antenatal care on maternal and newborn health outcomes have provided conflicting results. The aim of this review and meta-analysis was to determine the pooled effect of antenatal care on neonatal mortality in sub-Saharan Africa. Methods We searched PubMed, Medline, EMBASE, CINAHL and Google Scholar from September to November 2016 and then updated our search on April 13, 2019. Two independent reviewers extracted data from eligible studies. The quality of each included study was assessed using the Risk of Bias Assessment tool for Non-Randomized Studies (RoBANS). The results were reported based on risk ratio (RR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI) using a random-effects model. Results Eight hundred and ninety eight studies were initially identified. During screening, 23 studies were found to be relevant for data extraction. Of these, only twelve studies fulfilled the inclusion criteria and were included in the analysis. In five of the twelve studies included in the analysis, antenatal care service utilization had a significant association with neonatal mortality. The pooled risk ratio by the random-effects model was 0.61 (95% CI: 0.43, 0.86) for neonates born to women who received at least one antenatal care visit by a skilled provider as compared to neonates born to women who did not receive antenatal care. Conclusion This review indicates that utilization of at least one antenatal care visit by a skilled provider during pregnancy reduces the risk of neonatal mortality by 39% in sub-Saharan African countries. Thus, in order to accelerate progress towards the reduction of newborn deaths, all pregnant women should receive antenatal care during pregnancy.