Newborn Resuscitation Skills in Health Care Providers at a Zambian Tertiary Center, and Comparison to World Health Organization Standards.

BACKGROUND: Birth asphyxia is a leading cause of early neonatal death. In 2013, 32% of neonatal deaths in Zambia were attributable to birth asphyxia and trauma. Basic, timely interventions are key to improving outcomes. However, data from the World Health Organization suggest that resuscitation is often not initiated, or is conducted suboptimally. Currently, there are little data on the quality of newborn resuscitation in the context of a tertiary center in a lower-middle income country. We aimed to measure the competencies of clinical practitioners responsible for newborn resuscitation. METHODS: This observational study was conducted over 5 months in Zambia. Health care professionals were recruited from anesthesia, pediatrics, and midwifery. Newborn skills and knowledge were examined using the following: (1) multiple-choice questions; (2) a ventilation skills test; and (3) 2 low-medium fidelity simulation scenarios. Participant demographics including previous resuscitation training and a self-efficacy rating score were noted. The primary outcome examined performance scores in a simulated scenario, which assessed the care of a newborn that failed to respond to basic interventions. Secondary outcome measures included apnea times after delivery and performance in the other assessments. RESULTS: Seventy-eight participants were enrolled into the study (13 physician anesthesiology residents, 13 pediatric residents, and 52 midwives). A significant difference in interprofessional performance was observed when examining checklist scores for the unresponsive newborn simulated scenario (P = .006). The median (quartiles) checklist score (out of 18) was 14.0 (13.0-14.75) for the anesthesiologists, 11.0 (8.5-12.3) for the pediatricians, and 10.8 (8.3-13.9) for the midwives. A score of 14 or more was required to pass the scenario. There was no significant difference in performance between participants with and without previous newborn resuscitation training (P = .246). The median (quartiles) apnea time after delivery was significantly different between all groups (P = .01) with anesthetic and pediatric residents performing similarly, 61 (37-97) and 63 (42.5-97.5) seconds, respectively. The midwifery participants displayed a significantly longer apnea time, 93.5 (66.3-129) seconds. Self-efficacy rating scores displayed no correlation between confidence level and the primary outcome, Spearman coefficient 0.06 (P = .55). CONCLUSIONS: Newborn resuscitation skills among health care professionals are varied. Midwives lead the majority of deliveries with anesthesiologists and pediatricians only being present at operative or high-risk births. It is therefore common that midwifery practitioners will initiate resuscitation. Despite this, midwives perform poorly when compared to anesthesia and pediatric residents. To address this discrepancy, a multidisciplinary, simulation-based newborn resuscitation program should be considered with continual clinical reenforcement of best practice.

An Analysis of Substandard Propofol Detected in Use in Zambian Anesthesia.

BACKGROUND: In early 2015, clinicians throughout Zambia noted a range of unpredictable adverse events after the administration of propofol, including urticaria, bronchospasm, profound hypotension, and most predictably an inadequate depth of anesthesia. Suspecting that the propofol itself may have been substandard, samples were procured and sent for testing. METHODS: Three vials from 2 different batches were analyzed using gas chromatography-mass spectrometry methods at the John L. Holmes Mass Spectrometry Facility. RESULTS: Laboratory gas chromatography-mass spectrometry analysis determined that, although all vials contained propofol, its concentration differed between samples and in all cases was well below the stated quantity. Two vials from 1 batch contained only 44% ± 11% and 54% ± 12% of the stated quantity, whereas the third vial from a second batch contained only 57% ± 9%. The analysis found that there were no hexane-soluble impurities in the samples. CONCLUSIONS: None of the analyzed vials contained the stated amount of propofol; however, our analysis did not detect additional contaminants that would explain the adverse events reported by clinicians. Our results confirm the presence of substandard propofol in Zambia; however, anecdotal accounts of substandard anesthetic medicines in other countries abound and warrant further investigation to provide estimates of the prevalence and scope of this global problem.