4.5 Review

The use of chlorhexidine to reduce maternal and neonatal mortality and morbidity in low-resource settings

期刊

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1016/j.ijgo.2007.01.014

关键词

chlorhexidine; maternal mortality; neonatal mortality; sepsis; oomphilitis

资金

  1. NICHD NIH HHS [U01 HD040636-06, U24 HD092094, U01 HD040636] Funding Source: Medline

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Of the 4 million neonatal deaths and 500,000 maternal deaths that occur annually worldwide, almost 99% are in developing countries and one-third are associated with infections. Implementation of proven interventions and targeted research on a select number of promising high-impact preventative and curative interventions are essential to achieve Millennium Development Goats for reduction of child and maternal mortality. Feasible, simple, low-cost interventions have the potential to significantly reduce the mortality and severe morbidity associated with infection in these settings. Studies of chlorhexidine in developing countries have focused on three primary uses: 1) intrapartum vaginal and neonatal wiping, 2) neonatal wiping alone, and 3) umbilical cord cleansing. A study of vaginal wiping and neonatal skin cleansing with chlorhexidine, conducted in Malawi in the 1990s suggested that chlorhexidine has potential to reduce neonatal infectious morbidity and mortality. A recent trial of cord cleansing conducted in Nepal also demonstrated benefit. Although studies have shown promise, widespread acceptance and implementation of chlorhexidine use has not yet occurred. This paper is derived in part from data presented at a conference on the use of chlorhexidine in developing countries and reviews the available evidence related to chlorhexidine use to reduce mortality and severe morbidity due to infections in mothers and neonates in low-resource settings. It also summarizes issues related to programmatic implementation. (C) 2007 International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics. Published by Elsevier Ireland Ltd. All rights reserved.

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

4.5
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