Skip to main content
PLOS One logoLink to PLOS One
. 2022 Dec 14;17(12):e0274594. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0274594

The practice of early mother-newborn skin-to-skin contact after delivery of healthy term neonate and associated factors among health care professionals at health facilities of Southwestern Oromia, Ethiopia: A cross-sectional study

Dejene Edosa Dirirsa 1,*, Mukemil Awol Salo 1, Tinsae Abeya Geleta 2,#, Berhanu Senbata Deriba 2,#, Girma Tufa Melese 3,#
Editor: Jianhong Zhou4
PMCID: PMC9750000  PMID: 36516164

Abstract

Introduction

Skin-to-skin contact between a mother and her new-born baby after birth is beneficial for both the mother and her baby. Although mother-newborn skin-to-skin contact after birth is an essential practice, it is limited to a small proportion of premature babies in low-income countries including Ethiopia. The aim of this study was to assess the practice of early mother-new-born skin-to-skin contact after the delivery of healthy term neonates and associated factors among health care professionals in Southwestern Oromia, Ethiopia.

Methods

An institutional-based cross-sectional study was conducted to assess the practice of 286 health care practitioners towards early mother-new-born skin-to-skin contact after delivery. Data was collected using a pre-tested observational checklist and a self-administered questionnaire from March to April 2017. Epi Info 3.5 was used for data entry, while SPSS version 20 was used for cleaning and analyzing the data. To determine the association between outcome variable and independent variables, bivariate and multivariable logistic regressions were used with a 95% confidence interval and P <0.05. Frequency tables and charts were used to present the findings.

Results

Only 128 (44.8%) of the study participants practiced mother-newborn skin-to-skin contact within the first hour of life after birth. Mother newborn skin-to-skin contact after birth was found to be significantly associated with health professional’s knowledge (AOR = 4, 95% CI = 1.7, 10), training (AOR = 7, 95% CI = 2.2, 21), complicated delivery (AOR = 0.12, 95% CI = 0.04, 0.4), and maternal chronic illness (AOR = 0.13, 95% CI = 0.03, 0.6).

Conclusion

In general, the practice of health care providers on mother-newborn skin-to-skin contact in the first one hour after birth was low. Knowledge, training, childbirth related maternal complication, and maternal chronic illness were significant factors associated with the practice of mother-newborn skin-to-skin contact immediately after birth. Policies should be revised and enforced, with monitoring and awareness building through training among health care workers, to improve the practice of skin-to-skin contact between mothers and newborns shortly after birth.

Introduction

Background

Early skin-to-skin contact (SSC) between mother and newborn is defined as placing the bare baby’s body on the mother’s bare chest and covering the rest of the baby’s body parts with a warm blanket within the first hour after birth. The first hour after delivery is an essential time for starting a newborn’s feeding habits, such as searching for breast and sucking [1].

The supported suggestions indicated that the practice of skin-to-skin contact after birth has strong benefits for both mother and newborn, include: shortening of delivery of the placenta, decrease hemorrhage after birth by increasing the mother’s oxytocin during the first hour, and decreases bad consequences of the ‘stress of being born’ of the newborn, thermoregulation, and promote breastfeeding [2].

The first day of life for the newborn is the most essential moment of survival. During this initial phase, newborns may need support to set up regular breathing and maintain normal body temperature and blood sugar levels to avoid potentially life-threatening situations [3].

Worldwide, 2.5 million child deaths occur in the first months of life in 2017 which accounts 47% of all child mortality. The majority of neonatal death (99%) occurs in low-income countries, and the important causes of death include prematurity, birth asphyxia, infection, birth defects, and hypothermia. A higher prevalence of neonatal hypothermia has been reported from countries with the highest neonatal mortality which can be preventable through the principle of SSC and initiating breastfeeding within the first hour after birth [4].

Even though the actual possibility of practicing SSC, currently only a few preterm babies in low & middle-income countries have access to these practices. The reason may be opposition among health care providers regarding providing SSC. This opposition could be due to fear of harm to the infant, lack of skill or training, time, institutional guidelines, and assistance to hand over the infant to the parent and/or monitor the infant’s well-being [5, 6].

In medical training programs, the factors should be identified and ranked to emphasize the effectiveness of the implementation of SSC. Factors could affect the behavior of healthcare providers in implementing mother-infant skin-to-skin contact upon birth. For instance, inadequate equipment, insufficient human resources, and absence of structured programs for the proper implementation of SSC are factors associated with mother-newborn skin-to-skin contact [7].

Although the mother-newborn skin-to-skin contact is beneficial for both mother and newborn, in many developing-countries like Ethiopia, health care professionals separate mother and newborn immediately after birth. In this case mother-newborn skin-to-skin contact is rarely used only to treat neonates who are clinically ill due to prematurity or other disorders. These babies are routinely separated from their mothers and placed in incubators or radiant warmers for long periods of time [3].

