Skip to main content
PLOS Global Public Health logoLink to PLOS Global Public Health
. 2023 Jan 20;3(1):e0001469. doi: 10.1371/journal.pgph.0001469

Essential newborn care practices and associated factors among home delivered mothers in Guto Gida District, East Wollega zone

Mulugeta Abebe 1, Gemechu Kejela 2,*, Melese Chego 2, Markos Desalegn 2
Editor: Ramachandran Thiruvengadam3
PMCID: PMC10021559  PMID: 36963077

Abstract

Background

Essential Newborn Care is a set of strategic and cost-effective interventions planned to improve the health of newborns through the care they receive from birth up to 28 days. In the current study area, little is known about the prevalence of essential newborn care practices and its associated factors. This study was aimed to assess the prevalence of essential newborn care practice and its associated factors among home-delivered mothers in Guto Gida district, western Ethiopia.

Methods

A community-based cross-sectional study was conducted in Guto Gida district from September 5 to 15, 2020. Data were collected by interviewing 601 systematically selected home-delivered women. Descriptive statistics were employed to describe frequency and percent. Binary logistic regression analysis was employed to identify candidate variables for the final model. Variables with p-value less than 0.25 at bivariate logistic regression were considered as the candidate variable and entered into multivariable logistic regression model. Finally, multivariable logistic regression was employed to identify associated factors at p-value less than 0.05, and the strength of association was described by adjusted odds ratios with 95% CI.

Results

The study shows that the level of essential newborn care practices was 168 (28%) (23.9–31.4). In this study, women in the first wealth quantile (AOR [95% CI] = 0.64 [0.34–0.97]), women who had one live birth (AOR [95% CI] = 0.51 [0.22–0.87]), women who lost their neonate before the study period (AOR [95% CI] = 0.11 [0.05–0.22]) were less likely to practice essential newborn care. Women who were advised on essential newborn care practice during a home visit by health extension workers (AOR [95% CI] = 3.45[1.56–7.26]), women who attended antenatal care during their current pregnancy (AOR [95% CI] = 1.79 (1.21–3.36]), and women who were attended at their birth by health extension workers (AOR [95% CI] = 3.29 [2.13–5.94]) were more likely to practice essential newborn care.

Conclusions

In this study, the prevalence of essential newborn care practice was low (28%), as compared with the World Health Organization recommendation that it should be 100%. The wealth quantile, number of live births, home visits by health extension workers, antenatal care, birth attendant, and neonatal death were independent predictors of essential newborn care practices.

Introduction

The first 28 days of life have been the most vulnerable time for newborn survival, particularly the first day, the first week, and the first month of life have been the most critical times for the survival of children [13]. Essential Newborn Care, which is a set of strategic and cost-effective interventions planned to improve the health of newborns through the care they receive from delivery till 28 days of life is crucial for their survival. These interventions are: cutting the cord by using a new or boiled blade; tying the cord by using new or washed thread; and preventing the application of any substance to the cord stump [4]. Wrapping and drying the newborn immediately after birth, delaying the first bath for 24 hours or more, early initiation of breastfeeding within one hour of birth, providing first milk (colostrum) for the newborn, and preventing pre-lacteal feeding [46].

Every year, over 130 million babies are delivered worldwide; 40 million of them are delivered at home without the help of a skilled birth attendant, which has a great risk for mothers and newborns. In Ethiopia, approximately 2.6 million births occur annually. Of these, 73%, or 1.83 million, occur at home without the help of a skilled birth attendant, which contributes to the low utilization of Essential Newborn Care Practice (ENCP) [59].

Despite proven cost-effective solutions to reduce neonatal mortality, there was a low utilization of ENCP and relatively little improvement in neonatal mortality compared to under-five mortalities. Low and middle income countries account for nearly all neonatal deaths. Ethiopia is one of the countries with high neonatal mortality, along with India, Nigeria, Pakistan, Somalia, and the Democratic Republic of the Congo. This mortality occurred as a result of complications related to poor care during postnatal and delivery [1012].

To increase this low utilization level of ENCP to 100% as recommended by the World Health Organization (WHO) and to prevent causes of neonatal mortality, WHO, Ethiopian Federal Ministry of Health (EFMOH), different scholars and many other stakeholders have provided guidelines, allocated budgets and conducted multiple activities that encompass cleanliness of institutional delivery, thermal protection, breast-feeding and cord care [11, 1315].

Despite all the above efforts, neonatal mortality is still very high in the country. To the best of the researcher’s knowledge, little is known about the level of ENCP and its associated factors in the study area. In addition to this, 2020 Health Management Information System (HMIS) report for Guto Gida district showed that the majority of births (52% of births in the district) occurred at home and utilization of essential newborn care practice was low in the district [16]. Therefore, this study aimed to assess the prevalence of essential newborn care practice and identify its associated factors among home-delivered mothers in Guto Gida district.

Methods and materials

Study design and setting

A community-based cross-sectional study was conducted from September 5 to 15, 2020, among home-delivery mothers in Guto Gida district, East Wollega zone of Oromia region. According to Guto Gida district map that was obtained from the district administrative office, the district is at an altitude of 905’N 36,033’E, and longitude 9,083,036’E with an elevation of 2,088m and is divided into twenty-one rural kebeles (the lowest administrative unit in Ethiopia). According to information obtained from the Guto Gida district administrative office, there are 21 rural health posts (two health extension workers were assigned to each health post), 3 health centers (lead by BSc Nurse or public health professional), and no hospital in the district. According to the 2007 Population and Housing Census report of Ethiopia, the district had a total population of 1,19101, of which 57,168 were men and 61,933 were women, and there were a total of 27,068 households and 26,927 women in the reproductive age group (15–49 years). The average number of households in one kebele was 1,289, with a total population of 5,671 [16].

Population

All women who delivered at home and permanent residents in Guto Gida district were the source population, and all home-delivered women in five randomly selected kebeles of Guto Gida district were the study population. Women in the reproductive age group (15–49), who resided in the study area for at least six months, who were reported to have delivered an alive baby within six months of postpartum and who might have had an infant loss prior to the study period were included into the study. Mothers who were seriously ill, had a history of mental illness, and were unable to care for their infants, or care givers/guardians were excluded from the study.

Sample size determination and sampling procedure

The required sample size of the study was determined by using the single population proportion formula based on the following assumptions: A prevalence of essential newborn care practice of 24% from a study conducted in Damot Pulasa district, south Ethiopia [9], 5% margin of error, a 95% confidence level, design effect of 2 (since the study employed multistage cluster sampling), and 10% for non-response. Depending on all these assumptions, the final sample size becomes 617.

A multi-stage sampling was employed to perform the procedure. First, five kebeles were selected from 21 kebeles in Guto Gida district, by lottery method. The number of all home-delivered women within the six months in those five selected kebeles were identified by consulting health extension workers of the respective kebeles. Then, the determined sample size was proportionally allocated to each selected kebele. The study participants were then selected from all selected kebeles by systematic random sampling, after calculating sampling interval as follows: K = (N/n) = [2495/617] = 4.

Measurements

Essential newborn care practice was good and coded as ‘Yes’, for mothers who were practiced three domains (safe cord care, optimal thermal care, and good neonatal feeding) appropriately whereas the practice was poor and coded as ‘No’, if one component was missed from the three domains [4, 10, 17]. Safe cord care was defined as the use of a clean cutting instrument to cut the umbilical cord (boiled new, used blade or scissor) plus clean thread, cord tie or cord clamp and no any substance applied on the cord stump [4, 10, 17]. Thermal care was defined as wiping off/drying the baby within ten minute, wrapping in new or clean and dry old cloth and washing the body of the newborn by warm water after 24 hour of delivery to prevent hypothermia [4, 10, 17]. Good neonatal feeding was defined as initiating breastfeeding within the first one hour after birth, giving no prelacteal feeding, and feeding the child with colostrum [4, 10, 17].

