Neonatal resuscitation in low-resource settings: What, who, and how to overcome challenges to scale up?

Article Outline

• Abstract
• 1. Introduction
  • 1.1. Current coverage, constraints, key challenges
  • 1.2. Objective
• 2. Methods
• 3. Results
  • 3.1. Neonatal resuscitation algorithms and actions
    • 3.1.1. Which newborns should be resuscitated?
    • 3.1.2. How should the newborn with meconium staining of the liquor be managed?
    • 3.1.3. What equipment should be used for suction and on whom?
    • 3.1.4. What equipment is needed for resuscitative ventilation?
      • 3.1.4.1. Type of pressure control resuscitation device
      • 3.1.4.2. Should air from the room or oxygen be used?
    • 3.1.5. Should chest compressions be performed in basic resuscitation?
    • 3.1.6. Which, if any drugs, are useful in basic neonatal resuscitation?
    • 3.1.7. When should resuscitation not be initiated, and when should it be stopped?
  • 3.2. Evidence for the impact of neonatal resuscitation training
    • 3.2.1. Resuscitation in health facilities
    • 3.2.2. Neonatal resuscitation in the community
      • 3.2.2.1. Community midwives
      • 3.2.2.2. Trained traditional birth attendants
      • 3.2.2.3. Community health workers
      • 3.2.2.4. Family member
  • 3.3. Post-resuscitation management
    • 3.3.1. Breathing and oxygenation
    • 3.3.2. Serum glucose and fluid management
    • 3.3.3. Anticonvulsants
    • 3.3.4. Other potential drugs for neonatal encephalopathy
    • 3.3.5. Thermal management and hypothermia for neonatal encephalopathy
• 4. Considerations for scaling up neonatal resuscitation in low- and middle-income countries
  • 4.1. Training, competency, and maintenance of resuscitation skills
  • 4.2. Availability of equipment and supplies
  • 4.3. Cost of neonatal resuscitation: Training and equipment
    • 4.3.1. Equipment
    • 4.3.2. Training
  • 4.4. Monitoring outcomes
  • 4.5. Scaling up in referral and first-level (district hospital) facilities
  • 4.6. Should neonatal resuscitation be scaled in the community?
• 5. Conclusion
• Conflict of interest
• Funding
• Acknowledgments
• References
• Panel 1. Freedom of Breath, Fountain of Life: A nationwide neonatal resuscitation program, China
• Copyright

Abstract 

Background

Each year approximately 10million babies do not breathe immediately at birth, of which about 6million require basic neonatal resuscitation. The major burden is in low-income settings, where health system capacity to provide neonatal resuscitation is inadequate.

Objective

To systematically review the evidence for neonatal resuscitation content, training and competency, equipment and supplies, cost, and key program considerations, specifically for resource-constrained settings.

Results

Evidence from several observational studies shows that facility-based basic neonatal resuscitation may avert 30% of intrapartum-related neonatal deaths. Very few babies require advanced resuscitation (endotracheal intubation and drugs) and these newborns may not survive without ongoing ventilation; hence, advanced neonatal resuscitation is not a priority in settings without neonatal intensive care. Of the 60million nonfacility births, most do not have access to resuscitation. Several trials have shown that a range of community health workers can perform neonatal resuscitation with an estimated effect of a 20% reduction in intrapartum-related neonatal deaths, based on expert opinion. Case studies illustrate key considerations for scale up.

Conclusion

Basic resuscitation would substantially reduce intrapartum-related neonatal deaths. Where births occur in facilities, it is a priority to ensure that all birth attendants are competent in resuscitation. Strategies to address the gap for home births are urgently required. More data are required to determine the impact of neonatal resuscitation, particularly on long-term outcomes in low-income settings.

Keywords: Asphyxia neonatorum, Birth asphyxia, Intrapartum-related neonatal deaths, Low-income countries, Neonatal, Neonatal encephalopathy, Neonatal resuscitation, Newborn resuscitation, Perinatal, Hypothermia

Back to Article Outline

1. Introduction 

Each year an estimated 10million babies require assistance to initiate breathing (Fig. 1). Between 5%–10% of all babies born in facilities need some degree of resuscitation, such as tactile stimulation or airway clearing or positioning [1], [2], and approximately 3%–6% require basic neonatal resuscitation, consisting of these simple initial steps and assisted ventilation [3], [4]. The need for neonatal resuscitation is most urgent in low-resource settings, where access to intrapartum obstetric care is poor and the incidence, mortality, and burden of long-term impairment from intrapartum-related events is highest [5], [6]. Delays in assisting the non-breathing newborn to establish ventilation, as may happen in many low-resource country settings, may exacerbate hypoxia, increase the need for assisted ventilation, and contribute to neonatal morbidity and mortality. Each year there are an estimated 904000 intrapartum-related neonatal deaths, previously loosely termed “birth asphyxia” [7]. The first paper in this series discusses this shift in terminology in more detail [5]. Although “birth asphyxia,” as applied to the non-breathing newborn, is an important clinical problem, it is not a specific cause of death. A series of international consensus statements have recommended the shift to the term “intrapartum-related deaths” when used for cause of death, and “neonatal encephalopathy” for the acute complications manifesting with a neurologically abnormal state soon after birth. Case definitions should exclude preterm babies and other causes of death where possible, such as congenital anomalies.

• 
  • View Large Image
  • Download to PowerPoint

• Fig. 1 

  Estimates of global numbers of babies undergoing resuscitation at birth. Source: Estimates based on references [1], [2], [3], [4], [8], [9].

Advanced resuscitation (i.e. chest compressions, intubation, or medications) is required for around 2% of all babies who do not breathe at birth [4], [8], and less than 1% of all babies born [2], [9]. Furthermore, in many cases, babies who require advanced resuscitation may not survive without ongoing ventilation and neonatal intensive care. Therefore, basic neonatal resuscitation, including bag-and-mask ventilation, is sufficient for most babies who would be saved by resuscitation in low-resource settings. Recently, Newton and English [10] reviewed the evidence for neonatal resuscitation and concluded that effective resuscitation was possible with basic equipment and skills in low-resource settings. Training providers in neonatal resuscitation in health facilities may prevent 30% of deaths of full-term babies with intrapartum-related events, as well as 5%–10% of deaths due to preterm birth [11]. Therefore, universal application of basic resuscitation may save hundreds of thousands of newborn lives currently lost each year, and contribute significantly to progress toward Millennium Development Goal 4. To achieve impact, the challenge is to improve obstetric care and provide universal coverage of basic resuscitation where resources are limited and where many, even most, babies are born at home.

1.1. Current coverage, constraints, key challenges 

In low-resource settings where the burden of intrapartum events is the greatest, the capacity to provide adequate neonatal resuscitation is lacking. For example, in South East Asia where over one-third of all intrapartum-related neonatal deaths occur, rates of skilled birth attendance are among the lowest in the world (34% for 2000–2007) [12]. For the babies born in hospitals, staff are frequently not trained in resuscitation and equipment is not available. In National Service Provision Assessments in 6 African countries, only 2%–12% of personnel conducting births in facilities had been trained in neonatal resuscitation and only 8%–22% of facilities had equipment for newborn respiratory support (Fig. 2). If these limited data were generalizable for Africa, less than one-quarter of babies born in facilities would have access to resuscitation, and because only about half of births are in facilities, only one-eighth of babies who require resuscitation may receive this intervention. Clearly a major increase in coverage is required. The key challenges are how to seize the missed opportunity to ensure adequate provision of basic resuscitation in facility settings, including equipment and competent personnel, and how to address the gap for neonatal resuscitation for 60million non-facility births each year.

• 
  • View Large Image
  • Download to PowerPoint

• Fig. 2 

  Estimates from 6 countries for the percentage of babies born in facilities, and the percentage of facilities with staff trained in neonatal resuscitation and with bag-and-mask. Source: Egypt: Ministry of Health and Population, El-Zanaty Associates, and ORC Macro. Egypt Service Provision Assessment Survey 2004: Key Findings. Calverton, Maryland, USA: Ministry of Health and Population and ORC Macro; 2005. Ghana: Ghana Statistical Service (GSS), Health Research Unit, Ministry of Health, and ORC Macro. Ghana Service Provision Assessment Survey 2002. Calverton, Maryland: Ghana Statistical Service and ORC Macro; 2003: 135. Kenya: National Coordinating Agency for Population and Development (NCAPD) [Kenya], Ministry of Health (MOH), Central Bureau of Statistics (CBS), ORC Macro. Kenya Service Provision Assessment Survey 2004. Nairobi, Kenya: National Coordinating Agency for Population and Development, Ministry of Health, Central Bureau of Statistics, and ORC Macro; 2005. Rwanda: National Institute of Statistics (NIS) [Rwanda], Ministry of Health (MOH) [Rwanda], and Macro International Inc. Rwanda Service Provision Assessment Survey 2007. Calverton, Maryland, USA: NIS, MOH, and Macro International Inc; 2008. Tanzania: National Bureau of Statistics [Tanzania], Ministry of Health and Social Welfare [Tanzania], and Macro International Inc. Tanzania Service Provision Assessment Survey 2006: Key Findings on Family Planning, Maternal and Child Health, and Malaria. Dar es Salaam, Tanzania: National Bureau of Statistics and Macro International, Inc; 2006:13. Uganda: Ministry of Health (MOH) [Uganda] and Macro International Inc. Uganda Service Provision Assessment Survey 2007. Kampala, Uganda: Ministry of Health and Macro International Inc. 2008; 132.

1.2. Objective 

In this paper, the third in a series that focuses on reduction of intrapartum-related neonatal deaths, we review the current evidence for neonatal resuscitation and post-resuscitation management. Several publications have recently analyzed the level of evidence for specific components of neonatal resuscitation in settings with limited resources [10], [13], [14]. Here we focus on the evidence for neonatal resuscitation and post-resuscitation care in low-resource settings, the evidence for impact in different settings, and a series of national case studies to synthesize the implications for scaling-up neonatal resuscitation. The major focus is on evidence and feasibility of interventions most relevant to the lower levels of the health system including:

A complete discussion of resuscitation interventions for referral facilities is beyond the scope of this paper; however, some selected referral-level interventions and relevant issues for programs and scaling up are included, particularly regarding management of neonatal encephalopathy.

