Posts Tagged ‘maternal death’

Ugandan maternal deaths in the NYT

Tuesday, August 2nd, 2011 by Christopher Lindahl

Recently, The New York Times featured a piece on free health care in Sierra Leone for mothers and children. Maternal health had another prominent space in The Times last weekend with a discussion of maternal deaths in Uganda, which have led to a lawsuit against the Ugandan government. The article was featured on the front page of Saturday’s edition.

 

The Times reports:

Jennifer Anguko was slowly bleeding to death right in the maternity ward of a major public hospital. Only a lone midwife was on duty, the hospital later admitted, and no doctor examined her for 12 hours. An obstetrician who investigated the case said Ms. Anguko, the mother of three young children, had arrived in time to be saved.

 

Her husband, Valente Inziku, a teacher, frantically changed her blood-soaked bedclothes as her life seeped away. “I’m going to leave you,” she told him as he cradled her. He said she pleaded, “Look after our children.”

 

Half of the 340,000 deaths of women from pregnancy-related causes each year occur in Africa, almost all in anonymity. But Ms. Anguko was a popular elected official seeking treatment in a 400-bed hospital, and a lawsuit over her death may be the first legal test of an African government’s obligation to provide basic maternal care.

  • Share/Bookmark

Maternal Health Supplies Community of Practice

Monday, March 21st, 2011 by Christopher Lindahl

The MHTF is proud to launch, with Population Action International, the Maternal Health Supplies Community of Practice.

 

Written by: Jess Bernstein, Project Manager, RH Supplies, Population Action International

 

Why a Community of Practice for Maternal Health Supplies? Because no woman should die during childbirth because the shelves in her clinic were bare. Because no infant should lose their mother before they have a chance to meet her. Because most of the maternal health supplies that save women’s lives are inexpensive and available. Because Coca Cola is more available than magnesium sulfate and oxytocin.

 

Governments must take a stand to meet MDG 5, and supplies are key to progress. We have learned from a decade of success in RH supplies advocacy that it takes a community to create sustainable progress on a large scale. Together, we can make a difference to increase the availability of these supplies, through logistical improvements, adequate and innovative financing, improved programs and policies, and with a forum for advocacy to hold those in positions of responsibility accountable. Join us in this community. Let’s make progress together to make sure that the bare shelves become full shelves – and that women survive the births of their children.

 

To participate in the MH Supplies Community of Practice, register on the MHTF website and visit the Discussion Forum, view MH Supplies Resources, and RSVP for the CoP meeting in April.

  • Share/Bookmark

Weekend Reading

Friday, January 21st, 2011 by Christopher Lindahl

Recently on the MHTF blog:

  1. Wendy J. Graham spoke about maternal mortality estimation
  2. EngenderHealth Medical Director Roy Jacobstein wrote about contraceptive implants in the UK
  3. Anrudh K. Jain reacted to a maternal death in India

Some reading for the weekend:

  1. WHO and universal coverage
  2. Low cost health care in India
  3. An advocacy guide for parliamentarians
  4. Men and women may experience diseases differently
  • Share/Bookmark

Saving Women’s Lives: Reducing Unnecessary Delays to Comprehensive EmOC

Thursday, January 20th, 2011 by Raji Mohanam

Written by: Anrudh K. Jain, Ph.D., Distinguished Scholar, Population Council, New York

 

Vapari Bai’s death (Human Rights Watch, January 10, 2011) due to eclampsia in Barwani district hospital in Madhya Pradesh, India highlights the need of reducing unnecessary delays in reaching the appropriate health facility equipped to offer comprehensive emergency obstetric care (EmOC) services through an effective referral system, between communities and facilities without these services with those facilities equipped to offer these services.  Investigation of maternal deaths, while important, may have an unwarranted side effect of providers refusing care to those who really need it.

 

It is well known that 15% to 20% of pregnant women experience life threatening complications (e.g. hemorrhage, sepsis, eclampsia, and obstructed labor) around the process of childbirth (pregnancy, delivery, and post-partum). However, these complications cannot be predicted well in advance, but they are the ones which require timely and appropriate care. What to do when these complications start to appear? Finding an appropriate solution has been a major challenge in efforts to reduce maternal mortality in developing countries.

