Experiences of 6 years quality assurance in obstetrics in Nigeria – a critical review of results and obstacles
Rattachement africain : Nigéria, de, us. Niveau de preuve : code pays fourni par la source.
Le résumé fourni par la source
OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to monitor the maternal mortality ratio (MMR) in 19 general hospitals after introducing quality assurance in four states in Nigeria. METHODS: Data collection with a structured maternity record book started in 2008 in ten rural hospitals in Kano and Kaduna State. In 2011, five hospitals from Federal Capital Territory Abuja were added, whilst in 2013 four hospitals were added from Ondo State. The routine data collection was conducted by experienced midwives and supervised by obstetricians from each of the states. However, the data from all four states were collated centrally at Aminu Kano Teaching Hospital for analysis. RESULTS: From 2008 to 2013, 121,808 deliveries were evaluated; MMR fell from 1380 to 360/100,000 in Kaduna State, whilst for Kano State there was a gradual reduction of MMR from 2100/100,000 in 2008 to 1070/100,000 in 2011, and then it increased to 2150/100,000 in 2013. Ondo state had the lowest MMR of 180/100,000 in 2013 followed by Abuja with 240/100,000. The median cesarean section rate was 8.19%, (range 0.97-22.53%), eclampsia/preeclampsia was 4.43% (range 0-56.55%), and postpartum hemorrhage was 3.36% (range 0.81-11.4%). CONCLUSIONS: Quality assurance in rural hospitals generates the awareness necessary to improve maternal health and lead to reduction of MMR.
Ce résumé expose les affirmations des auteurs. BNTIC ne l’interprète pas comme une validation indépendante des résultats.
Le contrôle bibliographique ouvert
DOI retrouvé dans Crossref DOI retrouvé ; titre concordant.
- Titre Crossref
- Experiences of 6 years quality assurance in obstetrics in Nigeria – a critical review of results and obstacles
- Date Crossref
- 01/01/2016
- Éditeur
- Walter de Gruyter GmbH
- Type
- journal-article
Ce recoupement confirme des métadonnées liées au DOI. Il ne confirme ni la méthode ni les conclusions de l’étude, et il ne compte pas comme une seconde source scientifique indépendante.
Les institutions déclarées
Une affiliation ne permet pas de déduire la nationalité d’un auteur.