Back to Article Outline

2. Methods 

Details of the searches undertaken and the selection criteria are described in the first paper of this series [5]. In brief, searches of the following medical literature databases were conducted: PubMed, Popline, EMBASE, LILACS, IMEM, and African Index Medicus, Cochrane, and World Health Organization (WHO) documents. Initial searches were conducted in November 2002 and these were updated in May 2009. Keyword searches relevant for this paper included various combinations of the keywords: “birth asphyxia/asphyxia neonatorum/birth asphyxia,” “neonatal mortality,” “hypoxic ischaemic encephalopathy/hypoxic ischemic encephalopathy and developing countries,” “neonatal encephalopathy,” “newborn/neonatal resuscitation,” “skilled birth attendant,” “traditional birth attendant,” “community health worker,” “post-resuscitation management,” “hypothermia,” “fluid restriction,” and “anticonvulsants.” Modified GRADE criteria were used to evaluate the level of evidence [15], applying methods adapted by the Child Health Epidemiology Reference Group as detailed in an earlier paper in this series [5].

Back to Article Outline

3. Results 

3.1. Neonatal resuscitation algorithms and actions 

Since the formation of the International Liaison Committee on Resuscitation (ILCOR) in 1992, there have been a number of international consensus statements regarding resuscitation standards. The first statement on neonatal resuscitation was in 1999 and this was updated in 2005 [2], [16]. These guidelines are intended for settings with highly-skilled personnel, and focus on advanced resuscitation with use of endotracheal intubation, cardiac massage, and epinephrine. However, some of the principles, particularly the focus on effective ventilation, apply to low-resource setting [17]. Fig. 3 illustrates a variation of the ILCOR guidelines, published by the American Heart Association and the American Academy of Pediatrics [18]. The WHO guide “Basic newborn resuscitation: a practical guide” is aimed at first-referral level and higher in low-resource settings [3]. The more recent WHO Hospital Pocket Book [19] provides a more specific algorithm that includes ventilation and cardiac massage rates, shown in Fig. 4 with minor adaptations to make it consistent with ILCOR [17], [18]. The American Academy of Pediatrics is currently field testing a new educational program entitled “Helping Babies Breathe,” to promote neonatal resuscitation at lower levels of the health system in low-resource settings [20]. Fig. 5 shows the field test version, which includes pictorial depictions of each step in resuscitation up to the assessment of heart rate in a baby who has received ventilation.

• 
  • View Large Image
  • Download to PowerPoint

• Fig. 3 

  Neonatal algorithm for advanced resuscitation according to the American Heart Association and the American Academy of Pediatric's updated version of the original ILCOR algorithm. Reprinted with permission from Pediatrics, 117, e1029-e1038, Copyright ©2005 by the American Heart Association and American Academy of Pediatrics. Source [18].

• 
  • View Large Image
  • Download to PowerPoint

• Fig. 4 

  Neonatal Resuscitation Algorithm based on WHO Pocketbook of Hospital Care for Children and updated with ILCOR 2005 Recommendations. Source [19]. ⁎Items altered from the original for consistency with ILCOR. ⁎^a Changed instruction for 5 initial inflations to beginning regular ventilations as the 5 inflations based on just one study. Altered ventilate rate to a range of 30–40 instead of 40 based on more recent ILCOR guidelines. ⁎^b Changed heart rate to stop cardiac massage at from 100 per minute (WHO) to 60 per minute.⁎^c Added criteria for stopping ventilation. Color coding added to be consistent with Integrated Management of Childhood Illness (green = well; yellow = ongoing care; pink = add now).

• 
  • View Large Image
  • Download to PowerPoint

• Fig. 5 

  Action Plan for Helping Babies Breathe for lower levels of the health system. Reprinted with permission granted by American Academy of Pediatrics, 2009 [20].

An increasing number of algorithms and guidelines for neonatal resuscitation at varying levels of the health system are available. Many of these are based more on expert consensus than on rigorous evidence, partly because of the ethical issues surrounding randomized trials of an already established practice. While many detailed questions remain around the minutiae of these algorithms, the big question is how to reach the estimated 6million newborns each year who require basic neonatal resuscitation and “how to implement” questions such as the where, who, and what of neonatal resuscitation.

There is little systematic evidence to guide criteria to determine which newborns should be resuscitated. The ILCOR statement emphasizes that the decision is based not on a single sign but on a “compound assessment” of a sign complex, including initial cry, breathing, tone, heart rate, maturity, and response to stimulation [16]. This requires a high level of skill for complex and rapid clinical assessment, judgment, and decision making. The WHO guide [3] recommends a simple, more feasible clinical criterion based on assessment of breathing alone: all babies who do not cry, do not breathe at all, or who are gasping 30 seconds after birth should be resuscitated with bag-and-mask ventilation. This simple indication for resuscitation is similar to the signs that were listed as most useful and feasible in a survey of program managers [21]. Several studies have assessed the predictive value of specific newborn symptoms compared with low cord pH or neonatal death [22], [23], [24], [25]. The symptom of “no cry at birth” had a moderate positive predictive value for neonatal death, but was not specific for intrapartum hypoxia [22]. Other symptoms that have been evaluated include delayed or absent breathing, limpness or inactivity, pallor or cyanosis, irregular breathing, and cord pulsation. One study suggested that the combination of poor cry, color, and activity was the best predictor of abnormal cord pH (correlation coefficient 0.71; r=0.38); however, complex scoring systems are not feasible in low-resource settings, particularly at community level [23], [24], [25]. Therefore, the simple assessment advocated by WHO appears to be the best practice for now, but there remains a need for a systematic clinical definition of the baby who needs resuscitation and a simplified, but acceptably specific, case definition for resuscitation at the community level.

Routine intrapartum perineal suctioning for meconium-stained amniotic fluid is no longer recommended after a multicenter randomized controlled trial found no significant benefit [26]. However, these data are from high-income countries with low incidence of meconium aspiration, and may not be generalizable to low-income countries where meconium aspiration may be more common. If the baby is vigorous at delivery (breathing well, good tone, heart rate >100 beats per min), suctioning of the trachea is not required and may be harmful [27], [28]. Thus, the indication for endotracheal suctioning at delivery is staining of the liquor with meconium in a nonvigorous baby [2]. If the baby is not breathing, the trachea should be suctioned until clear or until the baby's heart rate falls below 60 beats per minute, in which case the baby should be ventilated. Tracheal suctioning requires advanced skill and frequent practice, is associated with hazards [3], and is not usually recommended, even for physicians at health facilities unless they are specifically trained. Where endotracheal intubation with suctioning is not feasible, it is unclear whether babies with meconium staining should undergo suctioning before birth, after birth, or not at all [29].

Healthy, vigorous newborns do not require suctioning. Indeed routine oro–naso–pharyngeal suctioning may have potential adverse effects (apnea, upper airway damage, bradycardia, and delays to establishing breathing) [26], [29], [30]. The WHO Basic Resuscitation Guide only recommends suctioning with a mechanical suction device, electrical or foot-pedal operated, where possible, when there is meconium and the newborn does not cry. Even in facilities, options for suctioning may be limited because of the cost of mechanical equipment or a lack of appropriate catheters. Risk of cross-contamination of reused catheters is a concern. There are also concerns that excessive negative pressures may be used in mechanical suctioning, resulting in mucosal injury. WHO discourages the use of a cloth to clean the mouth because of a lack of evidence indicating benefit and potential mucosal damage [3]; however, this practice is still common in the community [21]. Mucus extractors with one-way valves are also commonly used, although the operator may be at risk for infection. Rubber bulb suction devices are frequently used, but represent infection hazards when reused because the interior cannot be cleaned and dried adequately. Development of safe, inexpensive, and easily-cleaned suction devices is required.

3.1.4.1. Type of pressure control resuscitation device 

The key equipment for neonatal resuscitation is a self-inflating bag-and-mask, first invented by Ruben in 1954 using bicycle parts [31]. Several studies have shown that for the majority of babies who do not breathe at birth, initial ventilation with a self-inflating bag-and-mask is adequate, and there is little difference in the time to first breath whether using ventilation by bag-and-mask or endotracheal intubation by an experienced provider [1], [32]. Endotracheal intubation may be more effective than bag-and-mask ventilation for severely depressed babies, but this is often not an option in low-resource settings because of a lack of available equipment (working laryngoscope, supply of endotracheal tubes in a variety of sizes) and skills. In addition, these babies may require ongoing ventilation, which is usually not an option.

The WHO guide still recommends that “every birth attendant should be trained in mouth-to-mouth ventilation in case there is no equipment or equipment fails” [3]. This recommendation needs to be balanced against the possible risk of transmission of serious infections to the provider based on local prevalence of HIV and other infections.

In the 1970s, when bag-and-mask devices were still costly, mouth-to-mask and tube-and-mask devices were developed as a low-cost alternative, with the potential to reduce infection transmission compared with mouth-to-mouth resuscitation. Use of a prototype mouth-to-mask device with a short tube was compared with use of a self-inflating bag-and-mask device in two teaching hospitals: Dar es Salaam, Tanzania and Bombay (now Mumbai), India [33]. Newborns were non-randomly (according to predetermined time periods) allocated to bag-and-mask (Dar es Salaam n=56, Bombay n=24) or mouth-to-mask device groups (Dar es Salaam n=64; Bombay n=30). No significant differences were detected between the two methods as determined by Apgar scores at 5 and 10 minutes, time to first gasp, incidence of neonatal convulsions, and neonatal death. However, the study lacked sufficient power to detect differences for most outcomes. This study reported that the mouth-to-mask method “was tiring and uncomfortable for the resuscitating personnel,” as the provider's breathing had to regulate pressure as well as rate. The study's conclusions were corroborated by a survey of 173 program managers who rated the mouth-to-mask device as having low program feasibility [21].

In Indonesia, Program for Appropriate Technology in Health (PATH) compared 4 different neonatal resuscitation devices: 2 bag-and-mask devices and 2 tube-and-mask devices (1 with a short tube and 1 with a long tube) [34]. Trained community midwives used a computerized resuscitation doll and found no significant differences among the devices for tidal volume or ventilatory rate. Midwives preferred the bag-and-mask device for ease of use, their belief in greater efficacy, and safety with regard to transmission of infections. Challenges to using the tube-and-mask devices included fatigue and difficulties in visualizing the neonate during resuscitation, ascertaining appropriate pressure, and communicating during resuscitation. When device costs were also considered, the long tube-and-mask device was selected because it was substantially cheaper at the time. While the long tube-and-mask device was considered overall to be feasible and affordable, the short-tube device, also affordable, was rated unfavorably by the midwives. The tube-and-mask devices were also considered to be easier to clean than the bag-and-mask devices.

