Clean delivery kit use in low-and middle-income countries: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

IF 2.8 2区 医学 Q1 OBSTETRICS & GYNECOLOGY
Natnael Atnafu Gebeyehu, Yibeltal Assefa Atalay, Kirubel Dagnaw Tegegne, Gebeyaw Biset, Kelemu Abebe Gelaw
{"title":"Clean delivery kit use in low-and middle-income countries: a systematic review and meta-analysis.","authors":"Natnael Atnafu Gebeyehu, Yibeltal Assefa Atalay, Kirubel Dagnaw Tegegne, Gebeyaw Biset, Kelemu Abebe Gelaw","doi":"10.1186/s12884-024-06913-1","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>The use of Clean Delivery Kits (CDKs) promotes healthy birth outcome. Nevertheless, representative data are lacking for low- and middle-income countries. Thus, study aimed at determining the overall estimate of clean delivery kit use among low and middle income countries.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A comprehensive review of the Science Direct, Scopus, Google Scholar, EMBASE, and PubMed databases was part of the current investigation. Microsoft Excel (version 14) was used to extract the data, and STATA statistical software was used for analysis. The presence of publication bias was assessed using DOI Plots in the study. By calculating I<sup>2</sup> and doing an overall estimation analysis, heterogeneity was evaluated. Furthermore, a subgroup analysis was carried out according to the sample size, publication year, and study design.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Out of 654 articles, 12 met the inclusion criteria and were included in the analysis, covering 19,889 study participants. In low- and middle-income countries, the pooled proportion of clean delivery kits use was 54% (95%CI: 31. 60, 76.82, I<sup>2</sup> = 70%). Notably, the cross-sectional study revealed the lowest incidence of delivery kit use, with a proportion of 54.29%, while the cohort study revealed the highest proportion, at 72.37%. In studies with sample sizes < 500, clean delivery kit use was higher (60.28%) compared to studies with sample sizes > 500 (45.75%). Lastly, the proportion of clean delivery kits was found to be 62.53% for studies published after 2010, compared to 48.25% for studies published before 2010.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>In summary, the proportion of clean delivery kits use was 54%. Healthcare systems should focus on different strategies to improve clean delivery kit use.</p>","PeriodicalId":9033,"journal":{"name":"BMC Pregnancy and Childbirth","volume":"24 1","pages":"791"},"PeriodicalIF":2.8000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"BMC Pregnancy and Childbirth","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s12884-024-06913-1","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"OBSTETRICS & GYNECOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: The use of Clean Delivery Kits (CDKs) promotes healthy birth outcome. Nevertheless, representative data are lacking for low- and middle-income countries. Thus, study aimed at determining the overall estimate of clean delivery kit use among low and middle income countries.

Methods: A comprehensive review of the Science Direct, Scopus, Google Scholar, EMBASE, and PubMed databases was part of the current investigation. Microsoft Excel (version 14) was used to extract the data, and STATA statistical software was used for analysis. The presence of publication bias was assessed using DOI Plots in the study. By calculating I2 and doing an overall estimation analysis, heterogeneity was evaluated. Furthermore, a subgroup analysis was carried out according to the sample size, publication year, and study design.

Results: Out of 654 articles, 12 met the inclusion criteria and were included in the analysis, covering 19,889 study participants. In low- and middle-income countries, the pooled proportion of clean delivery kits use was 54% (95%CI: 31. 60, 76.82, I2 = 70%). Notably, the cross-sectional study revealed the lowest incidence of delivery kit use, with a proportion of 54.29%, while the cohort study revealed the highest proportion, at 72.37%. In studies with sample sizes < 500, clean delivery kit use was higher (60.28%) compared to studies with sample sizes > 500 (45.75%). Lastly, the proportion of clean delivery kits was found to be 62.53% for studies published after 2010, compared to 48.25% for studies published before 2010.

Conclusion: In summary, the proportion of clean delivery kits use was 54%. Healthcare systems should focus on different strategies to improve clean delivery kit use.

中低收入国家清洁接生包的使用情况:系统回顾和荟萃分析。
背景:使用清洁接生包(CDK)可促进健康分娩。然而,低收入和中等收入国家缺乏具有代表性的数据。因此,本研究旨在确定中低收入国家使用清洁接生包的总体情况:本次调查对 Science Direct、Scopus、Google Scholar、EMBASE 和 PubMed 数据库进行了全面查阅。使用 Microsoft Excel(14 版)提取数据,并使用 STATA 统计软件进行分析。研究中使用 DOI 图评估是否存在发表偏倚。通过计算 I2 和进行总体估计分析,对异质性进行了评估。此外,还根据样本量、发表年份和研究设计进行了分组分析:在 654 篇文章中,有 12 篇符合纳入标准并被纳入分析,涉及 19,889 名研究参与者。在中低收入国家,使用清洁接生包的总比例为 54%(95%CI:31.60, 76.82, I2 = 70%)。值得注意的是,横断面研究显示使用接生包的比例最低,为 54.29%,而队列研究显示使用接生包的比例最高,为 72.37%。在样本量为 500 的研究中(45.75%)。最后,在 2010 年之后发表的研究中,使用清洁接生包的比例为 62.53%,而在 2010 年之前发表的研究中,使用清洁接生包的比例为 48.25%:总之,清洁接生包的使用比例为 54%。医疗保健系统应关注不同的策略,以提高清洁接生包的使用率。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
BMC Pregnancy and Childbirth
BMC Pregnancy and Childbirth OBSTETRICS & GYNECOLOGY-
CiteScore
4.90
自引率
6.50%
发文量
845
审稿时长
3-8 weeks
期刊介绍: BMC Pregnancy & Childbirth is an open access, peer-reviewed journal that considers articles on all aspects of pregnancy and childbirth. The journal welcomes submissions on the biomedical aspects of pregnancy, breastfeeding, labor, maternal health, maternity care, trends and sociological aspects of pregnancy and childbirth.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信