Wealth index was assessed by using Ethiopian Demographic and Health Survey household assets questions and analyzed by using principal component analysis. The wealth index in this study was ranked into three categories as: 1st quintile, 2nd quintile and 3rd quintile [4, 10]. Knowledge about ENCP was good for mothers who responded correctly to greater than 50% of knowledge related questions. Whereas, knowledge was poor for mothers who responded correctly to less than or equal to 50% of knowledge related questions [4, 10]. Knowledge of mothers on neonatal danger signs was good when mothers identified at least four neonatal danger signs among the six common neonatal danger signs [4, 10]. The six common neonatal danger signs in this study were; poor sucking or not able to feed breast, fast breathing, hypothermia, fever, drowsy or unconscious, cord bleeding and infection [11, 18].

Data collection tools and procedures

A structured interviewer administered questionnaire developed from previous studies [5, 911] was used to collect the data. The questionnaire was developed in English and then translated into the regional language (Afan Oromo). The Afan Oromo questionnaire was retranslated to English by an individual who is fluent in both languages to check its consistency and better understanding by both data collectors and respondents. The questionnaire contains sociodemographic questions, service utilization related questions, and maternal knowledge related questions. Supervisors and data collectors modified the questionnaire based on pre-test findings, local traditions, and cultural sensitivity. Clarities were also made on vague questions before actual data collection. Finally, the Afan Oromo version of the questionnaire was utilized for actual data collection.

Four grade 12 completed data collectors collected the data and one BSc Nurse supervised data collection process. In addition, one health extension worker was recruited to show the geographical locations of home-delivered mothers. One-day, appropriate training was given for data collectors and supervisors before the data collection. Training was conducted on the purpose and objectives of the study, the role and responsibility of data collectors and supervisors, the content and meaning of each question, the way of respondent approach, and how to conduct the interview.

Data quality assurance

In this study, data quality was assured by using different approaches. The English version of the questionnaire was translated into Afan Oromo for ease of fieldwork, and then it was translated back to English to check its consistency. Training and orientation were provided for all data collectors and supervisors. The questionnaire was pre-tested at Uke kebele (the kebele out of the study area) on 40 (5%) mothers who have similar characteristics with the study population, five days before actual data collection. During data collection, the supervisors conducted onsite supervision, and every evening, they checked the accuracy, consistency, and completeness of all filled questionnaires. Incomplete questionnaires were returned to data collectors to complete or to recollect again. The supervisors were re-interviewed 5% of the participants. In addition, double data entry was also made to check its consistency.

Data processing and analysis

After checking its completeness, the collected data were coded, cleaned, and entered into Epi-Data version 3.1 and exported to SPSS for Windows version 24. Descriptive statistics were done to show frequency and percentage distribution of the variables. A binary logistic regression was conducted to check the significant relationship between dependent and independent variables. Variables that had a P value of less than 0.25 in binary logistic regression were considered as the candidate variables for the multivariable logistic regression. A step-wise backward logistic regression was used to identify the association between dependent and independent variables. The strength of association between multiple independent variables and a dependent variable was declared based on their adjusted odds ratio (AOR) with 95% CI. Finally, variables with p-value <0.05 at the final model were considered as statistically significant predictors of the outcome variable. Before running multivariable logistic regression analysis, the multi-co-linearity effect was cheeked by using variance inflation factor (VIF). As a result, all variables had a VIF of <10, indicating no collinearity problem. Model fitness was also checked by Hosmer-Leme show goodness of fit. The result of the Hosmer-Lemeshow showed insignificant result, indicating the model was fit for the analysis.

Ethical considerations

Ethical clearance was obtained from Research Ethics and Review Committee (RERC) of Wollega University. Then, letter of cooperation was written to Guto Gida district administration. Finally, the aim of the study was explained and informed written consent was obtained from the study participants.

Results

Demographic and socio-economic characteristics

Out of the total 617 calculated sample size, 601 women participated, making the response rate of 97.6%. Their age ranged from 16 to 41 with a mean of 25.76 (+3.786 SD) years. The majority 281 (46.8%) of participants belonged to the age group of 25–34 years. The majority of the study participants, 542 (90.2%), were Oromo, and more than four-fifth of the respondents, 522 (86.9%) were Protestant.

Almost all, 586 (97.5%) of the study participants were married. About two thirds, 408 (67.9%) of the respondents did not attended formal education, while 162 (27.0%) attended primary school and only 31 (5.2%) attended secondary school. Furthermore, 589 (98.0%) of the respondents were housewives, and about 354 (58.9%) of the respondents belonged to the second wealth quintile (Table 1).

Table 1. Socio-demographic and economic characteristics among home delivered women, in Guto Gida district, Oromia, September 2020 (n = 601).

Variables Category Frequency Percentage
Mothers age group 15–19 83 13.8
20–24 94 15.6
25–29 140 23.3
30–34 141 23.5
35–39 98 16.3
40–44 45 7.5
Mothers Religion Protestant 522 86.9
Orthodox 48 8.0
Muslim 31 5.2
Mothers Ethnicity Oromo 542 90.2
Amhara 52 8.7
Tigre 7 1.2
Mothers Marital status Married 586 97.5
Others (single, widowed and divorced) 15 2.5
Occupation Housewife 589 98.0
Others (merchant, labor work and student) 12 2
Wealth index in quintile 1st quintile, 187 31.1
2nd quintile 354 58.9
3rd quintile 60 10.0

Maternal factors and neonatal condition

From the total (601) study participants, majority of them 483 (80.3%) delivered their first baby at the age of > 18 years, and more than half 339 (56.4%) of the respondents had 2–4 children. Only 28 (4.7%) of participants reported that their neonates died before the study period, with half of these neonates dying due to a lack of ENCP and 11 (39.3%) dying on the first day of life.

Reasons for home delivery

From the total 601 women interviewed, 574 mothers had reason for their home delivery as; 119 (20.7%) because of no nearby health facility, 181(31.5%) due to lack of transportation, 318 (55.4%) due to precipitated labor, and 185 (32.2%) were due to lack of money for service (Fig 1).

Fig 1. Reasons of postpartum women for their home delivery, in Guto Gida district, Oromia regional state, Ethiopia, 2020, (n = 574).

Fig 1

Maternal health service utilization

The majority, 453 (75.4%) of respondents were visited and advised at their home by HEWs during pregnancy and PNC. More than four-fifths 515 (85.7%) of the study participants received ANC services, and 108 (18%) of them received their first ANC visit at less than 4 months of gestation.

From the total 515 participants who received ANC services, 194 (32.3%), 226 (37.6%), and 35 (5.8%) of them made one visit, two visits, and three visits, respectively. However, only 60 (10%) of participants received each of the four sets of focused ANC services.

About 499 (83.0%), 292 (48.6%), and 58 (9.7%) of all study participants received some ANC services from HEW, midwife/nurse/HO, and doctor, respectively. One hundred sixty-five (32.0%) of participants received their entire ANC visit only from HEWs, and 16 (3.1%) of participants received their entire ANC visit only from other health workers, other than HEWs.

With regard to the persons attended their birth, 330 (54.9%) of them were attended by traditional birth attendants (TBA), 139 (23.1%) of them were attended by HEWs, and 132 (22% of them were attended by others (mother/sisters/other-relatives/friends).

Only 160 (26.6%) of participants visited their PNC. Out of those who visited their postnatal care, 95 (59.3%), 34 (21.3%), and 31 (19.4%) of them visited their PNC once, twice, and three times respectively. Regarding the date of first PNC attendance, 15 (2.5%), 63 (10.5%), 30 (5.0%), 25 (4.2%), and 27 (4.5%) of women attended their first PNC in less than 4 hours, within 4–23 hours, within 1–2 days, within 3–6 days, and within 7–41 days respectively (Table 2).

Table 2. Health service utilization among home delivered women, in Guto Gida district, Oromia regional state, Ethiopia, September 2020 (n = 601).