For home deliveries attended by community health workers (CHWs) in rural India, the Society for Education, Action and Research in Community Health (SEARCH) trial compared tube-and-mask with bag-and-mask ventilation over sequential time periods [35]. A tube-and-mask device with a long tube was used by CHWs during the earlier time period (1996–1999), whereas a self-inflating bag-and-mask device was used in the later period (1999–2003) when an affordable device became available locally. Comparing the before-and-after data, there were non-significant trends toward lower case fatality rates for “severe asphyxia” (39%)—not breathing at 5 minutes—and apparently fresh stillbirths (33%) during the period when the bag-and-mask device was used. Moreover, CHWs reported that the bag-and-mask was easier to use. CHWs also noted difficulty in bending forward to ventilate with the tube-and-mask device, especially if prolonged (up to 15 minutes) assisted ventilation was required. SEARCH investigators concluded that the bag-and-mask device was more acceptable to providers, and potentially more effective at saving lives.

Hence, the self-inflating bag-and-mask device remains the standard of care. While the typical self-inflating bag-and-mask devices used in high-income countries are expensive, there are affordable versions now available in many low-income settings. Key considerations are that the bag-and-mask device is designed to be reusable and easily cleaned for safe reuse. In certain community-based settings, a tube-and-mask device, while probably less effective, may be considered as a temporary alternative.

3.1.4.2. Should air from the room or oxygen be used? 

Whether resuscitation should be initiated with air from the room or oxygen has been previously reviewed, and will be briefly discussed here. A recent meta-analysis pooling data from 4 trials [36], [37], [38], [39] found a significant reduction in mortality for newborns who were resuscitated with room air versus 100% oxygen (RR 0.71; 95% CI, 0.54–0.94) [40]. There was also evidence that the recovery time was shorter for newborns who received room air, including shorter time to first breath and sustained respirations, as well as higher Apgar scores. The authors estimated that one death could be prevented for every 20 newborns resuscitated with room air versus 100% oxygen (95% CI, 12–100).

Although ILCOR states that there is “insufficient evidence to specify the concentration of oxygen to be used at initiation of resuscitation” [17], WHO recommends air for resuscitation of “most babies,” also citing the unavailability and expense of oxygen. It is reasonable to recommend the use of air for resuscitation at community level and in facility settings without routine availability of oxygen. Further research is required to refine the recommendations for use of supplemental oxygen at resuscitation in facility settings where oxygen is available. However, given these data, it is clear that nonavailability of oxygen is not the limiting factor for the implementation of neonatal resuscitation.

There are no human studies that assess the benefit of chest compressions used in neonatal resuscitation [10]. Reported experience with 30839 consecutively born newborns in a tertiary center noted that chest compressions were employed on only 39 occasions (0.12%) [9]. The authors note that 31 of the 39 babies who received chest compressions were believed to be have been inadequately ventilated [9]. The WHO guide does not include chest compressions in basic resuscitation unless the baby has persistent bradycardia “despite adequate ventilation,” and as long as two trained providers are present and the heart rate has been “assessed correctly” [3]. There are 4 arguments to support omission of chest compressions, at least for first-level facilities and community level:

Both the ILCOR guidelines and the WHO guide agree that drugs are rarely indicated in neonatal resuscitation [3], [16], [42] and that ventilatory support should be the priority. The rare use of epinephrine for neonatal resuscitation, even in a tertiary care setting (18 uses in 30839 deliveries), indicates a low priority for use of medication in neonatal resuscitation within limited-resource settings [9]. The ILCOR guide, intended for advanced resuscitation, gives details of the evidence for drugs such as epinephrine and dextrose (Fig. 3) [17]. With the priority being ventilation, followed by chest compressions, drugs should probably not be considered, except in circumstances where 3 trained providers are available: a person to continue ventilation, a person to perform compressions, and a third person to administer drugs. Thus, there is probably no role for drugs in low-income settings except in advanced resuscitation in referral facilities.

This is a difficult ethical question, particularly regarding resuscitation of babies with malformations or extreme prematurity. There is a significant body of literature, almost all relevant to settings with neonatal intensive care. Only one paper was identified that was specifically related to low-income country settings [43]. A detailed discussion is beyond the scope of the present paper. The WHO guide recommends that the following should not be resuscitated: stillbirths that are not fresh; the newborn with a “severe malformation” (hydrocephaly, anencephaly, trisomy 13 or 18, short-limbed dwarfism, multiple defects); “extremely low gestational age” to be determined by local policy and probability of survival [3].

In addition to addressing extremely low gestational age, resuscitation protocols at peripheral levels of the health system will need to consider the skill level and experience of the personnel who will make the decision whether or not to resuscitate. One approach is to begin resuscitation for all babies who may appear lifeless, within locally determined gestational age limits, as long as there are no major malformations (such as anencephaly) and no evident maceration. Monitoring and infant follow-up are essential to ensure appropriate practices by peripheral-level providers and to determine whether neurological disability might be increased. The current ILCOR guidelines recommend that after 10 minutes of continuous and adequate resuscitative efforts, neonatal resuscitation may be discontinued if there are no signs of life (no heart beat and no respiratory effort). If the baby is still not breathing after 10 minutes, even if there may be a heart rate, some experts advocate that if there are no facilities for intubation and ventilation then resuscitation should be stopped unless there are clear indications that there is a modifiable factor involved, such as opioid administration to the mother during labor.

3.2. Evidence for the impact of neonatal resuscitation training 

We recently conducted a systematic review of the evidence for neonatal resuscitation and a meta-analysis showing that neonatal resuscitation training at the facility level averts 30% of intrapartum-related neonatal deaths [11]. The studies of facility-based neonatal resuscitation from low- and middle-income countries are shown in Table 1.

Table 1. Evidence for the impact of neonatal resuscitation at the facility level: Mortality effect.

Intervention/study (date order)	Setting	Baseline mortality rates	Mortality Effect: Percentage relative reduction in mortality rate (number of deaths in intervention or end line group); RR or OR (95% CI)				Investigator and year
			Early neonatal mortality rate (ENMR)	Perinatal mortality rate (PMR)	Neonatal mortality rate (NMR)	Intrapartum-related neonatal mortality (IPR-NMR)
Before-and-after baseline surveillance of 1722 newborns followed by 2-year prospective study of 4751 newborns while instituting standardized resuscitation guidelines	China Urban hospital	ENMR 34	66% (16) RR 0.34 (0.17–0.67)	–	–		Zhu et al. [4] 1997
Before-and-after surveillance of American Academy of Pediatrics' National Resuscitation Program training of village health center physicians, nurses, birth attendants in 1996	Peripheral health centers, Kerala India	IPR-NMR 5.4				32% (2) RR 0.68a (0.15–3.04)	Tholpadi et al. [105] 2000
Before-and-after surveillance in 14 teaching hospitals for 3months before institution of National Resuscitation Program and 12months after	14 University Hospitals, India	NMR 37 IPR-NMR 16	–		No significant change	30% (283) RR 0.70(0.56–0.87)	Deorari et al. [8] 2001
Before-and-after assessment of 10month perinatal training program of 115 doctors and nurses (neonatal resuscitation, thermal care, jaundice, respiratory distress syndrome, infection control) in 1999	Tertiary care hospitals, Macedonia	PMR 27.4		28% RR 0.72 (0.66–0.78)	36% RR 0.64 (0.56–0.72)		Jeffery et al. [47] 2004
Before-and-after surveillance of perinatal outcomes while instituting nationwide training of neonatal resuscitation for all delivery room personnel in Bulgaria from 2001–2003	National study. All hospitals Bulgaria	PMR 12.3 NMR 7.8 ENMR 5.1	14% RR 0.86 (0.74–1.01)			17% (38) RR 0.83 (0.54–1.27)	Vakrilova et al. [45] 2005
Before-and-after surveillance of WHO Essential Newborn Care Package, including basic resuscitation with bag-and-mask	Low-risk maternity centers, Zambia	IPR-NMR 3.2	44% (127) RR 0.56 (0.43–0.73)			43% (37) RR 0.57 (0.34–0.93)	Chomba et al. [46] 2008
Before-and-after evaluation of nationwide educational program of neonatal resuscitation training program started in 2004. Before-after comparison of incidence rates of babies not breathing (Apgar <7) and intrapartum-related neonatal mortality in 10 provinces	40 hospitals in China	IPR-NMR (delivery room) 3.3				33% (163) RR 0.67b (0.34–1.30)	Wang et al. [100] 2008

There were 6 observational before-and-after studies of primary neonatal resuscitation training programs for delivery room personnel (nurses, midwives, and doctors) that reported impact on intrapartum-related neonatal mortality (IPR-NMR). In rural China, a training program in modern resuscitation at the primary county maternal health centers was associated with a reduction in intrapartum-related case fatality rate from 7.1% to 0.45% [44]. In Zhuhai, China, a program training all delivery room staff in the American Academy of Pediatrics-American Heart Association National Resuscitation Program (NRP) resulted in a 63% reduction in early neonatal mortality [4], from 9.9 per 1000 before training to 3.4 per 1000 after training. Results from a nationwide program to scale up the training program in China are highlighted in Panel 1 at the end of the paper. The National Neonatology Forum of India initiated a national Neonatal Resuscitation Training Program in 1990 that was evaluated in 14 teaching hospitals [8]; the intrapartum-related neonatal mortality rate fell significantly from 1.6 per 1000 to 1.1 per 1000, comparing the surveillance period before to after training. Intrapartum-related morbidities including neonatal encephalopathy did not change significantly, although long-term follow-up assessing disability is not available. In Bulgaria, a national resuscitation training program for all delivery room staff in the country was associated with a significant 13% reduction in neonatal mortality and suggestive of declines in the early neonatal and intrapartum-related neonatal mortality rates [45]. A trial of midwife training in the WHO Essential Newborn Care Package (including basic newborn resuscitation with the bag-and-mask device) was taught to midwives in 18 low-risk delivery/health centers in Zambia [46], and demonstrated a 43% reduction in intrapartum-related neonatal deaths. Macedonia implemented a comprehensive perinatal training strategy of doctors and nurses that included a module on neonatal resuscitation, and observed a 21% reduction in perinatal mortality rate (PMR) over 2years from before-to-after training, although cause-specific mortality was not available and the intervention included multiple concurrent strategies [47]. Finally, in a national program of neonatal resuscitation training in Malaysia, initiated in 1996, national trends in neonatal mortality rates and perinatal mortality rates were observed to decline over an 8-year period [48]. However, it is difficult to attribute this effect to resuscitation training because intrapartum-related specific neonatal mortality was not available, and many other improvements in obstetric and newborn care likely occurred over the 8-year study period.