 

The Government of India is implementing a very ambitious program of conditional cash transfer—the Janani Suraksha Yojna (JSY)—to reduce maternal mortality ratio (MMR) by promoting institutional deliveries. The district level surveys indicate an increase in institutional deliveries from 41% to 54% between 2002/04 DLHS-2 and 2007/09 DLHS-3. However, the statistical analysis of these data published in The Lancet failed to establish any effect of JSY on MMR.

 

A rise in institutional deliveries is likely to decrease MMR if women experiencing complications around childbirth are shifted from home to institutions with comprehensive EmOC, and if the case-fatality ratio (CFR) among women with complicated deliveries at these facilities decreases. However, CFR among women with complicated deliveries at health facilities, as highlighted by the death of Vapri Bai, may be increasing for two reasons. First, women experiencing complications during childbirth may also be experiencing additional delays in reaching the appropriate institution because they are first taken to health facilities which do not have comprehensive EmOC. Second, those reaching a facility with comprehensive EmOC services may not be getting appropriate care because of the increased workload due to JSY.

 

It is essential to increase the number of facilities offering comprehensive EMoC and to improve quality of care by training providers at these facilities to offer timely care to women with complications. In the meantime, it is essential to clearly identify and label facilities in a district/state equipped to offer comprehensive EmOC. In addition, providers at other facilities (CHCs, PHCs and even district hospitals) without comprehensive EmOC and providers in communities (ASHAs, TBAs, and Dais) must be trained to identify women experiencing complications and refer them directly to the facility equipped to provide comprehensive EmOC. Linking facilities without comprehensive EmOC to those with comprehensive EmOC through ambulances and other transport facilities would also help.  Vapari Bai would, perhaps, still be alive if the family had the information to take her directly to the medical college hospital in Indore instead of first going to the district hospital and wasting valuable time and resources.

  • Share/Bookmark

Maternal Mortality, Human Rights and Accountability

Friday, November 19th, 2010 by Christopher Lindahl

In September in Geneva, experts in human rights and maternal health gathered to discuss “good practices regarding maternal death audits, the role of national human rights institutions, and the contribution of judicial procedures.” Participants included staff from Human Rights Watch, the Center for Reproductive Rights, Amnesty International and OHCHR, among others.

The presentations from the roundtable and the meeting report can be found online through the International Initiative on Maternal Mortality and Human Rights.

  • Share/Bookmark

The Five Steps to Achieving MDG 5 and Saving Mothers’ Lives

Wednesday, September 22nd, 2010 by Raji Mohanam

This is a cross-posting. The post was first published on the The Huffington Post

Written By: Pam Barnes, President, EngenderHealth

This week, the world’s leaders will descend on New York City for a perfect storm of high-level events, including the United Nations Summit on the Millennium Development Goals. Millennium Development Goal No. 5 (MDG 5)—improve maternal health—will be top of mind. UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon is expected to launch a Global Strategy for Women and Children’s Health. And the Clinton Global Initiative Annual Meeting is dedicating an entire track to women’s and girls’ empowerment. Just this week, the UN released its latest maternal health estimates, reaffirming that, while there is evidence of progress, clearly there is much more work to be done. The good news is that the momentum behind this issue has never been greater.

Earlier this month, I had the privilege of attending the Global Maternal Health Conference 2010 in Delhi, India, with nearly 700 of the world’s foremost experts in the field. The conference was a forecast of the topics and solutions that are likely to dominate discussions on MDG 5 this week. Here are the top five:

1. Solutions are only solutions if they land in the right hands. Severe bleeding after childbirth, infections, hypertensive disorders, and unsafe abortions are the primary causes of maternal death. Safe, effective, and low-cost preventive measures and treatments exist; the challenge has been making sure that these medical technologies reach women, especially poor women, as quickly as possible. Health professionals are experimenting with new ways to effectively distribute lifesaving drugs. For example, a central strategy for expanding access to misoprostol to prevent postpartum hemorrhage involves using trained community volunteers to distribute the drug. This allows women, a majority of whom continue to give birth at home and may be far from the nearest health facility, to safely treat themselves at home postpartum.