Variables Category Frequency Percentage
Home visit by HEW during current pregnancy and after delivery Yes 453 75.4
No 148 24.6
Advised by HEWs on hand washing with soap and water before care Yes 342 56.9
No 111 18.5
Advised by HEWs on drying and wrapping the neonate immediately after delivery Yes 124 20.6
No 329 54.7
Advised by HEWs on breastfeeding immediately after birth within 1 hour Yes 333 55.4
No 120 20.0
Advised by HEWs on Neonatal danger sign Yes 346 57.6
No 107 17.8
Attended ANC by any health professional during current pregnancy Yes 515 85.7
No 86 14.3
Travelled to health institution for PNC Yes 160 26.6
No 441 73.2

Knowledge of mother on ENCP

From the total study subjects (601), 560 (93.2%) of women had an awareness/information on ENCP. Four hundred ninety (87.3%) of women were responded the cord of the newborn were cut by using new razor blade, 514 (91.8%) of women were responded the cord were tied by new string or thread and 401 (71.6%) of them were responded nothing applied to the cord of newborn from birth up to 7 days. Three hundred fifty-two (62.9%) of women were responded as the newborn were washed/bathed after one hour. Four hundred eleven (73.4%) of women were responded as the newborn were breast fed within one hour after birth and 499 (89.1%) of them were responded as the newborn baby should feed the first breast milk/colostrum. Of those, who responded to the knowledge questions, 454 (81.1%) correctly answered more than 50% of the questions, and they were classified as having good knowledge of ENCP (Table 3).

Table 3. Knowledge status of home delivered women toward essential newborn care, in Guto Gida district, Oromia regional state, Ethiopia, September 2020.

Variables Category Frequency Percentage
Have information on ENCP (n = 601) Yes 560 93.2
No 41 6.8
Knowledge on instruments used to cut the cord (n = 560) Yes 490 87.5
No 70 12.5
Knowledge of materials used to tie the cord (n = 560) Yes 514 85.5
No 46 7.7
Knowledge of substance applied to the cord (n = 560) Yes 401 66.7
No 159 26.5
Knowledge of bathing the newborn (n = 560) Yes 111 18.5
No 449 74.7
Knowledge of mothers on newborn breast feed (n = 560) Yes 111 18.5
No 449 74.7
Knowledge of mothers on newborn first feed (n = 560) Yes 499 83.0
No 61 10.1
Knowledge on ENCP (n = 560) Good 454 75.5
Poor 106 17.6

Knowledge of mothers on neonatal danger signs

Out of the total respondents (601), 477 (78.4%) had an information/awareness on neonatal danger signs. From those women, 247 (51.8%) correctly listed 4 or more than 4 neonatal danger signs out of the 6 common danger signs and were classified as having good knowledge of neonatal danger signs (Table 4).

Table 4. Knowledge status of home delivered women toward neonatal danger signs in Guto Gida district, Oromia regional state, Ethiopia, 2020.

Variables category Frequency percentage
Awareness/information on neonatal danger signs (n = 601) Yes 477 78.4
No 124 21.6
Knowledge of mothers on poor sucking or not able feed breast (n = 477) Yes 371 61.7
No 106 17.6
Knowledge of mothers on Fast breathing (n = 477) Yes 283 47.1
No 194 32.3
Knowledge of mothers on hypothermia/babies feel cold (n = 477) Yes 83 13.8
No 394 65.6
Knowledge of mothers on febrile/fever (n = 477) Yes 346 57.6
No 131 21.8
Knowledge of mothers on drowsy or unconscious (n = 477) Yes 217 36.1
No 260 43.3
Knowledge of mothers on cord bleeding and infection (n = 477) Yes 134 22.3
No 343 57.1
Knowledge of women on neonatal danger signs (n = 477) Good 247 51.8
Poor 230 48.2

Components of essential newborn care practice

Cord care practice

The majority of respondents 443 (73.7%) cut their newborn cord with a new blade, 392 (65.2%) tied their cords with new thread, and 411 (68.4%) did nothing to their newborn cord (Table 5). Three hundred ninety-six (65.9%) of mothers had implement all essential cord care practice which were classified as good cord care practice, and 205 (34.1%) practiced poor cord care.

Table 5. Cord care practice among home delivered women, in Guto Gida district, Oromia regional state, Ethiopia, September 2020.
Variables Category Frequency Percentage
Instruments used to cut the cord (n = 601) New blade 443 73.7
Old blade 158 26.3
Boiled old instruments used to cut the cord (n = 158) Yes 106 67.1
No 52 32.9
Materials used to tie the cord (n = 601) New string/thread 392 65.2
Old string/thread/Don’t know/remember 209 34.7
Washing old materials used to tie the cord (n = 209) Yes 96 46.0
No 113 5.0
Applying substances to neonatal cord (n = 601) Yes 190 31.6
No 411 68.4
Substances those applied to neonate cord (n = 190) Butter 110 57.9
Vaseline/ointment/oil 80 42.1

Thermal care practice

About 258 (42.9%) of women bathed their newborns after 24 hours of birth, and 325 (54.1%) of women dried and wrapped their newborns after delivery of the placenta (Table 6). Majority, 381(63.4%) of mothers had not implement all essential thermal care practice and classified as poor thermal care practice, and 220 (36.6%) practiced good thermal care.

Table 6. Thermal care practice among home delivery women, in Guto Gida district, Oromia regional state, Ethiopia, September 2020, (n = 601).
Variables Category Frequency Percentage
Bathing time of the newborn after delivery within 1 hour 59 9.8
Within 24 hours 284 47.3
After 24 hours 258 42.9
Warping and drying of the newborn after delivery Before delivery of placenta 276 45.9
After delivery of placenta 325 54.1

Breastfeeding practice

With regard to breast-feeding practice, the majority 476 (79.2%) of participants provided first milk (colostrum) for their newborn, 395 (59.7%) of women initiated breastfeeding within 1 hour of birth, and 550 (91.5%) of women provided nothing for their newborn (Table 7). Majority, 355 (59.1%) of mothers had implement all essential breastfeeding practice, which was classified as good breastfeeding practice, and 246 (40.9%) practiced poor breastfeeding.

Table 7. Breast feeding practice among home delivered women, in Guto Gida district, Oromia regional state, Ethiopia, September 2020, (n = 601).
Variables Category Frequency Percentage
first breast milk (colostrum) was provided Yes 476 79.2
No 125 20.8
Breast feeding initiated within the first hour after delivery Yes 359 59.7
No 242 40.3
Provision of additional feed for the newborn Yes 51 8.5
No 550 91.5

Essential newborn care practice (ENCP)

The status of cord care practices, thermal care practices, and breastfeeding practices were assessed in this study, and the patterns of these three ENCP components were described by using percentages and frequencies. The prevalence of ENCP or women who practiced all three components of ENCP was 168 (28%) (23.9%-31.4%) (Fig 2).

Fig 2. Prevalence of essential newborn care among home delivered post-partum women in Guto Gida district, Oromia regional state, Ethiopia, May 2020.

Fig 2

Predictors of essential newborn care practices

After successfully passing through the all-important statistical process, multivariable logistic regression analysis was conducted, and the results of the analysis was compared in terms of AORs, CIs, and p-value.

The study found that the wealth quintile was statistically significantly associated with essential newborn care practice. Mothers in the first wealth quintile were 36% less likely to practice good ENCP compared to mothers in the third wealth quintile (AOR [95% CI] = 0.64 [0.34–0.97]). Similarly, the number of live births (parity) was statistically significantly associated with ENCP. Women who had 1 alive birth were 49% less likely to practice good ENCP compared to women who had > = 5 live births (AOR [95% CI] = 0.51 [0.22–0.87]). The study also discovered that neonatal death was significantly associated with ENCP practice. Women who had lost their neonate prior to the study period were 89% less likely to practice good ENCP compared to their counterparts (AOR [95% CI] = 0.11 [0.05–0.22]).

