Global maternal and neonatal mortality rates remain unacceptably high. The postnatal period, encompassing the first hour of life until 42 days, is critical for mother-baby dyads, yet postnatal care (PNC) coverage is low. Identifying mother-baby dyads at increased risk for adverse outcomes is critical. Yet few efforts have synthesized research on proximate and distant factors associated with maternal and neonatal mortality during the postnatal period. This scoping review identified proximate and distant factors associated with maternal and neonatal mortality during the postnatal period within low- and middle-income countries (LMICs). A rigorous, systematic search of four electronic databases was undertaken to identify studies published within the last 11 years containing data on risk factors among nationally representative samples. Results were synthesized narratively. Seventy-nine studies were included. Five papers examined maternal mortality, one focused on maternal and neonatal mortality, and the rest focused on neonatal mortality. Regarding proximate factors, maternal age, parity, birth interval, birth order/rank, neonate sex, birth weight, multiple-gestation, previous history of child death, and lack of or inadequate antenatal care visits were associated with increased neonatal mortality risk. Distant factors for neonatal mortality included low levels of parental education, parental employment, rural residence, low household income, solid fuel use, and lack of clean water. This review identified risk factors that could be applied to identify mother-baby dyads with increased mortality risk for targeted PNC. Given risks inherent in pregnancy and childbirth, adverse outcomes can occur among dyads without obvious risk factors; providing timely PNC to all is critical. Efforts to reduce the prevalence of risk factors could improve maternal and newborn outcomes. Few studies exploring maternal mortality risk factors were available; investments in population-based studies to identify factors associated with maternal mortality are needed. Harmonizing categorization of factors (e.g., age, education) is a gap for future research.

PURPOSE:In addition to the rapid physical and cognitive transformations very young adolescents (VYAs) experience between ages 10-14, gender and social norms internalized during this period have long-term implications as adolescents become sexually active. This age presents critical opportunities for early intervention to promote gender-equitable attitudes and norms for improved adolescent health. METHODS:In Kinshasa, DRC, Growing Up GREAT! implemented a scalable approach to engage in- and out-of-school VYAs, caregivers, schools, and communities. A quasi-experimental study evaluated the outcomes of sexual and reproductive health (SRH) knowledge, assets and agency, and gender-equitable attitudes and behaviors among VYA participants. Ongoing monitoring and qualitative studies provided insights into implementation challenges and contextual factors. RESULTS:Results show significant improvement in SRH knowledge and assets such as caregiver connectedness, communication, and body satisfaction among the intervention group. The intervention was also associated with significant improvements in gender-equitable attitudes related to adolescents' household responsibilities and decreased teasing and bullying. Intervention effects on awareness of SRH services, body satisfaction, chore-sharing, and bullying were stronger for out-of-school and younger VYAs, suggesting the intervention's potential to increase positive outcomes among vulnerable adolescents. The intervention did not shift key gender norm perceptions assessed. Implementation research suggests design decisions made to increase the intervention's scalability necessitated reductions in training and program dosing that may have affected results. DISCUSSION:Results affirm the potential of early intervention to increase SRH knowledge, assets and gender-equitable behaviors. They also highlight the need for more evidence on effective program approaches and segmentation for shifting VYA and SRH norms.

IntroductionThe potential of timely, quality postnatal care (PNC) to reduce maternal and newborn mortality and to advance progress toward universal health coverage (UHC) is well-documented. Yet, in many low-income and middle-income countries, coverage of PNC remains low. Risk-stratified approaches can maximise limited resources by targeting mother–baby dyads meeting the evidence-based risk criteria which predict poor postnatal outcomes.ObjectivesTo review evidence-based risk criteria for identification of at-risk mother–baby dyads, drawn from a literature review, and to identify key considerations for their use in a risk-stratified PNC approach.Design/setting/participantsA virtual, semi-structured group discussion was conducted with maternal and newborn health experts on Zoom. Participants were identified through purposive sampling based on content and context expertise.ResultsSeventeen experts, (5 men and 12 women), drawn from policymakers, implementing agencies and academia participated and surfaced several key themes. The identified risk factors are well-known, necessitating accelerated efforts to address underlying drivers of risk. Risk-stratified PNC approaches complement broader UHC efforts by providing an equity lens to identify the most vulnerable mother–baby dyads. However, these should be layered on efforts to strengthen PNC service provision for all mothers and newborns. Risk factors should comprise context-relevant, operationalisable, clinical and non-clinical factors. Even with rising coverage of facility delivery, targeted postnatal home visits still complement facility-based PNC.ConclusionRisk-stratified PNC efforts must be considered within broader health systems strengthening efforts. Implementation research at the country level is needed to understand feasibility and practicality of clinical and non-clinical risk factors and identify unintended consequences.