In the community, home births may be attended by persons with various skills and experience, ranging from skilled birth attendants to trained or untrained TBAs, community health workers, or family members (Table 2).

Table 2. Evidence for mortality effect of neonatal resuscitation in community-based settings.

Intervention/study (date order)	Setting	Percentage skilled attendance	Baseline mortality rates	Mortality Effect: Percentage relative reduction in mortality rate (number of deaths in intervention or end line group); RR or OR (95% CI)					Investigator and year
				Stillbirth rate (SBR)	ENMR	PMR	NMR	IPR-NMR
Nonrandomized comparison of perinatal outcomes between subset of TBAs trained in “advanced” resuscitation with suction and bag-and-mask as opposed to usual TBA training with mouth-to-mouth resuscitation	Rural India	<10%		–	–	19%a(4) RR 0.82 (0.56–1.19)	–	70% (5) RR 0.3 (0.1–0.8)	Kumar [24] 1995
									Kumar [106] 1998
Package of newborn home-based care. Longitudinal study; pre-post comparison. Baseline period (1993–1995): trained TBA using mouth-to-mouth resuscitation. Intervention: team of TBA and semi-skilled village health workers; training of village health workers in tube-and-mask (1996–1999) and later bag-and-mask (1999–2003) ventilation.	Rural India Maharashtra state	89%–95% Home deliveries, 92%–97% conducted by TBAs; 77%–84% attended by VHW's	NMR 52/1000 IPR-NMR 10.5/1000	32.6%b reduction in fresh stillbirth rate				48% reduction in case fatality of “severe asphyxia” casesc	Bang et al. [35] 2005
	39 villages: total population 38 998; 4033 home deliveries during study period		Incidence: “Mild birth asphyxia” 14.2% “Severe birth asphyxia” 4.6%					65% reduction in IPR-NMRc
								RR 0.35 (0.15–0.78)
								42%d reduction in IPR-NMR with tube-and-mask (37) and insignificant 12% e reduction with mouth-to-mouth resuscitation (56)
Training of Bidan di Desa (village midwives) in neonatal care, including management of neonatal resuscitation using tube-and-mask resuscitators. Refresher 5-minute video distributed with tube-and-mask devices. Before and after comparison of midwife knowledge, observed skills, and neonatal mortality rates.	Rural Cirebon, West Java Indonesia	80% of deliveries attended by health provider (midwives, doctors), 70% deliveries attended by midwives. 75% deliver at home	NMR 15	No significant change		29%f	40% f reduction in overall NMR (No.) not reported	47%f reduction in IPR-NMR	Ariawan PATH [34] 2006
	Pop: 2million		IPR-NMR 5.1	Baseline 8/1000
			PMR 21	End-line 6/1000
Training of birth attendants (TBAs, nurse midwives, and physicians) from rural communities in 6 countries in WHO essential newborn care and basic resuscitation, including bag-and-mask resuscitation. Prospective pre and post PMR and stillbirth rates comparison.	Rural Argentina, DR Congo, Guatemala, India, Pakistan, Zambia	NS	PMR 46/1000	31% (557)	NS	PMR 15% (1367)			Carlo et al. [52] 2008
			SBR 23/1000	RR 0.69 (0.54–0.88)	RR 0.99 (0.81–1.22)	RR 0.85 (0.70–1.02)

3.2.2.1. Community midwives 

A study of training midwives in neonatal resuscitation in Cirebon district, West Java, Indonesia, is highlighted in Panel 2 at the end of the paper.

3.2.2.2. Trained traditional birth attendants 

Several evaluations from India have assessed the roles of traditional birth attendants (TBAs) in neonatal resuscitation. In the 1980s, Daga et al. [49] trained TBAs in essential newborn care including mouth-to-mouth resuscitation of babies not breathing. At the start of the program the perinatal mortality rate was 75 per 1000 live births (1987) and this had reduced to 29 at the end of the program in 1990, although the effect of resuscitation training cannot be isolated as several interventions were delivered simultaneously. In the early 1990s, Kumar et al. [50], [51] at Chandigarh, India, trained TBAs in the recognition of “birth asphyxia” by clinical assessment and newborn resuscitation, including use of a cloth to wipe the baby's mouth, and mouth-to-mouth ventilation. A subset of nonrandomly selected TBAs were trained in “advanced” resuscitation techniques, including use of a mucus extractor and a self-inflating bag. The prevalence of the non-breathing baby was lower (0.9%) in the advanced resuscitation group compared with the basic group (2.4%), and there was a 20% reduction in case fatality rate among newborns with TBAs trained in advanced resuscitation had a 20% reduction in case fatality rate; however, this was not significant. The definition of “asphyxia-specific mortality” included preterm infants. Thus, while the difference in case fatality was reported to be statistically significant, it could have been due to improved management of the preterm baby, a reduction in the severity of the initial intrapartum insult, as well as a better resuscitation technique. A recent study evaluated the effect of training community birth attendants (TBAs and nurses) in essential newborn care (ENC), including basic neonatal resuscitation. ENC training was provided in 95 communities in 6 countries (Argentina, Democratic Republic of Congo, Guatemala, India, Pakistan, and Zambia). In a before-and-after comparison, stillbirth rates declined from 23 to 16 stillbirths per 1000 live births (RR 0.63; 95% CI, 0.44–0.88). The authors speculated that the decrease in stillbirths may have resulted from effective resuscitation of newborns who would have been classified as stillborn pre-ENC training [52].

3.2.2.3. Community health workers 

In a study from Gadichiroli, India, training of village health workers in neonatal resuscitation was feasible and associated with significant reductions in intrapartum-related mortality (see Panel 3).

3.2.2.4. Family member 

We did not identify any studies of training family members in neonatal resuscitation. School-aged children have been trained to effectively perform adult CPR in several settings [53], [54], [55]. A family member may certainly provide the essential first steps of neonatal resuscitation (drying, warming, stimulation, airway positioning), and in a recent expert Delphi process, an estimated 10% of intrapartum-related neonatal deaths could be averted by the immediate steps of drying and stimulating a baby who is not breathing [11].

3.3. Post-resuscitation management 

Post-resuscitation management can improve survival and long-term outcomes of newborns who have survived intrapartum hypoxia and received neonatal resuscitation. However, the evidence regarding effect and capacity for implementation is primarily from high-income settings. Selected post-resuscitation interventions that may apply to district and referral-level hospitals in low-resource settings are summarized in this section.

Babies who required extensive resuscitation should have ongoing assessment for at least 12–24 hours after birth. Even those who have responded appropriately to resuscitation may need further intervention to support breathing, achieve adequate oxygenation, avoid hyperthermia, and maintain glucose and fluid balance. Many of the gains from successful neonatal resuscitation can be lost by poor aftercare and not attending to potential complications. Limited studies indicate that long-term neurological outcomes may be modified by corrective responses to clinically important issues, such as thermal balance, serum glucose levels, oxygen use, seizure control, and medication dosing. Management of neonatal encephalopathy is not feasible in community settings, and requires referral to a district- or tertiary-level facility. In a series of 98 newborns who were transported for specialty care after resuscitation, Portman et al. [56] observed that 61% required continued assisted ventilation, 45% had renal dysfunction, 27% had abnormal liver function tests, and 53% had low blood pressure.

Newborns who have experienced intrapartum hypoxia have a high frequency of apneas in the hours following birth and may require supplemental oxygen [57], especially if there is hypoxic lung injury or meconium aspiration. Apnea can be associated with periods of hypoxemia and hypotension [58]. Treatment with methylxanthines or management of underlying causes may reduce apnea [59]. However, mechanical ventilatory support with nasal continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP) or intermittent mandatory ventilation may be necessary for newborns with severe intrapartum hypoxia, which may not be an option in many low-income settings.

While hypoxemia should be avoided, hyperoxia has been associated with cerebral vasoconstriction in preterm babies and lambs [60], [61] and with central nervous system cell death in rat pups [62]. Ahdab-Barmada et al. [63] reported a pattern of ponto-subicular necrosis in critically ill newborns with PaO2 higher than 150torr. These data suggest that excessive oxygen use should be avoided, particularly in the newborn with neonatal encephalopathy, and that these babies receiving supplemental oxygen should have regular oxygen saturation monitoring.

Hypoglycemia can cause neuronal injury and potentiate the injury associated with neonatal encephalopathy [64]. There is considerable uncertainty as to the lowest safe level of serum glucose in healthy newborns. Even though definitive data about the immediate management of glucose levels are lacking, both hypoglycemia and hyperglycemia may be associated with adverse outcomes [65], [66]. Since many newborns with neonatal encephalopathy have a period of significant gastrointestinal dysfunction, parenteral glucose administration should be considered if feasible.

Current recommendations for neonatal encephalopathy also include fluid restriction and avoidance of fluid overload to avert cerebral edema [67] and overcome the effect of excessive vasopressin release after intrapartum hypoxia [68], [69]. A recent Cochrane review [70] evaluated all randomized or quasi-randomized trials of fluid restriction in term newborns suffering intrapartum-related hypoxia, but found no studies that met the criteria for inclusion. This lack of evidence necessitates well-designed studies investigating the effects of fluid management on outcomes such as mortality, seizure activity, evidence of cerebral damage, electrolyte status, and multiorgan dysfunction. Until such clear guidelines become available, the subsequent management of newborns after intrapartum hypoxia must consist of close monitoring of fluid and glucose infusion needs, balanced against renal function and electrolyte status. There is an urgent need for developing and recommending appropriate evidence-based algorithms for fluid (or feeding) management of newborns with intrapartum hypoxia in the first 72 hours after resuscitation in district hospital settings.

Neonatal seizures occur in 50% of newborns with neonatal encephalopathy as a consequence of intrapartum hypoxia. Results from both human and animal studies are consistent with the hypothesis that seizures themselves accentuate the cerebral injury of neonatal encephalopathy [71], [72]. Anticonvulsive medications are indicated for neonatal seizures. There is consensus that parenteral phenobarbitol is the treatment of choice despite a relatively slow onset of action. Diazepam is not recommended as first-line therapy because of the higher risk of respiratory depression in the newborn [73].