2. Find creative solutions to increase the number of skilled health providers. The shortage of health professionals is a major barrier to reducing maternal mortality and morbidity. One approach has been to “task shift”—train and deploy more nonphysician clinicians to take on a broader range of health services, including some emergency obstetric care. Studies of this practice have shown that, given the right training and support, these providers are up to the task, having success equal to that of doctors. But this strategy is a longer term prospect and should not detract from the equally important goal of training more skilled doctors, nor should task shifting result in any health provider becoming burdened with too many responsibilities.

3. Hold decision makers accountable. Government leaders worldwide have formally committed to achieving the MDGs, but accountability has been a problem. On this front, what happens outside the health clinic can be as important as what happens within it. Just as we need more people trained to provide maternal health services, we must also invest in training advocates to pressure ministers of health and other decision makers to make real investments in reproductive health care. In many countries, a key aspect of this work involves compelling governments to provide data on where money earmarked for maternal health is spent. The Ask Your Government campaign is doing innovative work on this front to learn the extent to which governments are actually deploying the resources needed to achieve the MDGs.

4. Connect the dots. Health providers are getting increasingly sophisticated about drawing links between the underlying cultural, social, and economic factors that contribute to maternal deaths. An expectant mother who is HIV-positive, for example, needs special attention to protect her health and to help her deliver a healthy baby. Maternal health is not a “vertical issue,” but one that cuts across all of the Millennium Development Goals.

5. Strike the right balance between community- and facility-based care. For years, there has been debate about whether women are better served in health facilities or through community-based services. Such services may lack highly skilled doctors, but they also are often more accessible to poor women in rural areas. Experts at the Global Maternal Health Conference agreed that the time had come to reframe the discussion from “either or” to “both.” Where facilities are inadequate, community-based interventions can potentially serve women’s needs. But where facilities are adequate, community-based services still can be critical for supporting prenatal and postnatal care. The bottom line: Local context is everything. We need to use the approaches that best meet the realities of women in any given community.

MDG 5 consists of two specific targets. The first calls for a 75 percent reduction in maternal mortality between 1990 and 2015. This is the part that most people remember. The second part doesn’t get as much attention: the goal of universal access to reproductive health care. Yet, as the five steps above demonstrate, the two parts are inextricably linked. If the initial launch of the Global Millennium Development Goals more than 10 years ago was to answer the what and why behind eradicating poverty and improving global health, then the focus now must be how we will do so.

Check out MDGFive.com, a new media initiative uniting global artists and activists for maternal health.

  • Share/Bookmark

Maternal Mortality is Down; What About Women’s Rights?

Monday, September 20th, 2010 by Raji Mohanam

The MHTF is soliciting reactions from the maternal health community to the newly released UN MMR data. Our hope is that, together, these comments will serve as a springboard for discussion and provide momentum towards MDG5.


Written by: Jessica Mack, Senior Editor at Gender Across Borders and Manager at Global Health Strategies

This is cross-posted on Gender Across Borders

Last week the UN released their global maternal mortality figures (http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSTRE68E19V20100915), which basically matched the figures released by the Institute of Health Metrics and Evaluation back in May http://www.nytimes.com/2010/04/14/health/14births.html – globally, maternal deaths have dropped by about 200,000 deaths per year.

What does it mean from a global feminist perspective?  While it means good things – a drop is obviously better than an increase — I think the fact that we haven’t had more progress can be explained in part by our failure to leverage the power of human rights arguments in our efforts to address maternal health.

That is, I think in this field we too often rely on the heart string-pulling ability of stories of mothers lost… without stressing the inalienable truth that women’s rights — human rights — are at a complete loss here.  We want leaders to act because they’d be terrible people if they didn’t, or because they’d be making poor economic decisions if they didn’t invest in maternal health…but not because they absolutely must – as part and parcel of our global efforts to protect and promote human rights writ large.

