4.2 Article

Infection remains a leading cause of neonatal mortality among infants delivered at a tertiary hospital in Karachi, Pakistan

期刊

JOURNAL OF INFECTION IN DEVELOPING COUNTRIES
卷 8, 期 11, 页码 1470-1475

出版社

J INFECTION DEVELOPING COUNTRIES
DOI: 10.3855/jidc.3569

关键词

normal birth weight; low birth weight; mortality

资金

  1. Pakistan Medical Research Council (PMRC) [4-17-3/08/RDC/NICH/2011]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Introduction: The current cohort study was conducted to determine the frequency and compare the mortality rate with associated characteristics among low birth weight and normal birth weight infants during the neonatal period at a tertiary healthcare facility, Karachi. Methodology: Close-ended structured questionnaires were used to collect information from the parents of 500 registered neonates at the time of birth. Follow-ups by phone on the 28th day of life were done to determine the mortality among low birth weight and normal birth weight babies during the neonatal period. Results: The neonatal mortality rate ranged from as low as 2.4% in the normal birth weight and 16.4% in the low birth weight categories to as high as 96% in the very low birth weight category. Respiratory distress syndrome (24.2%) and sepsis (18.2%) were reported as the leading causes of neonatal deaths. The babies' lengths of stay ranged from 2 to 24 hours, and around 90% of neonatal deaths were reported in the first seven days of life. More than 6% of neonates died at home, and 7.6% of the deceased babies did not visit any healthcare facility or doctor before their death. In the 12-15 hours before their deaths, 13.6% of the deceased babies had been unattended. Around 90% of the deceased babies were referred from a doctor or healthcare facility. Conclusions: The present estimates of neonatal mortality are very high among low birth weight and very low birth weight categories. Infectious diseases, including respiratory distress syndrome (24.2%) and sepsis (18.2%), were leading causes of neonatal deaths.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.2
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据