The routine use of anticonvulsant therapy to prevent seizures following intrapartum hypoxia has been evaluated [74]. Of 7 randomized or quasi-randomized controlled trials, none was of sufficient methodologic quality and size to demonstrate a valid, clinically significant change in the risk of mortality or severe neurodevelopmental disability. The author's meta-analysis combining 5 studies comparing barbiturates with conventional therapy demonstrated no difference in risk of death (RR 1.13; 95% CI, 0.59–2.17) or severe neurological disability (RR 0.61; 95% CI, 0.30–1.22). Currently, routine anticonvulsant therapy for term newborns in the period immediately following intrapartum-related hypoxia cannot be recommended. However, as resuscitation strategies are scaled up, there is a need for well designed, suitably powered studies to address whether anticonvulsant therapy can reduce mortality and severe neuro-developmental disability.

Most medications administered to newborns are modified and/or excreted by the liver and/or kidney. Neonatal encephalopathy has been associated with elevated liver enzymes in one study (27%) [56] and significant renal dysfunction in several studies [75]. Hence, clinicians should carefully consider the selection, dose, and administration frequency for all medication given to a baby who is not breathing. Given the improved understanding of the mechanisms affecting cerebral metabolism of babies who are not breathing, several new drugs have been tested but have not yet shown convincing evidence of benefit, including naloxone [76], [77], xanthine oxidase inhibitors (allopurinol) [78], and dopamine [79]. Furthermore, while used in the past, there is no evidence to support the use of corticosteroids to treat neonatal encephalopathy [80], although animal data indicate that pretreatment with corticosteroids may be neuroprotective [81].

Minimization of neonatal heat loss and cold stress at birth and providing a neutral thermal environment during care after delivery have been shown to reduce mortality [82], [83]. Conversely, hyperthermia has been shown in animal models and human newborns to be physiologically destabilizing [84], to increase the risk of apnea [85], and to aggravate neonatal encephalopathy-induced central nervous system injury [86], with potentially fatal consequences [87]. The use of higher thermal control set points or an uncontrolled warming device should be avoided in babies with neonatal encephalopathy. Carefully controlled environmental temperature or skin-to-skin care may offer safer alternatives.

There has been considerable interest in evaluating the role of mild hypothermia in reducing neurologic sequelae after neonatal encephalopathy [88]. A recent Cochrane review [89] evaluated 8 randomized controlled trials that included 638 term newborns with moderate/severe encephalopathy and evidence of intrapartum hypoxia, and concluded that therapeutic hypothermia was associated with a reduction in mortality (RR 0.74; 95% CI, 0.58–0.94) as well as the combined outcome of mortality or major neuro-developmental disability to 18months of age (RR 0.76; 95% CI, 0.65–0.89). Notwithstanding the increase in the need for inotropic support and a significant increase in thrombocytopenia, the reviewers concluded that the benefits of cooling on survival and neurodevelopment outweighed the short-term adverse effects. Given that most of these studies have been small and none were conducted in low-income countries, further trials are needed to determine the effectiveness and appropriate method of providing therapeutic hypothermia. A large multicenter trial of total body cooling in the treatment of newborns with neonatal encephalopathy is currently underway [90]. While therapeutic hypothermia is a high technology intervention, modifications have been developed for application in low-resource settings, including use of water bottles and servo-controlled fans [91], [92]. However, the effectiveness may not be equivalent given different methods and settings, and randomized controlled trials are required and presently being conducted [93].

Back to Article Outline

4. Considerations for scaling up neonatal resuscitation in low- and middle-income countries 

Table 3 summarizes the evidence and recommendations based on a Grades of Recommendation Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach for the components of neonatal resuscitation at each level of the health system: in the home; health post or maternity clinic with skilled attendant; health facility with Basic Emergency Obstetric Care (BEmOC) services; district hospital with Comprehensive Emergency Obstetric Care (CEmOC) services; and tertiary referral level facilities. To save the lives of newborns who do not breathe, birth attendants at all deliveries must be competent in neonatal resuscitation at a level appropriate to the setting.

Table 3. Summary of GRADE level of evidence and recommendations for low- and middle-income settings.

Abbreviations: HIC, high-income countries; MIC, middle-income countries; LIC, low-income countries.

Simple immediate newborn care should be provided to newborns in all settings as part of essential newborn care, including warming, drying, stimulation, hygiene and thermal care. These immediate steps are the first in neonatal resuscitation, and can even be performed by family members. The most rational program approach at all levels is to ensure training in essential newborn care, either before or concurrent with training in basic and advanced neonatal resuscitation. Basic neonatal resuscitation training can be effectively performed by a wide range of health providers (from traditional birth attendants, CHWs, nurses, and midwives to physicians) resulting in reductions in intrapartum-related mortality in both the facility and home settings [11], [35]. Advanced neonatal resuscitation, including intubation and medications, is typically only feasible in district or referral level facilities in most low-income settings.

4.1. Training, competency, and maintenance of resuscitation skills 

Training courses in neonatal resuscitation can effectively increase the competency of health workers in conducting neonatal resuscitation and reduce potentially harmful practices [93]. Several training tools and materials are available to assist training courses (Fig. 6). Active monitoring of competency must be emphasized. In a cross-sectional evaluation of approximately 1500 skilled birth attendants in 5 countries, only half were competent to perform neonatal resuscitation with a bag-and-mask device [94]. Maintaining resuscitation knowledge and skills is a major challenge, particularly in settings where providers attend few deliveries and infrequently resuscitate newborns. In rural settings, TBAs, who may attend 30 or fewer births a year, would be expected to resuscitate with a bag-and-mask only once or twice a year, making maintenance of skills a challenge. Refresher training needs to be provided on a regular basis, as frequently as every 6months, to prevent loss of skills [95], [96]. In Zambia, resuscitation knowledge and skills of midwives declined significantly 6months after a neonatal resuscitation program training [96]. In Indonesia, PATH conducted routine refresher training every 3 months for midwives and distributed DVD movies demonstrating resuscitation skills and found no decline in the resuscitation knowledge and practice scores of community midwives at 3, 6 and 9months after training [34]. In the Basic Support for Institutionalizing Child Survival (BASICS) program in Madagascar, group supervision and practice drills were instrumental in maintaining competency. Supervisory visits were conducted in group sessions every 3months when staff were retrained using the mannequin and examined for competency with checklists [97]. At 6months, 88% of providers remained competent to perform neonatal resuscitation [97].

• 
  • View Large Image
  • Download to PowerPoint

• Fig. 6 

  Neonatal resuscitation and post-resuscitation care, equipment, and innovations required [107], [108]. ⁎Note reference to specific devices or use of images does not constitute endorsement. Bag-and-mask image reprinted with permission granted by from Programme for Appropriate Technology in Health (PATH); Reusable sterilizable bulb suction device (“penguin”) image and training mannequin images reprinted with permission granted by Laerdal.

There are no clear guidelines regarding the number of resuscitations per year required to maintain skills and few data to guide programs on the frequency and method of refresher training. Countries and training institutions need to plan for supervision and regular refresher training when primary training is instituted. Major initiatives that only provide training without this ongoing support and supervision should not be promoted. Most high-income country programs require full recertification every 2years. There is a dearth of data on what works in terms of frequency of supervision or formal retraining in low-income country health systems. However, within the large scale programs showing impact, a 6-monthly process of supervision appears to be the minimum. This remains a key area for health systems implementation research.

4.2. Availability of equipment and supplies 

Before birth, the necessary resuscitation equipment needs to be available, functioning, and clean. Essential equipment for basic neonatal resuscitation and key considerations are highlighted in Fig. 6. Difficulty procuring equipment is a key challenge, especially in countries where the equipment is not included on essential supply lists. Even senior health workers may be unaware of what to order in terms of a correctly-sized self-inflating bag, valve pressure, and mask size for neonatal resuscitation. Procurement of equipment may be facilitated by identifying local manufacturers, and this has been instrumental in reducing equipment costs in Asia. Equipment should be designed to withstand autoclaving.

4.3. Cost of neonatal resuscitation: Training and equipment 

The prices of common resuscitation equipment are shown in Fig. 6. In Gadchiroli, India the cost of a tube-and-mask resuscitation device was US $10 and a bag-and-mask device was US $20; however, the utilization rate was low (approximately 1–2 uses per year) with a village health worker attending an average of 20 births per year and an incidence of 6% for a non-breathing baby [35]. Hence, the estimated cost of equipment alone was US $13 per averted death.

The main cost, apart from some outlay on equipment, is training. A few studies that assessed the effect of broader training in perinatal care included cost data, and costs are often not easily comparable. A study from Brazil compared two strategies for in-service training in essential newborn care, one based on a conventional 5-day classroom teaching course and the other, a self-directed course using a manual [98]. There were no differences detected between the 2 training strategies, although the cost for the self-directed learning was US $6260 per course in contrast to US $8160 per course for the conventional training. While the course covered all aspects of essential newborn care with a small component on resuscitation, we can use these costs as an estimate for a neonatal training course, which is likely to take a similar time period and investment. A rough estimate of intrapartum-related early neonatal deaths in these hospitals is 236 per 1000 live births [56]. If 30% of these could be averted by resuscitation [11], the number of lives saved would be 71, giving a cost per life saved for a comprehensive essential newborn care course of US $88. In an analysis of management of the non-breathing baby in Cirebon, Indonesia, amortizing the cost of training and equipment over a 5-year period was US $0.25 per baby delivered, or US $42 per life saved [34]. Including the follow-up and refresher training into routine maternal/neonatal care, the cost was reduced to US $0.16 per baby delivered and US $28 per intrapartum-related neonatal death averted. In summary, although the data are limited, the cost per life saved appears to be well below the currently accepted benchmarks for cost-effectiveness of 3 times the national Gross National Income per capita per DALY averted, which is currently around US $900 in South Asia and Sub-Saharan Africa.

4.4. Monitoring outcomes 

Monitoring the progress of neonatal resuscitation programs in low/middle-income settings is particularly challenging because of the lack of consistent case definitions and challenges to birth surveillance in community settings [21]. In a survey of program implementers, 35% did not collect routine data on intrapartum-related events, while those that did used vital registration, hospital records, population-based surveys, or CHW collected surveys [21]. A preferred indicator was the onset of convulsions in the first 24 hours of life, and death in the first week, of a baby weighing more than 2500g; however, this may not be feasible in community settings where birth weight is not often measured. The proportion of babies requiring resuscitation may be a reasonable indicator, and was considered more feasible than Apgar scores [21].

4.5. Scaling up in referral and first-level (district hospital) facilities 

National groups such as the National Neonatology Forum in India, the Perinatal Society of Malaysia, and the Ministry of Health/China (see Panel 1) have disseminated the American Academy of Pediatrics-American Heart Association Neonatal Resuscitation Program (NRP) at a national level via a train-the-trainer model [48], [99], [100]. Local programs that build a core of national master trainers and engage governments to incorporate neonatal resuscitation into national perinatal strategies have potential to reach a greater scale in that they promote local ownership, national policy changes to sustain and scale programs, and institutionalization of neonatal resuscitation into preservice training curricula, medical education, and licensure requirements [47], [101].