That is still an elusive message for feminists and activists in the maternal and reproductive health community. In too many parts of the world, women simply don’t matter enough to others, or themselves, frankly, to spur enough change fast enough.  A woman can survive childbirth thanks to new technologies, only to be raped and shamed one week later, or see her daughter married off at twelve.  So maternal health indicators are really only one metric of a broader social justice issue that continues to plague the globe.

I was at the Women Deliver advocacy brunch http://www.womendeliver.org/updates/entry/women-deliver-and-partners-plan-to-urge-un-delegates-to-accelerate-action-o/ this morning, a powerful kick-off to an action-packed week at the UN, where global leaders and delegates will meet to review the Millennium Development Goals

http://www.businessdayonline.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=13668:world-leaders-arrive-for-mdg-summit&catid=1:latest-news&Itemid=18

Graca Machel http://www.theelders.org/elders/graca-machel, international women’s rights advocate and spouse of Nelson Mandela, gave a rabble rousing opening speech where she made a simple but powerful point: women’s rights are human rights, and yet this fact has been running to catch up with our local, national, and global policies for decades.  We should be enraged and propelled by this injustice.  Women matter first and foremost because they matter; secondly because they are at the heart of development and growth for our families, communities, and economies.

Machel said the word “rights,” which I find is so often missing in the maternal and child health discussions, especially when it comes to the MDGs.  She foreshadowed a day when we wouldn’t need to come up with compelling economic arguments or tell one more horrible story about a woman in prolonged labor, waiting for the delivery of blood supply while her newborn dies inside her womb.  She foreshadowed the day when women would be prioritized, placed at the foremost of global development efforts because they…we…have been suffering from rights abuses on too many levels for too long.

That’s what these numbers mean to me – a clarion call to bring out the big guns, and raise the flag… women’s rights are human rights and no one can afford to ignore that fact any longer.

  • Share/Bookmark

Making Outpatient Abortion Services a Reality

Thursday, September 2nd, 2010 by KateMitch

Written by Janna Oberdorf, Women Deliver

Every year, an estimated 20 million unsafe abortions take place. And of all maternal deaths, unsafe abortion accounts for 13%. Imagine if we could change that. Imagine if we could make a serious dent in the deaths and morbidities that are caused from botched abortions, from unhygienic surgeries, and from unskilled providers.

Now, imagine if we could change that with a few simple, low-cost pills. That’s what the drugs mifepristone and misoprostol are doing for women around the world.

At today’s panel session on “Reducing the toll of unsafe abortion using simple medical technology” at the Global Maternal Health Conference in Delhi, panelists laid out the landscape of how introducing and expanding access to medical abortions could save lives and prevent injury:

•    Beverly Winikoff, of Gynuity Health Projects, talked about misoprostol as first-line treatment of incomplete abortion, and about introducing and expanding existing services and implications for training. As she said, misoprostol is low cost, and it can increase women’s choice and reduce the burden on doctors and health facilities.

•    Patricio Sanhueza Smith, from the Secretariat of Health in Mexico City, talked about lessons learned from Mexico City on the potential of misoprostol alone for transitioning services. He said, “Medical abortion with misoprostol alone is not the Gold Standard, but it is a duty to widely disseminate its use, while mifepristone becomes available.”

•    Selma Hajiri, of the Center for Research and Consultancy in Reproductive Health, talked about a randomized controlled trial of medical abortion with misoprostol only versus mifepristone plus misoprostol. She said that although the combination is the gold standard, misoprostol alone should be promoted where mifepristone is not accessible.

•    Kelsey Lynd, of Stanford University, spoke about making outpatient services a reality. She discussed research on administering mifepristone and misoprostol at home, and a pregnancy test that could simplify medical abortion provision.

•    Hillary Bracken, of Gynuity Health Projects, spoke about expanding access late in the first trimester, and the promise of outpatient mifepristone and misoprostol after 63 days.