Ethiopia is one of the ten countries in the world with the highest rate of neonatal mortality, with an estimated 122,000 newborn mortality each year. Inadequate perinatal and postpartum care for the mother and newborn also exists. In Ethiopia, there is also a lack of evidence regarding mother-newborn skin-to-skin contact practices because several critical variables have not been identified recently by routine surveys such as the Demographic and Health Survey. In many hospitals across the country, mother-infant separation is common procedure [8].

The mother-infant SSC approach has emerged as the most effective neonatal care option at the hospital and community level. Consequently, both national and subnational research is becoming a foundation of the strategy to monitor progress at the desired level [9].

However, only a few types of studies on mother-infant skin-to-skin contact have been undertaken, and data on the proportion of SSC at the national level is lacking. As a result, the purpose of this study was to evaluate the practice of early mother-newborn skin-to-skin contact after the birth of healthy term neonates, as well as associated factors, among health care practitioners in Southwestern Ethiopian health institutions.

Methodology

Study design, area and period

Institutional-based cross-sectional study was carried out in Ilu Abba Bor and Bunno Beddelle districts of Oromia region south-western Ethiopia, from March to April 2017. Mettu and Bedelle, the capitals of both districts, are located in southwestern Ethiopia, 600 and 483 kilometers far from Addis Ababa, respectively. According to the 2007 Ethiopian national census the total population of the districts were over 1.2 million and 800,000 people, respectively. In the district, Mettu, Darimu, and Bedelle hospitals, as well as thirty-nine primary health care units were giving the delivery service during the study period.

Populations

All health-care professionals in Ilu Abba Bor and Bunno Beddelle districts (Midwives, Nurses, Health officers, Emergency surgeons, General practitioners, Gynecologists, and Senior surgeons) who were giving delivery service at the health facilities were the study population.

Eligibility criteria

The study included all health care practitioners working in the labor and delivery wards of health facilities in Ilu Abba Bor and Bunno Beddelle districts, with the exception of those who were seriously ill during data collection.

Sampling technique & procedures

Using a convenient sampling technique, health care practitioners working in labor and delivery rooms at each health facility were selected as study participants during the data collection period. The number of individual participants was insufficient to justify using the probability sampling method. As a result, we decided to use all of the illegible participants who were interested to participate in our study. The study included 84 health care practitioners from three hospitals and 202 health care practitioners from a 39 health facilities in the districts.

Data collection instruments and procedures

The data was gathered using a pre-tested observational checklist and a self-administered questionnaire that developed after review of several comparable works of literature and written in English [1012]. The data was collected by eight BSc Midwives who were supervised by the principal investigator and had more experience in labor and delivery as well as knowledge of the skin-to-skin contact technique.

The practice of SSC was assessed using an observational checklist while clinicians were caring for newborns without their knowledge. The observation was carried out without the participants’ awareness or knowledge of the specific care being observed, however consent was obtained for the assessment of general immediate new-born care. Following the observational assessment, all study participants were given a self-administered questionnaire based on their code, which was used to conduct a knowledge assessment. The questionnaire was validated by advisors, and additional professionals’ comments were incorporated into the final instrument used for data collection.

Data quality control

Data collectors were trained on subjects such as the content of the checklist and questionnaire, how to approach the study units, and the process how to assess practice of SSC and confidentiality before the actual data collection to assure the quality of the data. The checklist and questionnaire were pre-tested on 5% of the sample size at Agaro hospital one week before the actual data collection. Based on the results of the pre-test, unnecessary variables and ambiguous words were found and fixed.

Study variables

The dependent /outcome/ variable

Mother-newborn skin-to-skin contact practice status.

The independent variables

Age, sex, marital status, educational level, work experience (in years), knowledge, training, and health of the mother, complications of delivery, mother’s choice, and maternal request to put the newborn on her chest.

Data analysis

Epi Info version 3.5 was used for data entry, while SPSS version 20 statistical software was used for data cleaning and analysis. The association between outcome variable and independent variables was determined using bivariate and multivariate logistic regression with a 95% confidence interval, and statistical significance was set at P 0.05. The result was presented by frequency, percentages, tables and chart.

Operational and term definitions

Skin-to-skin contact practice

Placing the bare baby’s body on the mother’s bare chest by covering the rest of the parts with a warm blanket within the first hour after birth.

Good knowledge

Scoring ≥50% from knowledge measuring questionnaires.

Poor knowledge

Scoring of <50% from knowledge measuring questionnaires.