4.6. Should neonatal resuscitation be scaled in the community? 

There is evidence from India and Indonesia that community-based neonatal resuscitation may be both feasible and effective in reducing intrapartum-related mortality in settings with high rates of home birth and delivery attendance by community cadres, ranging from TBAs and CHWs to midwives. There are several forthcoming trials of community cadres providing home-based neonatal resuscitation that will add to this evidence base [102]. Whatever the results of these trials, training for community-level neonatal resuscitation should not occur in isolation without undertaking parallel efforts to strengthen health systems and the quality of, and linkages to, facility-based skilled emergency obstetric care. Only these efforts will avert the severe intrapartum insults that result in stillbirth and neonatal deaths.

In low-income countries, where the majority of births occur at home, if there are existing health cadres but skilled attendance is not achievable in the near future, then community-based resuscitation may be an option [103]. There are several key considerations required for an effective and sustainable program because community based-neonatal resuscitation may not be appropriate for every setting: (1) cadres must be present at birth, to recognize and assist the baby who does not breathe, and attend an adequate number of cases to maintain skills; (2) training should focus on essential newborn care first; (3) adequate systems should be in place for equipment procurement, cleaning/maintenance, resupply; (4) systems are required for supervision, refresher training, and monitoring of skills retention; and (5) functional referral systems should exist for post-resuscitation care and to follow-up resuscitated newborns. The Indonesian Ministry of Health took steps to scale neonatal resuscitation training nationally via district-level in-service training and incorporation of neonatal resuscitation training into the national curriculum. However, scaling up in a decentralized health system poses challenges because implementation requires district-level commitments and resources for training, equipment procurement, supervision, and monitoring.

A critical research question is how community-based resuscitation programs affect chronic disability among survivors. An evaluation of resuscitation training in India suggests that although intrapartum-related deaths were reduced, neonatal encephalopathy was unchanged, supporting the possibility of an increasing number of babies surviving with disability [8]; however, there are no follow-up data in community settings as yet.

Back to Article Outline

5. Conclusion 

Neonatal resuscitation, when implemented systematically by personnel using standard guidelines and competency-based training, has the potential to avert an estimated 192000 intrapartum-related neonatal deaths per year [11]. Furthermore, resuscitation may avert 5%–10% of deaths due to complications of preterm birth [11]. Neonatal resuscitation training should be incorporated into national neonatal strategies to complement the top priority of improved prevention of intrapartum-related deaths through obstetric care [6]. The dilemma is whether and how to apply this in settings where most of the babies who require resuscitation are born in the home, without skilled attendants. Possible strategies include training community cadres who already attend the majority of deliveries, ranging from skilled birth attendants to TBAs and CHWs, and linking them with the formal health system. A noteworthy concern is whether better resuscitation and improvements in care may increase the number of newborns who survive but are impaired; there is a dearth of follow-up data on newborns who required resuscitation in low- and middle-income countries, and particularly from community settings.

Many questions remain to be answered at all stages of the research pathway, from better description, through development of interventions, and particularly regarding delivery of this high impact intervention in the settings with highest burden yet weakest health systems [104]. The most effective strategy may vary by setting, and be strongly linked to which cadres are available to reach high coverage at the time of birth [104]. However, the fact remains that at the present time, a baby born in rural Africa or South Asia has a very small chance of being resuscitated at birth if they do not breathe, which is in stark contrast to the careful attention paid to avoiding injury at the time of birth for a baby born in a high-income country.

Back to Article Outline

Conflict of interest 

The authors have no conflicts of interest to declare.

Back to Article Outline

Funding 

The publication of this Supplement was supported by Saving Newborn Lives, a special program of Save the Children USA, funded by the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation.

Back to Article Outline

Acknowledgments 

We would like to thank Mary Kinney for her extraordinary assistance with the referencing and figures. For input on Panel 2 (Indonesia) we acknowledge Mardiana Agustini, Yancy Seamans, Vivien Tsu, James T. Litch and M. Sholeh Kosim. We would like to thank American Academy of Pediatrics, especially Eileen Schoen, for assistance with organizing permission to reprint algorithms and photos.