Though I’m constantly amazed by the possibility and potential of mifepristone and misoprostol for safe abortion, I was even more amazed to hear about Kelsey Lynd’s work on making outpatient services a reality.

Having an abortion is a difficult and traumatic decision, with serious health repercussions. But that decision becomes so much harder when you have to pay for a sonogram to determine gestation period; to attend a clinic to take the mifepristone; to return to the clinic two week later for a follow-up visit and second dose; and to have a second sonogram to ensure the pregnancy was terminated. It’s a time-consuming and costly decision… but every one of those steps also takes an emotional toll.

Lynd presented research that showed that it is safe for women to self-administer mifepristone and misoprostol at home. Though this is great news for time and money saving reasons, it also gives women some control and choice over when to start their abortion.

Lynd also presented findings on a home pregnancy test that determine their pregnancy status after abortion. This semi-quantitative pregnancy test is administered at the health facility while the woman is pregnant to achieve a baseline of her hCG blood level. Then, 1 to 2 weeks after the woman has been administered mifepristone and misoprostol, she can use the test to check if her hCG blood level has decreased, thus confirming termination of pregnancy. In her findings, 98% of women felt they could use the test on their own in the future, and the tests identified ALL ongoing pregnancies.

The implications for this research are mind-boggling. I think it is obvious that cutting down clinic visits and sonograms would save time (for the woman and the provider) and save money. But it is the emotional implications that jump out at me. The ability for women to feel they have some control over their bodies and their abortions is something that is severely needed.

One last note is that although these findings are encouraging in making outpatient services a reality, they must be partnered with education, information, and counseling. Home abortions are a scary thing. Bleeding for days on end is a scary thing. And women need to understand complications that need treatment, and have some emotional support. We need to guide these women with the proper education, counseling, call centers, job-aids, and more, if and when we finally make outpatient services a reality.

Janna Oberdorf is the Communications Manager at Women Deliver.

Follow the Maternal Health Task Force and EngenderHealth on Twitter: @MHTF and @EngenderHealth. The conference hashtag is #GMHC2010.

For more posts about the Global Maternal Health Conference, click here.

For the live stream schedule, click here.

Check back soon for the archived videos of today’s presentations.

  • Share/Bookmark

Maternal Health Realities: Accountability and Behavior Change

Tuesday, August 31st, 2010 by Raji Mohanam

Written by Calyn Ostrowski, Woodrow Wilson Center for Scholars

Four days ago a young woman died giving birth in a bustling marketplace in New Delhi. Just steps away from Parliament, this woman was left to die and no emergency care was sent to her–no midwives, nurses, or doctors; just people walking around her accepting the situation as normal and an uncontrollable way of life. But this is Delhi…not a remote tribal village where the nearest health clinic is hours away (on foot).

This juxtaposition lingers on in me as I sit in the plenary session of day two at the Global Maternal Health Conference and listen to Syeda Hameed, member of the Indian Parliament Planning Commission, discuss her recent visit to a remote village where every house has 10 children living in filth, flies, and emptiness.

Although I have been working on such development issues for the last five years I do not work in the field, nor do I visit the developing world on a regular basis. Hearing these stories, coupled with my firsthand experience of witnessing poverty here in Delhi reminds me of the daily reality of those 342,900 women who die every year. This is their way of life and I think it’s poignant that today’s sessions emphasize community based care, family planning, accountability, behavior change, and culture.

“Context, context, context,” said Wendy Graham of IMMPACT at yesterday’s plenary session. I agree, the context of social and cultural norms is an underlying factor that must be taken into consideration when implementing maternal and child health (MNCH) programs. With a background in psychology, I appreciated when Dr. Zulfiqar Bhutta, of Aga Khan University, recognized the toll of poverty on the imagination and the mentality of fatalism.

That is why it is so essential to “ask the people how they feel and bring their voices into the forums where policy decisions are made,” said Hameed. It is also important to hold key players accountable and include men in MNCH activities.

During the side session Male Involvement in Reproductive and Maternal and Newborn Health six field experts (in which half the panelists and audience members were men!) discussed effective methods for increasing male participation in family planning, vasectomies, gender equality, and hospital care.

