China's facility-based birth strategy and neonatal mortality: a population-based epidemiological study

Summary Background China's success in improving the quality of and access to obstetric care in hospitals offers an opportunity to examine the effect of a large-scale facility-based strategy on neonatal mortality. We aimed to establish this effect by assessing how the institutional strategy of i...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:The Lancet (British edition) 2011-10, Vol.378 (9801), p.1493-1500
Hauptverfasser: Feng, Xing Lin, PhD, Guo, Sufang, Prof, Hipgrave, David, PhD, Zhu, Jun, Prof, Zhang, Lingli, MD, Song, Li, PhD, Yang, Qing, PhD, Guo, Yan, Prof, Ronsmans, Carine, Prof
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
Beschreibung
Zusammenfassung:Summary Background China's success in improving the quality of and access to obstetric care in hospitals offers an opportunity to examine the effect of a large-scale facility-based strategy on neonatal mortality. We aimed to establish this effect by assessing how the institutional strategy of intrapartum care has affected neonatal mortality and its regional inequalities. Methods We did a population-based epidemiological study of China's National Maternal and Child Mortality Surveillance System from 1996 to 2008. We used data from 116 surveillance sites in China (37 urban districts and 79 rural counties) to examine neonatal mortality by cause, socioeconomic region, and place of birth, with Poisson regression to calculate relative risks. Rural counties were categorised into types 1–4, with type 4 being the least developed. We report attributable risks and preventable fractions for hospital births versus home births. Findings Neonatal mortality decreased by 62% between 1996 and 2008. The rate of neonatal mortality was much lower for hospital births than for home births in all regions, with relative risks (RR) ranging from 0·30 (95% CI 0·22–0·40) in type 2 rural counties, to 0·52 (0·33–0·83) in type 4 counties (p
ISSN:0140-6736
1474-547X
DOI:10.1016/S0140-6736(11)61096-9