Back to Article Outline

References 

1. Palme-Kilander C. Methods of resuscitation in low-Apgar-score newborn infants–a national survey. Acta Paediatr. 1992;81(10):739–744
   • View In Article
   • MEDLINE
   • CrossRef
2. Kattwinkel J. Textbook of Neonatal Resuscitation. 5th ed.. Elk Grove Village, IL: American Academy of Pediatrics; 2005;
   • View In Article
3. World Health Organization. Basic Newborn Resuscitation: a practical guide. Geneva: WHO; 1997. Available at: http://www.who.int/reproductivehealth/publications/maternal_perinatal_health/MSM_98_1/en/index.html. Accessed July 6, 2009.
   • View In Article
4. Zhu XY, Fang HQ, Zeng SP, Li YM, Lin HL, Shi SZ. The impact of the neonatal resuscitation program guidelines (NRPG) on the neonatal mortality in a hospital in Zhuhai, China. Singapore Med J. 1997;38(11):485–487
   • View In Article
   • MEDLINE
5. Lawn JE, Lee AC, Kinney M, Sibley L, Carlo WA, Paul VK, et al. Two million intrapartum stillbirths and neonatal deaths: Where, why, and what can be done?. Int J Gynecol Obstet. 2009;107:S5–S19
   • View In Article
6. Hofmeyr J, Haws RA, Bergstrom S, Lee AC, Okong P, Oarmstadt GL. Obstetric care in low-resource settings: what, who, how, and overcoming challenges to scale up. Int J Gynecol Obstet. 2009;107:S21–S45
   • View In Article
7. Lawn J, Shibuya K, Stein C. No cry at birth: global estimates of intrapartum stillbirths and intrapartum-related neonatal deaths. Bull World Health Organ. 2005;83(6):409–417
   • View In Article
   • MEDLINE
8. Deorari AK, Paul VK, Singh M, Vidyasagar D. Impact of education and training on neonatal resuscitation practices in 14 teaching hospitals in India. Ann Trop Paediatr. 2001;21(1):29–33
   • View In Article
   • MEDLINE
   • CrossRef
9. Perlman JM, Risser R. Cardiopulmonary resuscitation in the delivery room. Associated clinical events. Arch Pediatr Adolesc Med. 1995 Jan;149(1):20–25
   • View In Article
   • MEDLINE
10. Newton O, English M. Newborn resuscitation: defining best practice for low-income settings. Trans R Soc Trop Med Hyg. 2006 Oct;100(10):899–908
    • View In Article
    • Abstract
    • Full Text
    • Full-Text PDF (197 KB)
    • CrossRef
11. Lee AC, Wall S, Cousens S, Carlo W, Niermeyer S, Keenan W, et al. Neonatal resuscitation and simple immediate newborn care for the prevention of neonatal deaths. Int J Epidemiol. In press.
    • View In Article
12. UNICEF . State of the World's Children 2009. New York: UNICEF; 2009;
    • View In Article
13. Niermeyer S, Van Reempts P, Kattwinkel J, Wiswell T, Burchfield D, Saugstad OD, et al. Resuscitation of newborns. Ann Emerg Med. 2001;37(4 Suppl):
    • View In Article
14. Singhal N, Bhutta ZA. Newborn resuscitation in resource-limited settings. Semin Fetal Neonatal Med. 2008 Dec;13(6):432–439
    • View In Article
    • Abstract
    • Full Text
    • Full-Text PDF (211 KB)
    • CrossRef
15. Schünemann HJ, Oxman AD, Brozek J, Glasziou P, Jaeschke R, Vist GE, et al. Grading quality of evidence and strength of recommendations for diagnostic tests and strategies. BMJ. 2008;336(7653):1106–1110
    • View In Article
    • CrossRef
16. Kattwinkel J, Niermeyer S, Nadkarni V, Tibballs J, Phillips B, Zideman D, et al. Resuscitation of the newly born infant: an advisory statement from the Pediatric Working Group of the International Liaison Committee on Resuscitation. Resuscitation. 1999 Feb;40(2):71–88
    • View In Article
    • Abstract
    • Full Text
    • Full-Text PDF (173 KB)
    • CrossRef
17. The International Liaison Committee on Resuscitation (ILCOR) consensus on science with treatment recommendations for pediatric and neonatal patients: neonatal resuscitation. Pediatrics. May 2006;117(5):e978–e988
    • View In Article
    • CrossRef
18. 2005 American Heart Association (AHA) Guidelines for Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation (CPR) and Emergency Cardiovascular Care (ECC) of Pediatric and Neonatal Patients: Neonatal Resuscitation Guidelines. American Heart Association, American Academy of Pediatrics. Pediatrics 2006;117:e1029-e1038.
    • View In Article
19. World Health Organization . Pocket Book of Hospital Care for Children: Guidelines for the Management of Common Illnesses with Limited Resources. Geneva: WHO; 2005;
    • View In Article
20. Niermeyer S for the Global Implementation Task Force. Helping Babies Breathe. Elk Grov Village, IL: American Academy of Pediatrics; 2009;
    • View In Article
21. Lawn JE, Manandhar A, Haws RA, Darmstadt GL. Reducing one million child deaths from birth asphyxia -- a survey of health systems gaps and priorities. Health Res Policy Syst. May 2007;5(4):
    • View In Article
22. Leach A, McArdle TF, Banya WA, Krubally O, Greenwood AM, Rands C, et al. Neonatal mortality in a rural area of The Gambia. Ann Trop Paediatr. 1999;19(1):33–43
    • View In Article
    • MEDLINE
    • CrossRef
23. Ghosh D, Bhakoo ON, Narang A, Dhall K. Simplified assessment of asphyxia at birth. J Trop Pediatr. 1997;43(2):108–111
    • View In Article
    • MEDLINE
24. Kumar R. Birth asphyxia in a rural community of north India. J Trop Pediatr. 1995;41(1):5–7
    • View In Article
    • MEDLINE
25. Kumar RA. Community-based study on birth asphyxia risk factors. Indian Prev Soc Med. 1995;26:53–59
    • View In Article
26. Vain NE, Szyld EG, Prudent LM, Wiswell TE, Aguilar AM, Vivas NI. Oropharyngeal and nasopharyngeal suctioning of meconium-stained neonates before delivery of their shoulders: multicentre, randomised controlled trial. Lancet. 2004;364(9434):597–602
    • View In Article
    • Abstract
    • Full Text
    • Full-Text PDF (91 KB)
    • CrossRef
27. Wiswell TE, Gannon CM, Jacob J, Goldsmith L, Szyld E, Weiss K, et al. Delivery room management of the apparently vigorous meconium-stained neonate: results of the multicenter, international collaborative trial. Pediatrics. 2000;105(1):1–7
    • View In Article
    • MEDLINE
    • CrossRef
28. Yoder BA. Meconium-stained amniotic fluid and respiratory complications: impact of selective tracheal suction. Obstet Gynecol. 1994;83(1):77–84
    • View In Article
    • MEDLINE
29. Velaphi S, Vidyasagar D. The pros and cons of suctioning at the perineum (intrapartum) and post-delivery with and without meconium. Semin Fetal Neonatal Med. 2008;13(6):375–382
    • View In Article
    • Abstract
    • Full Text
    • Full-Text PDF (422 KB)
    • CrossRef
30. Cordero L, Hon EH. Neonatal bradycardia following nasopharyngeal stimulation. J Pediatr. 1971;78(3):441–447
    • View In Article
    • Abstract
    • Full-Text PDF (486 KB)
    • CrossRef
31. Baskett P, Zorab J. The resuscitation greats. Henning Ruben MD, FFARCS(I), FFARCS. The Ruben valve and the AMBU bag. Resuscitation. 2003;56(2):123–127
    • View In Article
    • Full Text
    • Full-Text PDF (287 KB)
    • CrossRef
32. Palme-Kilander C, Tunell R. Pulmonary gas exchange during facemask ventilation immediately after birth. Arch Dis Child. 1993;68(1 Spec No):11–16
    • View In Article
    • CrossRef
33. Massawe A, Kilewo C, Irani S, Verma RJ, Chakrapam AB, Ribbe T, et al. Assessment of mouth-to-mask ventilation in resuscitation of asphyctic newborn babies. A pilot study. Trop Med Int Health. 1996;1(6):865–873
    • View In Article
    • MEDLINE
    • CrossRef
34. PATH . Reducing Birth Asphyxia Through the Bidan di Desa Program in Cirebon, Indonesia: Final report submitted by Program for Appropriate Technology in Health (PATH) to Save the Children US. Jakarta, Indonesia: PATH; Mar 15 2006;
    • View In Article
35. Bang AT, Bang RA, Baitule SB, Reddy HM, Deshmukh MD. Management of birth asphyxia in home deliveries in rural Gadchiroli: the effect of two types of birth attendants and of resuscitating with mouth-to-mouth, tube-mask or bag-mask. J Perinatol. 2005;25(Suppl 1):S72–S81
    • View In Article
    • CrossRef
36. Ramji S, Ahuja S, Thirupuram S, Rootwelt T, Rooth G, Saugstad OD. Resuscitation of asphyxic newborn infants with room air or 100% oxygen. Pediatr Res. 1993;34(6):809–812
    • View In Article
    • MEDLINE
    • CrossRef
37. Ramji S, Rasaily R, Mishra PK, Narang A, Jayam S, Kapoor AN, et al. Resuscitation of asphyxiated newborns with room air or 100% oxygen at birth: a multicentric clinical trial. Indian Pediatr. 2003;40(6):510–517
    • View In Article
    • MEDLINE
38. Saugstad OD, Rootwelt T, Aalen O. Resuscitation of asphyxiated newborn infants with room air or oxygen: an international controlled trial: the Resair 2 study. Pediatrics. 1998;102(1):e1
    • View In Article
    • CrossRef
39. Vento M, Asensi M, Sastre J, Lloret A, Garcia-Sala F, Vina J. Oxidative stress in asphyxiated term infants resuscitated with 100% oxygen. J Pediatr. 2003;142(3):240–246
    • View In Article
    • Abstract
    • Full Text
    • Full-Text PDF (174 KB)
    • CrossRef
40. Tan A, Schulze A, O'Donnell CP, Davis PG. Air versus oxygen for resuscitation of infants at birth. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2005;(2):CD002273
    • View In Article
41. Whitelaw CC, Goldsmith LJ. Comparison of two techniques for determining the presence of a pulse in an infant. Acad Emerg Med. 1997;4(2):153–154
    • View In Article
    • MEDLINE
    • CrossRef
42. Burchfield DJ, Berkowitz ID, Berg RA, Goldberg RN. Medications in neonatal resuscitation. Ann Emerg Med. 1993;22(2 Pt 2):435–439
    • View In Article
    • Abstract
    • Full-Text PDF (418 KB)
    • CrossRef
43. Airede KI. Should we resuscitate? Ethical dilemmas. Ann Trop Paediatr. 1991;11(2):
    • View In Article
44. Zhu X. Neonatal resuscitation. World Health Forum. 1993;14(3):289–290
    • View In Article
    • MEDLINE
45. Vakrilova L, Elleau C, Sluncheva B. French-Bulgarian program "Resuscitation of the newborn in a delivery room"–results and perspectives. Akush Ginekol (Sofiia). 2005;44(3):35–40
    • View In Article
    • MEDLINE
46. Chomba E, McClure EM, Wright LL, Carlo WA, Chakraborty H, Harris H. Effect of WHO newborn care training on neonatal mortality by education. Ambul Pediatr. 2008;8(5):300–304
    • View In Article
    • Abstract
    • Full Text
    • Full-Text PDF (124 KB)
    • CrossRef
47. Jeffery HE, Kocova M, Tozija F, Gjorgiev D, Pop-Lazarova M, Foster K, et al. The impact of evidence-based education on a perinatal capacity-building initiative in Macedonia. Med Educ. 2004;38(4):435–447
    • View In Article
    • MEDLINE
    • CrossRef
48. Boo NY. Neonatal resuscitation programme in Malaysia: an eight-year experience. Singapore Med J. 2009;50(2):152–159
    • View In Article
49. Daga AS, Daga SR, Dighole RV, Patil RP, Ratil MR. Evaluation of training programme for traditional birth attendants in newborn care. Indian Pediatr. 1997;34(11):1021–1024
    • View In Article
    • MEDLINE
50. Kapoor SK, Anand K, Kumar G. Risk factors for stillbirths in a secondary level hospital at Ballabgarh, Haryana: a case control study. Indian J Pediatr. 1994;61(2):161–166
    • View In Article
    • MEDLINE
    • CrossRef
51. Kumar R. Training traditional birth attendants for resuscitation of newborns. Trop Doct. 1995 Jan;25(1):29–30
    • View In Article
    • MEDLINE
52. Carlo W FIRST BREATH study group. Effect of Essential Newborn Care (ENC) Training: A Global Network Study of Site Differences. Honolulu, HI: Pediatric Academic Societies; 2009;
    • View In Article
53. Jones I, Handley AJ, Whitfield R, Newcombe R, Chamberlain D. A preliminary feasibility study of a short DVD-based distance-learning package for basic life support. Resuscitation. 2007;75(2):350–356
    • View In Article
    • Abstract
    • Full Text
    • Full-Text PDF (215 KB)
    • CrossRef
54. Plotnikoff R, Moore PJ. Retention of cardiopulmonary resuscitation knowledge and skills by 11- and 12-year-old children. Med J Aust 1989;150(6):296, 298–9, 302.
    • View In Article
55. Van KE, Delooz HH, Moens GF. The effectiveness of repeated cardiopulmonary resuscitation training in a school population. Resuscitation. 1989;17(3):211–222
    • View In Article