In this study, women who had been visited and advised at their home by HEWs during pregnancy and PNC were 3.45 times more likely to practice good ENCP compared to those who did not receive ENCP advice during home visits (AOR [95% CI] = 3.45[1.56–7.26]). Similarly, women who received their ANC from skilled health professional during their current pregnancy were 1.79 times more likely to practice ENCP compared to their counterparts (AOR [95% CI] = 1.79 (1.21–3.36]). The study also discovered that women whose delivery was attended by HEWs were 3.29 times more likely to practice good ENCP than women who were attended by their relatives (AOR [95% CI] = 3.29 [2.13–5.94]) (Table 8).

Table 8. Multivariable logistic regression analysis results showing the predictors of ENCP among home delivery women, in Guto Gida district, Oromia regional state, Ethiopia, 2020.

Variables Essential newborn care practice COR(95%CI) AOR(95%CI)
Good Poor
Age group
15–19 10(6.0%) 73(16.9%) 0.57(0.14–0.97) 0.67(0.13–1.23)
20–24 18(10.2%) 76(17.5%) 0.42(0.20–0.73) 0.64(0.22–1.87)
25–29 50(29.3%) 90(20.8%) 1.22(0.68–1.43) 0.87(0.41–1.24)
30–34 44(26.2%) 97(22.4%) 1.57(1.16–2.25) 0.82(0.52–1.21)
35–39 22(14.2%) 76(17.6%) 0.25(0.08–0.49) 0.41(0.13–1.07)
40–44 24(14.1%) 21(4.8%) 1.00 1.00
Educational status
No formal education 94(56.0%) 314(72.5%) 0.51(0.18–0.97) 0.81(0.44–1.32)
Primary (1–8) 60(35.7%) 102(23.6%) 0.71(0.37–0.92) 0.74(0.25–1.46)
Secondary (9–12) 14(8.3%) 17(3.9%) 1.00 1.00
wealth index in quintile
1st—quintile 39(23.2%) 148(34.2%) 0.53(0.19–0.95) 0.64(0.34–0.97) *
2nd—quintile 117(69.7%) 237(54.7%) 1.97(0.92–2.12) 0.71(0.50–1.10)
3rd—quintile 12(7.1%) 48(11.1%) 1.00 1.00
Number of children (alive birth)
One 21(12.5%) 131(30.2%) 0.27(0.12–0.56) 0.51(0.22–0.87) *
2–4 127(75.6%) 212(49.0%) 2.69(0.92–4.81) 1.43(0.78–2.05)
At > = 5 20(11.9%) 90(20.8%) 1.00 1.00
Visited and advised at home by HEWs
Yes 145(86.4%) 308(71.1%) 2.56(1.47–4.33) 3.45 (1.56–7.26) *
No 23(13.6%) 125(28.9%) 1.00 1.00
Attending ANC visit
Yes 155(92.3%) 360(83.1%) 2.42(1.23–5.01) 1.79 (1.21–3.36) *
No 13(7.7%) 73(16.9%) 1.00 1.00
Birth attendants
HEWs 78(46.4%) 61(14.1%) 4.50(1.09–7.29) 3.29(2.13–5.94) *
TBAs 73(43.4%) 257(50.5%) 1.92(0.84–4.42) 2.20(0.73–4.42)
Mothers/sisters 9(5.4%) 79(18.1%) 0.51(0.35–1.01) 0.53(0.33–1.05)
Other relatives 8(4.8%) 36(8.3%) 1.00 1.00
Neonatal status/condition
Died 4(2.4%) 24(5.5%) 0.42(0.10–0.67) 0.11(0.05–0.22) *
Live 164(97.6%) 409(94.5%) 1.00 1.00

COR = Crude odd ratio, AOR = Adjusted Odd Ratio

* = significant at p<0.05, 1 = Reference category, CI = Confidence Interval

Discussion

It is interesting to note that this study was conducted in rural areas of Guto Gida district to assess the prevalence of ENCP and to identify determinant factors that hinder or promote ENCP among home-delivered mothers. The prevalence of ENCP was 168 (28%) (24.6%-31.8%) and the level of safe cord care, good breastfeeding, and good thermal care practices were (65.9%), (59.1%), and (36.6%), respectively. Our study findings also provided further evidence like: (42.9%) mothers bathed their newborn after 24 hours; (45.9%) mothers dried/wrapped the newborn immediately after birth; (59.7%) mothers initiated breast-feeding within one hour; and (79.2%) mothers provided colostrum for their newborn, which is lower than the WHO recommendation (100%).

In this study, 168 (28%) (24.6%-31.8%) of women demonstrated good ENCP, which is almost similar to previous studies conducted in Karnataka, India (28%) [19]. However, the current study finding is lower than the study conducted in rural area of South Ethiopia, Gedeo zone (24.1%) [7], study conducted in South Ethiopia Damot Pulasa (24%) [9], a study conducted in Chewaka Resettlement area, Ethiopia (5%) [11], a study conducted in Awabel district, East Gojam (23.1%) [20], and a study conducted in Ghana (2%) [5]. This difference may be due to multi-cultural variation among regions and the good status of mothers on pre-lacteal feeding, which has a rate of 91.5% in this study.

The prevalence of the current study is lower than previous studies conducted in Chencha District, South Ethiopia (38.4%) [4], Enderta Tigray, Ethiopia (40.7%) [8], Addis Ababa, Ethiopia (38.8%) [12], North West Ethiopia Mandura (41%) [21], and North Ethiopia Tigray (48.1%) [22]. This may be due to the low level of home visits by HEW (75% only visited), and the poor attitude of women on ENCP (approximately 66%) in the current study. The other possible reason is that, in the current study, all of the study participants were home-born without the help of skilled birth attendants, which contributed to the low prevalence of ENCP.

In this study, wealth quintile, number of live births (parity), neonatal death, home visit by HEW, ANC visit, and birth attendants were statistically significant predictors of ENCP.

In this study, women in the first wealth quintile were 36% less likely to practice ENCP as compared with women in the third wealth quintile. It was supported by the studies conducted in Chencha District, South Ethiopia, Eastern Uganda and rural areas of Nepal, which showed that women in the lower wealth quintiles were less likely to practice ENCP as compared to women in the highest wealth quintiles [4, 10, 23]. There are possible explanations for this finding. The first one is that women in the first wealth quintile were less likely to purchase a new blade to cut the cord, the new thread to tie the cord, and the clean clothes to warp the neonate. Another fact is that, when compared to women in the highest wealth quintile, women in the lowest wealth quintile were expected to have less access to information due to the unavailability of important items such as TVs, radios, and mobile phones in their homes.

In this study, women who had one live birth were 49% less likely to practice ENCP than women who had more than five live births. The reason for this association may be ongoing advice that has been given by health workers during repetitive pregnancy, delivery, and postnatal care. In contrast to this finding, the study conducted in Uganda found that multi-porous mothers were 50% less likely to practice ENCP as compared to prime-porous mothers [23] This contradiction may be due to aged mothers’ being more likely to prefer traditional practice than younger ones.

In this study, women who had home visits by HEWs and got advice on ENCP during pregnancy and PNC were 3.45 times more likely to practice ENCP as compared with women who had not been advised during home visits by HEWs. A consistent finding was documented by the study conducted in East Gojjam Awabel District, which found that women who had been advised on ENCP during their monthly visit were 4.8 times more likely to practice ENCP as compared with those women who were not advised during their monthly visit [20]. It was also supported by the studies conducted in four regions of Ethiopia, Addis Ababa, South Ethiopia (Damot Pulasa), and Nepal [6, 9, 12, 24]. The possible reason for this may be the ongoing progressive advice on ENCP during home visits by HEWs, which helps the mothers better understand and internalize the benefits of ENCP.

