1 year after The Lancet Neonatal Survival Series--was the call for action heard?
1 year after The Lancet Neonatal Survival Series--was the call for action heard?
复制标题
DOI：
10.1016/s0140-6736(06)68587-5
复制
发表时间：
2006-05-06
期刊：
影响因子：
--
通讯作者：
Lancet Neonatal Survival Series steering team
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Lawn JE;Cousens SN;Darmstadt GL;Bhutta ZA;Martines J;Paul V;Knippenberg R;Fogstad H;Lancet Neonatal Survival Series steering team
2005年3月，《柳叶刀》发表了一系列文章，包括4篇文章1-4和2篇评论，5，6强调了大量被忽视的死亡-每年有400万新生儿死亡，其中99%出生在发展中国家。1400万大约是美国或西欧23个最大国家每年出生的婴儿数量。这也大致相当于一年内艾滋病和疟疾死亡人数的总和。然而，新生儿死亡在全球卫生优先事项中很少被提及。一种误解是，需要高度技术性的护理。相反，我们的估计表明，在死亡率最高的75个国家中，多达四分之三的死亡可以通过低技术干预来预防，而人均额外成本不到1美元。2，4需要的是政治意愿，以确保这些干预措施能够惠及需要它们的妇女和婴儿。3、4一年过去了，我们要问：过去一年在高死亡率国家的政策、供资以及最重要的方案方面取得了哪些进展？在讨论自2005年3月以来影响新生儿生存的承诺和事件之前，我们有一个警告-测量对政策和实践的影响是复杂的，将变化归因于柳叶刀系列是不可能的，也不是我们的目标。我们的目的是促进和评估在帮助最需要帮助的母亲和婴儿方面取得的进展。
In March, 2005, The Lancet published a series of four articles 1–4 and two Comments, 5, 6 highlighting a huge number of largely neglected deaths—the 4 million newborn babies who die every year, of whom 99% are born in developing countries. 1 4 million is roughly the number of babies born every year in the USA or in the 23 largest countries of western Europe. It is also roughly the number of AIDS and malaria deaths combined in 1 year. Yet deaths in newborn babies are rarely mentioned in global-health priorities. A misconception has been that highly technical care is needed. On the contrary, our estimates suggest that up to three-quarters of these deaths could be prevented with low-technology interventions at an additional cost of less than US $1 per head for the 75 countries with the highest mortality. 2, 4 What is needed is the political will to ensure that these interventions reach the women and babies who need them. 3, 4 1 year on, we ask: what progress has been made over the past year in policy, in funding, and most importantly, in programmes in high-mortality countries?Before discussing the commitments and events affecting newborn survival since March, 2005, we have a caveat—measuring the effect on policy and practice is complex, and attributing changes to The Lancet series is not possible and is not our aim. Our purpose is to promote and assess progress in reaching mothers and babies most in need.