Integrated service delivery approaches have shown promise to increase use of services including postpartum family planning (PPFP) by young, first-time mothers (FTMs) but have proven challenging to scale and institutionalize. Integration adds complexity, requiring careful assessment of effects on a range of key system functions from demand creation and service delivery to oversight and governance. Through an innovative design process, we selected approaches to increase FTMs' PPFP use through existing health systems. We generated programmatic options and then sought to select approaches based on (1) potential impact on FTMs' PPFP uptake and (2) potential to institutionalize in the health system. The latter represented an innovation in addressing management systems' drivers of scalability and sustainability; to accomplish it, we developed a participatory design process to assess the potential of an approach to be institutionalized in a specific context. We adapted a management systems theory, the Viable System Model (VSM), which presents 5 essential organizational functions and the relations required between them to improve the viability (performance and institutionalization) of organizational systems. Drawing from the VSM, we developed a process for reviewing the effects of proposed approaches on provider workload, client flow, infrastructure, revisions to guidelines and job descriptions, coordination and management, and information systems. The VSM provided a structure to identify potential displacement of capacity in the health system and mitigate often neglected organizational challenges that compromise institutionalization. The process informed the elimination of approaches with potential for impact but that had deal-breakers to institutionalization, such as increased workload or shifted job descriptions, in the Bangladeshi context. For the selected approaches, consideration of systems elements fostered discussion of expected risks to institutionalization, highlighting needed mitigation efforts and monitoring during implementation.

Globally, few programs consider the needs of first-time young parents (FTYPs), who face disproportionate negative health consequences during pregnancy and childbirth. Scant evidence exists on FTYPs' broader health needs. Formative research in two regions of Madagascar used a socio-ecological lens to explore, via 44 interviews and 32 focus group discussions, the influences on FTYPs at the individual, couple, family, community, and system levels. We spoke with FTYPs who had, and who had not, used sexual and reproductive health (SRH) services, their parents/kin and influential adults, and community health workers and facility health providers. Data analysis, guided by a codebook, used Atlas.ti. Age, social position, and implicit power dynamics operating within and across socio-ecological levels affected FTYPs' service-seeking behaviors. The nature and extent of influence varied by health service type. Cross-cutting social factors affecting service use/non-use included gender dynamics, pressures from mothers, in-laws, and family tradition, and adolescent stigmatization for too-early pregnancy. Structural and economic factors included limited awareness of and lack of trust in available services, unfriendliness of services, and FTYPs' limited financial resources. A socio-ecological program perspective can inform tailoring of activities to address broader SRH issues, including how relationships, gender, power, and intergenerational dynamics influence service use.

Estimates of the potential impacts of contraceptive use on averting unintended pregnancies, total and unsafe abortions, maternal deaths, and newborn, infant, and child deaths provide evidence of the value of investments in family planning programs and thus are critically important for policy makers, donors, and advocates alike. Several research teams have independently developed mathematical models that estimate the number of adverse health outcomes averted due to contraceptive use. However, each modeling approach was designed for different purposes, and as such the methodological assumptions, data inputs, and mathematical algorithms initially used in each model differed; consequently, the models did not produce comparable estimates for the same outcome indicators. To address this, a series of expert group meetings took place in which 5 models-Adding it Up, Impact 2, ImpactNow, Reality Check, and FamPlan/Lives Saved Tool (LiST)-were reviewed and harmonized where possible. The group identified the main reasons for the inconsistencies in the estimates generated by the models for each of the adverse health outcome indicators. The group then worked together to align the methodologies for estimating numbers of unintended pregnancies, abortions, and maternal deaths averted due to contraceptive use, and reviewed the challenges with estimating the impact of contraceptive use on newborn, infant, and child deaths, including the lack of a conceptually clear pathway and rigorous evidence. The assumption that most influenced harmonization was the comparison pregnancy rate used by the models to estimate the counterfactual scenario-that is, if women who are currently using contraception were not using a method, how many would become pregnant? All the models now base this on the number of unintended pregnancies among women with unmet contraceptive need, bringing the estimates for unintended pregnancies, total and unsafe abortion, and maternal deaths much closer together. The agreed approaches have already been adopted by the Family Planning 2020 (FP2020) initiative and Track20, a project that supports FP2020. The experts will continue to update their models collaboratively to ensure that the most current estimation methodologies and data available are used. Valid and reliable methodologies for estimating these impacts from family planning are critically important, not only for advocacy to sustain resource allocation commitments but also to enable measurement and tracking of global development indicators. Conflicting estimates can be counterproductive to generating support for family planning programs, and this harmonization process has created a more unified voice for quantifying the benefits of family planning.

Demographic and Health Survey data from 18 countries were analyzed to better understand the characteristics of women wishing to limit childbearing. Demand for limiting (14% of all women) is less than that that for spacing (25%) but is still substantial. The mean "demand crossover age" (the average age at which demand to limit births begins to exceed demand to space) is generally around age 33, but in some countries it is as low as 23 or 24. Young women often intend to limit their births, contrary to the assumption that only older women do. Large numbers of women have exceeded their desired fertility but do not use family planning, citing fear of side effects and health concerns as barriers. When analysis is restricted to married women, demand for limiting nearly equals that for spacing. Many women who want no more children and who use contraception, especially poor women and those with less education, use less effective temporary contraceptive methods. A sizable number of women in sub-Saharan Africa-nearly 8 million-have demand for limiting future births. Limiting births has a greater impact on fertility rates than spacing births and is a major factor driving the fertility transition. Family planning programs must prepare to meet this demand by addressing supply- and demand-side barriers to use. Meeting the growing needs of sub-Saharan African women who want to limit births is essential, as they are a unique audience that has long been overlooked and underserved.