According to the study findings, women who had their ANC attended by a skilled health professional were 1.79 times more likely to practice ENCP than women who had not attended. This finding is supported by a study conducted in Chencha District of Southern Ethiopia [4], a study conducted in Enderta District, Tigray of Ethiopia [8], a study conducted in the rural districts of Gedeo zone of Southern Ethiopia [7], a study conducted in Mandura district of North West Ethiopia [21], a study conducted in Jimma [5], a study conducted in Eastern Uganda [23], a study conducted in Northern Ghana [17], a study conducted in Tanzania [25], and a study conducted in Sindhuli district of Nepal [10]. The possible reason may be the counseling that was conducted on the risk of poor ENCP and the benefit of good ENCP during ANC visit, which improved awareness of mothers on all activities of ENCP.

The current study found that women who had given birth by the help of HEWs were 3.29 times more likely to practice ENCP as compared with women who had given birth by the help of their relatives. This finding was supported by the studies conducted in Adis Abeba, Jimma, and Eastern Uganda [12, 23, 26]. This may be due to the fact that HEWs have more skill and experience on ENCP than other community members. However, this finding is inconsistent with a study done in Chencha District, South Ethiopia, [4]. The reason for this difference may be that some mothers reside in traditional mal-practices such as giving birth in the hands of more skilled birth attendants.

In this study, women who had lost their neonate before the study period were 89% less likely to practice ENCP as compared with women who had a live neonate. This finding confirms the fact that poor practicing of ENCP including the use of unclean cord cuts that may cause tetanus, the use of poor strength old cord ties that may cause cord bleeding and the application of substances to the cord that may cause infection can lead to neonatal death. The finding of the current study was contradicted by the studies conducted in Endenet Tigray Ethiopia, North West Ethiopia, and Northern Ghana [8, 17, 21]. The reason for this difference might be due to awareness creation made by health extension workers and other health care providers in case of the studies conducted in Endenet Tigray Ethiopia, North West Ethiopia, and Northern Ghana.

The present study used a cross-sectional study design; therefore, the temporal relationship between cause and effect was not addressed. The study used quantitative approach that makes unable to provide qualitative perspectives on essential newborn care practice. The other limitation is the use of only women’s responses to conduct the study and the inability to consider bias that occurred as a result of differences between women’s responses and actual observations. It study asked the women’s past practice. As a result, recall bias may have affected the study.

Sample size was calculated for the prevalence of the outcome variable only, and not for factors associated with the outcome variable. This may lead to lack of adequate power and missing out on some other risk factors with small effect sizes.

Conclusions and recommendations

The evidence from this study suggests that ENCP was demonstrated by less than one-third of women, safe cord care was demonstrated by two-thirds of women, good thermal care was demonstrated by about one-third of women, and good breastfeeding was demonstrated by two-thirds of women, which is lower than the WHO recommendation (100%). In this study, women in the first wealth quintile, women who had one live birth, and women who had lost their neonate before the study period were independent negative predictors for good ENC practice. Home visits by HEWs, ANC visits, and HEW attendance at birth were independent positive predictors of good ENC practice.

Healthcare planners should improve the current intervention plan on all components of ENCP and should give special attention to ANC service, home visits by HEW, women in lower wealth quintiles, and primi gravid (Para 1) women. Health office of the study district should organize an (IEC) program and enforce health care providers’ recommendations in order to work efficiently. HWs should provide continued education and counseling services during ANC visits and delivery. HEWs should ensure they provide sufficient information on ENCP and neonatal danger signs during ANC visits, delivery, and home visits. They should give special attention to those women in the low-wealth quintile and primi gravid (Para one) during the ANC visit and home visit. Newborn care practice is a relatively crucial research topic and a government concern to achieve the sustainable development goal by 2030 and to reduce neonatal morbidity and mortality. Therefore, further research that uses advanced design and include qualitative part is needed.

Supporting information

S1 Questionnaire. English and Afan Oromo (Local language) versions questionnaire.

(DOCX)

S1 Data. SPSS data base.

(SAV)

Acknowledgments

The authors would like to thank Wollega University Institute of Health Sciences. Particular thanks also go to all supervisors, data collectors, and study participants for their cooperation and support during the study.

Data Availability

All relevant data are within the paper and its Supporting Information files.

Funding Statement

The authors received no specific funding for this work.

References

  • 1.Komakech H, Lubogo D, Nabiwemba E, Orach CG (2020) Essential newborn care practices and determinants amongst mothers of infants aged 0–6 months in refugee settlements, Adjumani district, west Nile, Uganda. PLoS ONE 15(4): e0231970. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0231970 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 2.Tegene T, Andargie G, Nega A, Yimam K. (2015), Newborn care practice and associated factors among mothers who gave birth within one year in Mandura district, Northwest Ethiopia, Clinics Mother Child Health. 12: 172. 10.4172/2090-7214.1000172. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 3.Misgna H., Gebru H., Birhanu M. Knowledge, practice and associated factors of essential newborn care at home among mothers in, Tigray, North Ethiopia, 2014. BMC pregnancy and childbirth, 16(1), 144. doi: 10.1186/s12884-016-0931-y [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 4.Mersha A., Assefa N., Teji K., Shibiru S., Darghawth R. Essential newborn care practice and its predictors among mother who delivered within the past six months in Chencha District, Southern Ethiopia, 2017.PLoS ONE 13 (12): e0208984. 10.1371/journal.pone.0208984. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 5.Ndebugri Alem John, (2017), Determinants of essential newborn care practices among postnatal women in Bawku municipality, University of Ghana. Ghana. URI: http://hdl.handle.net/123456789/2198. [Google Scholar]
  • 6.Jennifer A. Callaghan-Koru, Abiy SE., Maya T, Barbara R. (2014) Newborn care practices at home and in health facilities in 4 regions of Ethiopia, Ethiopia: BMC pediatrics, doi: 10.1186/1471-2431-13-198 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 7.Abebe A., Akine E. (2020), Assessment of home-based newborn care practices among lactating mothers and associated factors in rural districts of Gedeo Zone, Southern Ethiopia. https://www.dovepress.com/terms.php. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 8.Gebrehiwot GW., Zenawi N., Alemayehu BK., Yemane G., Kidanemaryam BT. (2020), Community-Based Essential Newborn Care Practices and Associated Factors among Women of Enderta, Tigray, Ethiopia. Hindawi Jor, Rep, Med, 2020, ID 2590705, 10.1155/2020/2590705. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 9.Tesfaye YC., Baze M., Feleke H., Birhanu WD., Antehun A., (2018), Essential newborn care practices and associated factors among home delivered mothers in Damot pulasa Woreda, S-Ethiopia. MPH thesis, no.15:162, URI: 10.1186/s12978-018-0609-1 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 10.Tuladhar S. (2017). The Determinants of Good Newborn Care Practices in the Rural Areas of Nepal. Retrieved 24th April, from https://ir.canterbury.ac.nz/handle/10092/5061 [Google Scholar]
  • 11.Aliyie Hasen Adem, (2014), Effect of planned teaching on essential newborn care practice and identification of neonatal danger signs among mothers in Chewaka resettlement area June, Addis Ababa, Ethiopia. [Google Scholar]
  • 12.Workinesh D., Tsion A., Mulugeta S., Behailu T. (2019), Knowledge and practice of essential newborn care among postnatal mothers in Addis Ababa City Health Centers, Ethiopia, doi: 10.5897/JPHE2019.1161, http://www.academicjournals.org/JPHE. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 13.Ahmad S, Goel K, Agarwal G, Goel P, Kumar V. (2012) Assessment of the Newborn Care Practices in Home Deliveries among Urban Slums of Meerut, UP India. J Community Med Health Educ 2:171. doi: 10.4172/2161-0711.1000171 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 14.Zum ED., Medizinischen F. (2013), impact of community- and home-based interventions for improved newborn care practices in Nepal. [Google Scholar]
  • 15.R Eshma Sujatha R. (2014), Cultural practices and beliefs on newborn care among mothers, in a selected hospital of Mangalore Taluk Nujhs India. 2014;359(9832):2151–61. [Google Scholar]
  • 16.Ethiopia, central statistical Administrative report, (2012), the 2007 population and housing census of Ethiopia, April 2012, Addis Ababa. [Google Scholar]
  • 17.Saaka M., Iddrisu M. (2014). Patterns and determinants of essential newborn care practices in rural areas of northern Ghana, International Journal of Population Research, 2014, doi: 10.1155/2014/404387 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 18.Maonga AR., Mahande MJ., Damian DJ, Msuya SE. (2016), Factors Affecting Exclusive Breastfeeding among Women in Muheza District Tanga Northeastern Tanzania: A Mixed Method Community Based Study. Maternal and child health journal, 20(1), 77–87. doi: 10.1007/s10995-015-1805-z [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 19.Upashe Shivaleela P. (2014), A Study to Assess the Essential Newborn Care Practices among Primipara Mothers at Government District Hospital, Tumkur, Karnataka, India. Asian J. Nur. Edu. & Research 4(3): July-Sept.; Page 370–375. [Google Scholar]
  • 20.Kokebie T., Aychiluhm M., & Alamneh G. (2015). Community Based Essential New Born Care Practices and Associated Factors among Women in the Rural Community of Awabel District, East Gojjam Zone, Amhara, Ethiopia, 2013. International Journal of Advances in Scientific Research, doi: 10.7439/ijasr [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 21.Tegene T, Andargie G, Nega A, Yimam K. (2015), Newborn care practice and associated factors among mothers who gave birth within one year in Mandura district, Northwest Ethiopia, Clinics Mother Child Health. 12: 172. doi: 10.4172/2090-7214.1000172 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 22.Misgna G., Gebru B., Birhanu M. (2016). Knowledge, practice and associated factors of essential newborn care at home among mothers in, Tigray, North Ethiopia, 2014. BMC pregnancy and childbirth, 16(1), 144. doi: 10.1186/s12884-016-0931-y [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 23.Owor O., Matovu K., Murokora D., Wanyenze K., Waiswa P. (2016). Factors associated with adoption of beneficial newborn care practices in rural Eastern Uganda: a cross-sectional study. doi: 10.1186/s12884-016-0874-3 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 24.Osrin D, Tumbahangphe KM, Shrestha D, Mesko N, Shrestha BP, Manandhar MK. et al. (2012), Cross sectional, community based study of care of newborn infants in Nepal. BMJ. 2002;325(7372):1063. doi: 10.1136/bmj.325.7372.1063 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 25.Penfold S., Manzi F., Mkumbo E., Temu S., Jaribu J., Shamba D, et al. (2014), Effect of home-based counselling on newborn care practices in southern Tanzania, BMC Pediatr. 2014; 14:187. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 26.Girma T, Nida H. (2008), Traditional newborn care in Jimma town, Southwest Ethiopia. Ethiop J Health Sci. 18(3):79–86. [Google Scholar]
PLOS Glob Public Health. doi: 10.1371/journal.pgph.0001469.r001