The key findings from this discussion include:

•    Targeted interventions that educate men about danger signs and pregnancy complications correlates with behavior change and increased facility births.
•    Many young married men feel pressured to prove their fertility. A sample of men was evaluated and those who had increased education and income were more likely to delay first pregnancy.
•    Vasectomy is not something men want to talk about with family planning fieldworkers; however, official recognition of the vasectomy benefits by the government did increase referrals.
•    Puppet and theater shows that demonstrate gender equity behaviors provide an opportunity for dialogue. Women in this study reported increased gender equity in family planning decision-making.

There are so many variables that exacerbate the maternal mortality cycle, but evidence presented here provides REAL solutions.  It is time to scale up these solutions and political willpower will be essential.

Calyn Ostrowski is the Coordinator of the Maternal Health Dialogue Series in partnership with the Maternal Health Task Force and UNFPA at the Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars.

Stay up to date with the conference happenings! Follow the Maternal Health Task Force and EngenderHealth on Twitter: @MHTF and @EngenderHealth. The conference hashtag is #GMHC2010.

For more posts about the Global Maternal Health Conference, click here.

For the live stream schedule, click here.

Check back soon for the archived videos of today’s presentations.

  • Share/Bookmark

The Impact of Maternal Mortality and Morbidity on Economic Development

Monday, July 19th, 2010 by KateMitch

Please join the Woodrow Wilson Center’s Global Health Initiative, the Maternal Health Task Force, and the United Nations Population Fund (UNFPA) for the sixth event of the series on Advancing Policy Dialogue on Maternal Health.

economic_impact

featuring

Mayra Buvinic, Sector Director Gender and Development Group, World Bank
Dr. Nomonde Xundu, Health Attaché Embassy of South Africa in Washington DC
Mary Ellen Stanton, Senior Maternal Health Advisor, U.S. Agency for International Development

July 29, 2010
3:00 p.m. – 5:00 p.m.

5th Floor Conference Room
Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars
1300 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW

Please RSVP to globalhealth@wilsoncenter.org with your name and affiliation.

Investing in women and girls health is smart economics. According to the United Nations Population Fund (UNFPA) women contribute to a majority of small businesses in the developing world and their unpaid work on the farm and at home account for one-third of the world’s GDP. The U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID) estimates that maternal and newborn deaths cost the world $15 billion in lost productivity.

Mayra Buvinic, sector director of the gender and development group of the World Bank, will address the economic impact of maternal deaths and the role of education and gender equality on economic development. Dr. Nomonde Xundu, health attaché at the Embassy of South Africa in Washington DC will discuss the policy implications of maternal health and share lessons learned in empowering women and girl’s economic status in South Africa. Mary Ellen Stanton, senior maternal health advisor of USAID, will present the foreign policy and economic case for increased donor investment in maternal health.


About the Maternal Health Policy Series

The reproductive and maternal health community finds itself at a critical point, drawing increased attention and funding, but still confronting more than a half million deaths each year and a high unmet need for family planning. The Policy Dialogue series seeks to galvanize the community by focusing on important issues within the maternal health community.

The Wilson Center’s Global Health Initiative is pleased to present this series with its co-conveners, the Maternal Health Task Force and the United Nations Population Fund (UNFPA), and is grateful to USAID’s Bureau for Global Health for further technical assistance.

If you are interested, but unable to attend the event, please tune into the live or archived webcast at www.wilsoncenter.org. The webcast will begin approximately 10 minutes after the posted meeting time. You will need Windows Media Player to watch the webcast. To download the free player, visit: http://www.microsoft.com/windows/windowsmedia/download.

Location: Woodrow Wilson Center at the Ronald Reagan Building: 1300 Pennsylvania Ave., NW (”Federal Triangle” stop on Blue/Orange Line), 5th floor conference room. A map to the Center is available at www.wilsoncenter.org/directions. Note: Photo identification is required to enter the building. Please allow additional time to pass through security.

  • Share/Bookmark