    • Abstract
    • Full-Text PDF (780 KB)
    • CrossRef
56. Portman RJ, Carter BS, Gaylord MS, Murphy MG, Thieme RE, Merenstein GB. Predicting neonatal morbidity after perinatal asphyxia: a scoring system. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1990;162(1):174–182
    • View In Article
    • MEDLINE
57. Sasidharan P. Breathing pattern abnormalities in full term asphyxiated newborn infants. Arch Dis Child. 1992;67(4 Spec No):440–442
    • View In Article
    • CrossRef
58. Pillekamp F, Hermann C, Keller T, von GA, Kribs A, Roth B. Factors influencing apnea and bradycardia of prematurity - implications for neurodevelopment. Neonatology. 2007;91(3):155–161
    • View In Article
    • MEDLINE
    • CrossRef
59. Schmidt B, Roberts RS, Davis P, Doyle LW, Barrington KJ, Ohlsson A, et al. Caffeine therapy for apnea of prematurity. N Engl J Med. 2006;354(20):2112–2121
    • View In Article
    • CrossRef
60. Rosenberg AA. Cerebral blood flow and O2 metabolism after asphyxia in neonatal lambs. Pediatr Res. 1986;20(8):778–782
    • View In Article
    • MEDLINE
    • CrossRef
61. Lindstrom K, Pryds O, Greisen G. Oxygen at birth and prolonged cerebral vasoconstriction in premature infants. Arch Dis Child. 1995;73:F81–F85
    • View In Article
62. Yis U, Kurul SH, Kumral A, Cilaker S, Tugyan K, Genc S, et al. Hyperoxic exposure leads to cell death in the developing brain. Brain Dev. 2008;30(9):556–562
    • View In Article
    • Abstract
    • Full Text
    • Full-Text PDF (2906 KB)
    • CrossRef
63. Ahdab-Barmada M, Moossy J, Painter M. Pontosubicular necrosis and hyperoxemia. Pediatrics. 1980;66(6):840–847
    • View In Article
    • MEDLINE
64. Burns CM, Rutherford MA, Boardman JP, Cowan FM. Patterns of cerebral injury and neurodevelopmental outcomes after symptomatic neonatal hypoglycemia. Pediatrics. 2008;122(1):65–74
    • View In Article
    • CrossRef
65. Hays SP, Smith EO, Sunehag AL. Hyperglycemia is a risk factor for early death and morbidity in extremely low birth-weight infants. Pediatrics. 2006;118(5):1811–1818
    • View In Article
    • CrossRef
66. Kao LS, Morris BH, Lally KP, Stewart CD, Huseby V, Kennedy KA. Hyperglycemia and morbidity and mortality in extremely low birth weight infants. J Perinatol. 2006;26(12):730–736
    • View In Article
    • MEDLINE
    • CrossRef
67. Oh W. Renal function and fluid therapy in high risk infants. Biol Neonate. 1988;53(4):230–236
    • View In Article
    • MEDLINE
68. Smith A, Prakash P, Nesbitt J, McIntosh N. The vasopressin response to severe birth asphyxia. Early Hum Dev. 1990;22(3):119–129
    • View In Article
    • MEDLINE
    • CrossRef
69. Bartons J, Figueras J, Jimenez R, Gaya J, Cruz MA. Vasopressin in cerebrospinal fluid of newborns with hypoxic-ischemic encephalopathy, preliminary report. J Perinat Med. 1993;21(5):399–403
    • View In Article
    • MEDLINE
    • CrossRef
70. Kecskes Z, Healy G, Jensen A. Fluid restriction for term infants with hypoxic-ischaemic encephalopathy following perinatal asphyxia. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2005;(3):
    • View In Article
71. Miller SP, Weiss J, Barnwell A, Ferriero DM, Latal-Hajnal B, Ferrer-Rogers A, et al. Seizure-associated brain injury in term newborns with perinatal asphyxia. Neurology. 2002;58(4):542–548
    • View In Article
    • MEDLINE
72. Wirrell EC, Armstrong EA, Osman LD, Yager JY. Prolonged seizures exacerbate perinatal hypoxic-ischemic brain damage. Pediatr Res. 2001;50(4):445–454
    • View In Article
    • MEDLINE
    • CrossRef
73. WHO , UNFPA , UNICEF  The World Bank Group. Managing newborn problems: a guide for doctors, nurses and midwives. Geneva: WHO; 2003;
    • View In Article
74. Evans DJ, Levene MI, Tsakmakis M. Anticonvulsants for preventing mortality and morbidity in full term newborns with perinatal asphyxia. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2007;(3):CD001240
    • View In Article
75. Jayashree G, Dutta AK, Sarna MS, Saili A. Acute renal failure in asphyxiated newborns. Indian Pediatr. 1991;28(1):19–23
    • View In Article
    • MEDLINE
76. Chernick V, Manfreda J, De B. V, Davi M, Rigatto H, Seshia M. Clinical trial of naloxone in birth asphyxia. J Pediatr. 1988;113(3):519–525
    • View In Article
    • Abstract
    • Full-Text PDF (565 KB)
    • CrossRef
77. Grylack L. Use of naloxone in asphyxiated neonates. J Pediatr. 1989 Mar;114(3):509
    • View In Article
    • Full-Text PDF (145 KB)
    • CrossRef
78. Chaudhari T, McGuire W. Allopurinol for preventing mortality and morbidity in newborn infants with suspected hypoxic-ischaemic encephalopathy. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2008;(2):CD006817
    • View In Article
79. Hunt R, Osborn D. Dopamine for prevention of morbidity and mortality in term newborn infants with suspected perinatal asphyxia. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2002;(3):CD003484
    • View In Article
80. Shankaran S. The postnatal management of the asphyxiated term infant. Clin Perinatol. 2002 Dec;29(4):675–692
    • View In Article
    • Full Text
    • Full-Text PDF (125 KB)
    • CrossRef
81. Chumas PD, Del Bigio MR, Drake JM, Tuor UI. A comparison of the protective effect of dexamethasone to other potential prophylactic agents in a neonatal rat model of cerebral hypoxia-ischemia. J Neurosurg. 1993;79(3):414–420
    • View In Article
    • MEDLINE
    • CrossRef
82. Day RL, Caliguiri L, Kamenski C, Ehrlich F. Body temperature and survival of premature infants. Pediatrics. 1964;34:171–181
    • View In Article
    • MEDLINE
83. Darmstadt GL, Bhutta ZA, Cousens S, Adam T, Walker N, De Bernis L. Evidence-based, cost-effective interventions: how many newborn babies can we save?. Lancet. 2005;365(9463):977–988
    • View In Article
    • Abstract
    • Full Text
    • Full-Text PDF (146 KB)
    • CrossRef
84. Jardine DS, Haschke RH. An animal model of life-threatening hyperthermia during infancy. J Appl Physiol. 1992;73(1):340–345
    • View In Article
    • MEDLINE
85. Perlstein PH, Edwards NK, Sutherland JM. Apnea in premature infants and incubator-air-temperature changes. N Engl J Med. 1970;282(9):461–466
    • View In Article
    • MEDLINE
    • CrossRef
86. Laptook AR, O'Shea M, Shankaran S, Bhaskar B. Neonatal Network. Adverse neurodevelopmental outcomes among extremely low birth weight infants with a normal head ultrasound: prevalence and antecedents. Pediatrics. 2005;115(3):673–680
    • View In Article
    • CrossRef
87. American Academy of Pediatrics Committee on Environmental Hazards CoFaNCoAaPP. Hyperthermia from malfunctioning radiant heaters. Pediatrics. 1977;59:1041–1042
    • View In Article
88. Edwards AD, Azzopardi DV. Therapeutic hypothermia following perinatal asphyxia. Arch Dis Child Fetal Neonatal Ed. 2006;91(2):F127–F131
    • View In Article
    • MEDLINE
    • CrossRef
89. Jacobs S, Hunt R, Tarnow-Mordi W, Inder T, Davis P. Cooling for newborns with hypoxic ischaemic encephalopathy. Cochrane database syst rev (Online). 2007;(4):CD003311
    • View In Article
90. Azzopardi D, Brocklehurst P, Edwards D, Halliday H, Levene M, Thoresen M, et al. The TOBY Study. Whole body hypothermia for the treatment of perinatal asphyxial encephalopathy: a randomised controlled trial. BMC Pediatr. 2008;8:17
    • View In Article
    • CrossRef
91. Robertson NJ, Nakakeeto M, Hagmann C, Cowan FM, Acolet D, Iwata O, et al. Therapeutic hypothermia for birth asphyxia in low-resource settings: a pilot randomised controlled trial. Lancet. 2008;372(9641):801–803
    • View In Article
    • Full Text
    • Full-Text PDF (77 KB)
    • CrossRef
92. Horn A, Thompson C, Woods D, Nel A, Bekker A, Rhoda N, et al. Induced hypothermia for infants with hypoxic- ischemic encephalopathy using a servo-controlled fan: an exploratory pilot study. Pediatrics. 2009;123(6):e1090–e1098
    • View In Article
    • CrossRef
93. Opiyo N, Were F, Govedi F, Fegan G, Wasunna A, English M. Effect of newborn resuscitation training on health worker practices in Pumwani Hospital, Kenya. PLoS ONE. 2008;3(2):e1599
    • View In Article
    • CrossRef
94. Harvey SA, Blandon YC, Caw-Binns A, Sandino I, Urbina L, Rodriguez C, et al. Are skilled birth attendants really skilled? A measurement method, some disturbing results and a potential way forward. Bull World Health Organ. 2007;85(10):783–790
    • View In Article
    • CrossRef
95. Kaczorowski J, Levitt C, Hammond M, Outerbridge E, Grad R, Rothman A, et al. Retention of neonatal resuscitation skills and knowledge: a randomized controlled trial. Fam Med. 1998;30(10):705–711
    • View In Article
    • MEDLINE
96. Carlo WA, Wright LL, Chomba E, McClure EM, Carlo ME, Bann CM, et al. Educational impact of the neonatal resuscitation program in low-risk delivery centers in a developing country. J Pediatr. 2009;154(4):504–508
    • View In Article
    • Abstract
    • Full Text
    • Full-Text PDF (386 KB)
    • CrossRef
97. Indira N. 2009. Personal Communication.
    • View In Article
98. Vidal SA, Ronfani L, da Mota SS, Mello MJ, dos Santos ER, Buzzetti R, et al. Comparison of two training strategies for essential newborn care in Brazil. Bull World Health Organ. 2001;79(11):1024–1031
    • View In Article
    • MEDLINE
99. Deorari AK, Paul VK, Singh M, Vidyasagar D. The National Movement of Neonatal Resuscitation in India. J Trop Pediatr. 2000;46(5):315–317
    • View In Article
    • MEDLINE
    • CrossRef
100. Wang H, Ye H, Niermeyer S. Asphyxia decreases in 10 Provinces of the People's Republic of China after training with the Neonatal Resuscitation Program. i. 5-4-2008. Honolulu, Hi: Pediatric Academic Societies; 2008;
     • View In Article
101. English M, Niermeyer S. First Breath. 2009. Personal Communication.
     • View In Article
102. Hamer D, Carlo W, Costello T. 2009. Personal Communication.
     • View In Article
103. Darmstadt GL, Lee AC, Cousens S, Sibley L, Zulfiqar A, Bhutta ZA, et al 60million non-facility births: Who can deliver in community settings to reduce intrapartum-related deaths?. Int J Gynecol Obstet. 2009;107:S89–S112
     • View In Article
104. Lawn JE, Kinney M, Lee AC, Chopra M, Donnay F, Paul VK, et al. Reducing intrapartum-related deaths and disability: Can the health system deliver?. Int J Gynecol Obstet. 2009;107:S123–S142
     • View In Article
105. Tholpadi SR, Sudhindra BK, Bhutani VK. Neonatal Resuscitation Program in Rural Kerela (India) To Reduce Infant Mortality Attributed to Perinatal Asphyxia. J Perinatol. 2000;20:460–488
     • View In Article
     • CrossRef
106. Kumar R. Effectiveness of training traditional birth attendants for management of asphyxia neonatorum using resuscitation equipment. Prenat Neonatal Med. 1998;3(2):225–260
     • View In Article
107. Neonatal Resuscitation Program. American Academy of Pediatrics 2009. Available at: http://www.aap.org/nrp/nrpmain.html. Accessed July 6, 2009.
     • View In Article
108. Richmond S. Resuscitation Guidelines: Newborn Life Support. Resuscitation Council UK; 2005;
     • View In Article
109. WHO . A Health Situation Assessment of the People's Republic of China (Country Health Information Profile 2005). World Health Organization; 2009;Available at: www.wpro.who.int/countries/2008/chn/health_situation.htm. Accessed July 6, 2009
     • View In Article
110. Shankar A, Sebayang S, Guarenti L, Utomo B, Islam M, Fauveau V, et al. The village-based midwife programme in Indonesia. Lancet. 2008;371(9620):1226–1229
     • View In Article
     • Full Text
     • Full-Text PDF (711 KB)
     • CrossRef
111. Bang AT, Bang RA, Baitule SB, Reddy MH, Deshmukh MD. Effect of home-based neonatal care and management of sepsis on neonatal mortality: field trial in rural India. Lancet. 1999;354(9194):1955–1961
     • View In Article
     • Abstract
     • Full Text
     • Full-Text PDF (112 KB)
     • CrossRef

Back to Article Outline

Panel 1. Freedom of Breath, Fountain of Life: A nationwide neonatal resuscitation program, China