Decision Letter 0

Ramachandran Thiruvengadam

18 Aug 2022

PGPH-D-22-00752

Essential newborn care practices and associated factors among home delivered mothers in Guto Gida District, East Wollega Zone

PLOS Global Public Health

Dear Dr. Kejela,

Thank you for submitting your manuscript to PLOS Global Public Health. After careful consideration, we feel that it has merit but does not fully meet PLOS Global Public Health’s publication criteria as it currently stands. Therefore, we invite you to submit a revised version of the manuscript that addresses the points raised during the review process.

==============================

Further, all reviewers and the editor feel that the formatting and language must improve to be able to communicate the message clearly in the manuscript. In the absence of such a revision, it may be difficult to evaluate the manuscript to the fullest. The authors are requested to correct the grammatical and typographical errors in the manuscript in the revised version. 

==============================

Please submit your revised manuscript by Oct 02 2022 11:59PM. If you will need more time than this to complete your revisions, please reply to this message or contact the journal office at globalpubhealth@plos.org. When you're ready to submit your revision, log on to https://www.editorialmanager.com/pgph/ and select the 'Submissions Needing Revision' folder to locate your manuscript file.

Please include the following items when submitting your revised manuscript:

  • A rebuttal letter that responds to each point raised by the editor and reviewer(s). You should upload this letter as a separate file labeled 'Response to Reviewers'.

  • A marked-up copy of your manuscript that highlights changes made to the original version. You should upload this as a separate file labeled 'Revised Manuscript with Track Changes'.

  • An unmarked version of your revised paper without tracked changes. You should upload this as a separate file labeled 'Manuscript'.

Guidelines for resubmitting your figure files are available below the reviewer comments at the end of this letter.

We look forward to receiving your revised manuscript.

Kind regards,

Ramachandran Thiruvengadam, M.D.,

Academic Editor

PLOS Global Public Health

Journal Requirements:

1. Please upload all main figures as separate Figure files in .tif or .eps format only. For more information about how to convert and format your figure files please see our guidelines:

https://journals.plos.org/globalpublichealth/s/figures

2. Please provide a/amend your detailed Financial Disclosure statement. This is published with the article. It must therefore be completed in full sentences and contain the exact wording you wish to be published.

a. State the initials, alongside each funding source, of each author to receive each grant.

b. State what role the funders took in the study. If the funders had no role in your study, please state: “The funders had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript.”

c. If any authors received a salary from any of your funders, please state which authors and which funders.

3. Please provide separate figure files in .tif or .eps format.

For more information about figure files please see our guidelines: 

https://journals.plos.org/globalpublichealth/s/figures 

https://journals.plos.org/globalpublichealth/s/figures#loc-file-requirements 

4. Please amend your Data Availability Statement and indicate where the data may be found

Additional Editor Comments (if provided):

1. Abstract – In the following lines of results section, “Women who were advised on essential newborn care practice during a home visit by a health extension worker (3.45 p 0.01), women who attended antenatal care during their current pregnancy (1.79 p 0.01), and women who were attended at their birth by a health extension worker (3.29 p 0.01) were more likely to practice essential newborn care.”, the authors must provide the 95% CI for the association estimates and avoid p-values.

2. Methods section of the main manuscript – The authors write, “Women in the reproductive age group (15–49), who resided in the study area for at least six months, were reported to have delivered an alive baby within six months of postpartum and might have had an infant loss prior to the study period. mothers who were seriously ill, had a history of mental illness, and were unable to care for their infants, or care givers/guardians who cared for infants”. It seems that they are trying to describe the inclusion and exclusion criteria but these sentences aren’t conveying the information. Please rewrite.

3. Sample size calculation has been done to estimate the prevalence of the adoption of essential newborn care practices and not for the association analysis that they perform subsequently. This potentially could lead to lack of adequate power and missing out on the some other risk factors with small effect sizes. This should be mentioned in the limitation section.

4. The numbering of sections and subsections may be removed

5. The lists of dependent and independent variables may either be shifted to a table or written in to a narrative form, rather than bulleted lists.

6. Abbreviations need not be listed, better be avoided and if used, should be expanded at the first instance of usage.

7. In table-8, it is better to avoid p-values, if the author wants to present, then please give the actual p-vlaue instead of mentioning <0.01 etc.,

[Note: HTML markup is below. Please do not edit.]

Reviewers' comments:

Reviewer's Responses to Questions

Comments to the Author

1. Does this manuscript meet PLOS Global Public Health’s publication criteria? Is the manuscript technically sound, and do the data support the conclusions? The manuscript must describe methodologically and ethically rigorous research with conclusions that are appropriately drawn based on the data presented.

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #2: Partly

Reviewer #3: Yes

**********

2. Has the statistical analysis been performed appropriately and rigorously?

Reviewer #1: No

Reviewer #2: Yes

Reviewer #3: I don't know

**********

3. Have the authors made all data underlying the findings in their manuscript fully available (please refer to the Data Availability Statement at the start of the manuscript PDF file)?

The PLOS Data policy requires authors to make all data underlying the findings described in their manuscript fully available without restriction, with rare exception. The data should be provided as part of the manuscript or its supporting information, or deposited to a public repository. For example, in addition to summary statistics, the data points behind means, medians and variance measures should be available. If there are restrictions on publicly sharing data—e.g. participant privacy or use of data from a third party—those must be specified.

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #2: Yes

Reviewer #3: Yes

**********

4. Is the manuscript presented in an intelligible fashion and written in standard English?

PLOS Global Public Health does not copyedit accepted manuscripts, so the language in submitted articles must be clear, correct, and unambiguous. Any typographical or grammatical errors should be corrected at revision, so please note any specific errors here.

Reviewer #1: No

Reviewer #2: No

Reviewer #3: No

**********

5. Review Comments to the Author

Please use the space provided to explain your answers to the questions above. You may also include additional comments for the author, including concerns about dual publication, research ethics, or publication ethics. (Please upload your review as an attachment if it exceeds 20,000 characters)

Reviewer #1: Abstract

• Methods

o No need to write about software details

o Focus on description of the protocol

• In the results section, expression values can be changed

o 95% CI instead of CI

o Write [ a vs.b ; p:0.01] format

• Conclusions

o the world health organization should be written as World Health Organization

o Recommendations can’t be in conclusion

o Only findings of the study need to be described

Introduction

• Looks a little lengthy

• Should focus on the basis for the study; shouldn’t comment about

• 2nd line: “the care they receive from delivery up to 28 days postpartum”

o Need to change it

o We are focusing on the neonatal care

o Authors can write it as till 28 days of life

o Postpartum period refers to maternal care

Methodology

• A little details about existing care available for the population can be mentioned

• Existing health care personnel manpower details can be mentioned

• WHO includes following in essential newborn care:

o Immediate care at birth (delayed cord clamping, thorough drying, assessment of breathing, skin-to-skin contact, early initiation of breastfeeding)

o Thermal care

o Resuscitation when needed

o Support for breast milk feeding

o Nurturing care

o Infection prevention

o Assessment of health problems

o Recognition and response to danger signs

o Timely and safe referral when needed

Authors need to mention the reason for choosing limited items

Results

• Expression of variable needs to be changed; should be according to the author’s guidelines

• Husband or spouse education details might help; Also highest educational status in the family will also help in understanding the mother’s family status. Also we can utilize their knowledge to look the ENC practices; If author’s have the details, they can mention

Discussion

• Authors should try to describe and compare the results with other studies..No description of other study details and values. Also authors should tell how the present study fares against them in terms of strengths and limitations

• Limitations

o The design of the study has inherent limitations; Authors need to mention it

o Recall bias also need to be mentioned

Typo errors and grammar needs to be corrected; 3 level heading policy doesn't require authors to have the numbering; It can be removed.

Authors can write a footnote below each table: need to expand abbreviations used in the table;

Reviewer #2: Introduction:

The introduction explains the importance of Essential newborn care. The justification for the study is written in a lengthy way which could be shortened.

Methods and Materials:

The primary and secondary objectives of the study were not explicitly mentioned.

Population:

Inclusion and exclusion criteria were not mentioned clearly.

Sampling methods and study design were explained in detail.

Operational definitions:

Dependent variables:

Three variables and their scoring methods could be explained in simple words or table for easy clarity.

Poor ENCP was also assigned a score of 1. (? Typographical error)

Independent variables:

There is a mention about 12 independent variables for ENCP. Those could be numbered and clearly mentioned.

The scale used to measure wealth index to be mentioned

Results:

The description of data mentioned in tables could be avoided.

Only 560 of the total 601 study participants were assessed for knowledge on ENCP. The reasons were not mentioned.

Similarly, only 477 were evaluated for knowledge on neonatal danger signs.

All the independent variables used and the results of the analysis for each variable could be mentioned.

Though used as independent variables, knowledge and attitude on ENCP was not used for analysis.

The data collected for reasons for home delivery were not used in analysis. The importance of those data for the study objectives has to be mentioned.

Discussion:

The paragraph mentioning the association of neonatal loss with lack of ENCP is difficult to understand. Reframing sentences for clear understanding is suggested.

Tables:

Table 2: The frequency of subjects advised on handwashing, drying baby, breastfeeding and those who were not advised do not add to the total of 601 subjects.

Tables 3 & 4: The number of respondents for each category is varying and not all study subjects data were not studied.

Reviewer #3: This study is the valid and valuable confirmation of the state of essential newborn care practices in rural Ethiopia. Authors have used rigorous research tools to test the research question. However authors need to pay attention to the English as some of the sentences need grammatical correction so that they can be meaningful. For example the section on population in section 2.2 under methods- does not convey any meaning.

**********

6. PLOS authors have the option to publish the peer review history of their article (what does this mean?). If published, this will include your full peer review and any attached files.

Do you want your identity to be public for this peer review? If you choose “no”, your identity will remain anonymous but your review may still be made public.

For information about this choice, including consent withdrawal, please see our Privacy Policy.

Reviewer #1: No

Reviewer #2: No

Reviewer #3: Yes: Chandra Kumar Natarajan

**********

[NOTE: If reviewer comments were submitted as an attachment file, they will be attached to this email and accessible via the submission site. Please log into your account, locate the manuscript record, and check for the action link "View Attachments". If this link does not appear, there are no attachment files.]

While revising your submission, please upload your figure files to the Preflight Analysis and Conversion Engine (PACE) digital diagnostic tool, https://pacev2.apexcovantage.com/. PACE helps ensure that figures meet PLOS requirements. To use PACE, you must first register as a user. Registration is free. Then, login and navigate to the UPLOAD tab, where you will find detailed instructions on how to use the tool. If you encounter any issues or have any questions when using PACE, please email PLOS at figures@plos.org. Please note that Supporting Information files do not need this step.

PLOS Glob Public Health. doi: 10.1371/journal.pgph.0001469.r003

Decision Letter 1

Ramachandran Thiruvengadam

25 Oct 2022

PGPH-D-22-00752R1

Essential newborn care practices and associated factors among home delivered mothers in Guto Gida District, East Wollega Zone

PLOS Global Public Health

Dear Dr. Kejela,

Thank you for submitting your manuscript to PLOS Global Public Health. After careful consideration, we feel that it has merit but does not fully meet PLOS Global Public Health’s publication criteria as it currently stands. Therefore, we invite you to submit a revised version of the manuscript that addresses the points raised during the review process.

Please submit your revised manuscript by Nov 24 2022 11:59PM. If you will need more time than this to complete your revisions, please reply to this message or contact the journal office at globalpubhealth@plos.org. When you're ready to submit your revision, log on to https://www.editorialmanager.com/pgph/ and select the 'Submissions Needing Revision' folder to locate your manuscript file.

Please include the following items when submitting your revised manuscript:

  • A rebuttal letter that responds to each point raised by the editor and reviewer(s). You should upload this letter as a separate file labeled 'Response to Reviewers'.

  • A marked-up copy of your manuscript that highlights changes made to the original version. You should upload this as a separate file labeled 'Revised Manuscript with Track Changes'.

  • An unmarked version of your revised paper without tracked changes. You should upload this as a separate file labeled 'Manuscript'.

Guidelines for resubmitting your figure files are available below the reviewer comments at the end of this letter.

We look forward to receiving your revised manuscript.

Kind regards,

Ramachandran Thiruvengadam, M.D.,

Academic Editor

PLOS Global Public Health

Journal Requirements:

Please review your reference list to ensure that it is complete and correct. If you have cited papers that have been retracted, please include the rationale for doing so in the manuscript text, or remove these references and replace them with relevant current references. Any changes to the reference list should be mentioned in the rebuttal letter that accompanies your revised manuscript. If you need to cite a retracted article, indicate the article’s retracted status in the References list and also include a citation and full reference for the retraction notice.

Additional Editor Comments (if provided):

[Note: HTML markup is below. Please do not edit.]

Reviewers' comments:

Reviewer's Responses to Questions

Comments to the Author

1. If the authors have adequately addressed your comments raised in a previous round of review and you feel that this manuscript is now acceptable for publication, you may indicate that here to bypass the “Comments to the Author” section, enter your conflict of interest statement in the “Confidential to Editor” section, and submit your "Accept" recommendation.

Reviewer #1: All comments have been addressed

Reviewer #2: All comments have been addressed

**********

2. Does this manuscript meet PLOS Global Public Health’s publication criteria? Is the manuscript technically sound, and do the data support the conclusions? The manuscript must describe methodologically and ethically rigorous research with conclusions that are appropriately drawn based on the data presented.

Reviewer #1: No

Reviewer #2: Yes

**********

3. Has the statistical analysis been performed appropriately and rigorously?

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #2: Yes

**********

4. Have the authors made all data underlying the findings in their manuscript fully available (please refer to the Data Availability Statement at the start of the manuscript PDF file)?

The PLOS Data policy requires authors to make all data underlying the findings described in their manuscript fully available without restriction, with rare exception. The data should be provided as part of the manuscript or its supporting information, or deposited to a public repository. For example, in addition to summary statistics, the data points behind means, medians and variance measures should be available. If there are restrictions on publicly sharing data—e.g. participant privacy or use of data from a third party—those must be specified.

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #2: Yes

**********

5. Is the manuscript presented in an intelligible fashion and written in standard English?

PLOS Global Public Health does not copyedit accepted manuscripts, so the language in submitted articles must be clear, correct, and unambiguous. Any typographical or grammatical errors should be corrected at revision, so please note any specific errors here.

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #2: Yes

**********

6. Review Comments to the Author

Please use the space provided to explain your answers to the questions above. You may also include additional comments for the author, including concerns about dual publication, research ethics, or publication ethics. (Please upload your review as an attachment if it exceeds 20,000 characters)

Reviewer #1: Spellings of sections headers like “conclusion”, “Introduction”, “Key word” and “study” needs correction. Many needs correction in text, tables and figures

Methodology:

The detailing of “Yes/No and 1/0” can be removed as you have mentioned definitions. Keep categorizations only when authors have more than >2 categories exist.

Sample size formula can be removed

Reviewer #2: All comments have been addressed. The language of the manuscript is now easy to understand.

**********

7. PLOS authors have the option to publish the peer review history of their article (what does this mean?). If published, this will include your full peer review and any attached files.

Do you want your identity to be public for this peer review? If you choose “no”, your identity will remain anonymous but your review may still be made public.

For information about this choice, including consent withdrawal, please see our Privacy Policy.

Reviewer #1: No

Reviewer #2: No

**********

[NOTE: If reviewer comments were submitted as an attachment file, they will be attached to this email and accessible via the submission site. Please log into your account, locate the manuscript record, and check for the action link "View Attachments". If this link does not appear, there are no attachment files.]

While revising your submission, please upload your figure files to the Preflight Analysis and Conversion Engine (PACE) digital diagnostic tool, https://pacev2.apexcovantage.com/. PACE helps ensure that figures meet PLOS requirements. To use PACE, you must first register as a user. Registration is free. Then, login and navigate to the UPLOAD tab, where you will find detailed instructions on how to use the tool. If you encounter any issues or have any questions when using PACE, please email PLOS at figures@plos.org. Please note that Supporting Information files do not need this step.

PLOS Glob Public Health. doi: 10.1371/journal.pgph.0001469.r005

Decision Letter 2

Ramachandran Thiruvengadam

14 Dec 2022

Essential newborn care practices and associated factors among home delivered mothers in Guto Gida District, East Wollega Zone

PGPH-D-22-00752R2

Dear Dr Kejela,

We are pleased to inform you that your manuscript 'Essential newborn care practices and associated factors among home delivered mothers in Guto Gida District, East Wollega Zone' has been provisionally accepted for publication in PLOS Global Public Health.

Before your manuscript can be formally accepted you will need to complete some formatting changes, which you will receive in a follow up email. A member of our team will be in touch with a set of requests.

Please note that your manuscript will not be scheduled for publication until you have made the required changes, so a swift response is appreciated.

IMPORTANT: The editorial review process is now complete. PLOS will only permit corrections to spelling, formatting or significant scientific errors from this point onwards. Requests for major changes, or any which affect the scientific understanding of your work, will cause delays to the publication date of your manuscript.

If your institution or institutions have a press office, please notify them about your upcoming paper to help maximize its impact. If they'll be preparing press materials, please inform our press team as soon as possible -- no later than 48 hours after receiving the formal acceptance. Your manuscript will remain under strict press embargo until 2 pm Eastern Time on the date of publication. For more information, please contact globalpubhealth@plos.org.

Thank you again for supporting Open Access publishing; we are looking forward to publishing your work in PLOS Global Public Health.

Best regards,

Ramachandran Thiruvengadam, M.D.,

Academic Editor

PLOS Global Public Health

***********************************************************

Reviewer Comments (if any, and for reference):

Reviewer's Responses to Questions

Comments to the Author

1. If the authors have adequately addressed your comments raised in a previous round of review and you feel that this manuscript is now acceptable for publication, you may indicate that here to bypass the “Comments to the Author” section, enter your conflict of interest statement in the “Confidential to Editor” section, and submit your "Accept" recommendation.

Reviewer #1: All comments have been addressed

**********

2. Does this manuscript meet PLOS Global Public Health’s publication criteria? Is the manuscript technically sound, and do the data support the conclusions? The manuscript must describe methodologically and ethically rigorous research with conclusions that are appropriately drawn based on the data presented.

Reviewer #1: Yes

**********

3. Has the statistical analysis been performed appropriately and rigorously?

Reviewer #1: Yes

**********

4. Have the authors made all data underlying the findings in their manuscript fully available (please refer to the Data Availability Statement at the start of the manuscript PDF file)?

The PLOS Data policy requires authors to make all data underlying the findings described in their manuscript fully available without restriction, with rare exception. The data should be provided as part of the manuscript or its supporting information, or deposited to a public repository. For example, in addition to summary statistics, the data points behind means, medians and variance measures should be available. If there are restrictions on publicly sharing data—e.g. participant privacy or use of data from a third party—those must be specified.

Reviewer #1: Yes

**********

5. Is the manuscript presented in an intelligible fashion and written in standard English?

PLOS Global Public Health does not copyedit accepted manuscripts, so the language in submitted articles must be clear, correct, and unambiguous. Any typographical or grammatical errors should be corrected at revision, so please note any specific errors here.

Reviewer #1: Yes

**********

6. Review Comments to the Author

Please use the space provided to explain your answers to the questions above. You may also include additional comments for the author, including concerns about dual publication, research ethics, or publication ethics. (Please upload your review as an attachment if it exceeds 20,000 characters)

Reviewer #1: Authors have done the necessary corrections

**********

7. PLOS authors have the option to publish the peer review history of their article (what does this mean?). If published, this will include your full peer review and any attached files.

Do you want your identity to be public for this peer review? If you choose “no”, your identity will remain anonymous but your review may still be made public.

For information about this choice, including consent withdrawal, please see our Privacy Policy.

Reviewer #1: No

**********

Associated Data

    This section collects any data citations, data availability statements, or supplementary materials included in this article.

    Supplementary Materials

    S1 Questionnaire. English and Afan Oromo (Local language) versions questionnaire.

    (DOCX)

    S1 Data. SPSS data base.

    (SAV)

    Attachment

    Submitted filename: Response to Reviewers.docx

    Attachment

    Submitted filename: Authors Response to reviewers comments.docx

    Data Availability Statement

    All relevant data are within the paper and its Supporting Information files.


    Articles from PLOS Global Public Health are provided here courtesy of PLOS

    RESOURCES