Practice

If the providers apply early skin-to-skin contact according to observational checklist used for this study which has 7 questions. (1. Was naked newborn put belly-down on his or her mother’s bare abdomen or chest and then wrap both with warm cloth, with in the 1sthr? 2. Was the newborn stays ≥1hr in skin to skin contact continuously? 3. Was the newborn allowed to contact with the nipple? 4. Was the newborn’s head covered with warm cloth or with cap? 5. Was the newborn wrapped with warm cloth and put on the mother’s abdomen within the 1st hour? 6. Was the newborn wrapped with warm cloth and put at the side of the mother on the bed? 7. Was the newborn wrapped with warm cloth and/or stay more than an hour under the heater?) [12, 13].

Ethical consideration

Ethio-Canada MCH project and Saint Paul Millennium Medical College (SPMMC) Research Ethical Review Committee gave the approval. Supportive letter was written to each health offices of Ilu Abba Bor and Bunno Beddelle districts.

Ethical considerations were taken into account at every stage of the study. The study participants were given a full description of the objective of the study, purpose, benefit, and importance. Data was collected after complete informed verbal consent was obtained, and the information was kept confidential throughout the process.

Results

Socio-demographic characteristics of health care professionals providing newborn care

During the study period, 286 health care providers were observed while providing care to new-born. One hundred eighty (62.9%) of the study participants were between the ages of 21 and 30, 168 (58.7%) of them were females and 160 (55.9%) of them being married. In terms of respondents’ educational backgrounds, 158 (55.3%) of health care professionals had a BSc degree, while 184 (64.3%) had 1 to 5 years of experience. The majority of health care practitioners, 228 (79.7%), did not have the opportunity to participate in the mother-newborn skin-to-skin contact practice training (Table 1).

Table 1. Socio-demographic characteristics of health care professionals providing newborn care during observation in labor and delivery wards of health institutions in the Ilu Abba Bor and Bunno Beddelle Zones, Oromia, Ethiopia, 2017.

Variables Number (n = 286) Percentage (%)
Age in years 21–30 180 62.9
31–40 72 25.2
41–50 34 11.9
Sex Male 118 41.3
Female 168 58.7
Marital status Never married 126 44.1
Married*** 160 55.9
Educational level Diploma 128 44.7
BSc degree and above 158 55.3
Years of experience 1–5 184 64.3
6–10 26 9.1
11–15 36 12.6
16 and above 40 14
Training Not trained 228 79.7
Trained 58 20.3

Married

*** = include married, separated, divorced and widowed.

Knowledge of health care providers on mother-newborn skin-to-skin contact

Skin-to-skin contact between a mother and her newborn is beneficial to effective breastfeeding, according to the majority of health care practitioners (82.5%). Two hundred twenty (76.9%) of the study participants correctly identified the appropriate time to begin mother-newborn skin-to-skin contact, whereas 170 (59.4%) had awareness on the option of practicing skin-to-skin contact while managing complicated labor and delivery (Table 2).

Table 2. Knowledge of health care providers on mother-newborn skin-to-skin contact of Ilu Abba Bor and Bunno Beddelle Zones health facilities, Oromia, Ethiopia 2017.
Variables Frequency (%)
The correct procedure for practice of mother-SSC Put naked newborn on mother’s bare abdomen and cover 188(65.7)
Wrap & put on the mother’s abdomen without cloth 98(34.3)
The appropriate time to start mother-newborn SSC Within the first 1hour 220(76.9)
After hour 66(23.1)
The minimum time duration for the newborn to stay on SSC 30minutes 202(70.6)
1 hour 84 (29.4)
Practice of SSC is possible during managing complication aroused from delivery Yes 170(59.4)
No 116(40.6)
Skin to skin contact prevents neonatal hypothermia Yes 182(63.6)
No 104(36.4)
Skin to skin contact promotes effective breast feeding Yes 236(82.5)
No 50(17.5)
SSC improves neonatal breathing, prevents neonatal infection, accelerates involution and prevents PPH Yes 174(60.8)
No 112(39.2)
Over all knowledge Good Knowledge 196(68.5)
Poor knowledge 90(31.5)

The practice of mother-newborn skin-to-skin contact

From the total study participants, 128 (44.7%) health care providers placed a naked new-born on the mother’s bare abdomen for at least 30 minutes after birth (within the first 1hr), allowing contact with the nipple, and wrapped the new-born with a warm cloth, while 52 (18.2%) study participants placed the new-born on the mother’s abdomen after wrapping the new-born with cloth, and 36 (12.6%) health care providers wrapped the new-born with cloth and placed it at the side of the mother on the bed, whereas some study subjects 70 (24.5%) wrapped the new-born with a cloth and put under the heater.

Reasons for not practicing mother-newborn skin-to-skin contact

In the absence of maternal complications and/or disease, 96 (33.6%) health care providers were not practicing mother-new-born SSC, and they asked for specific reasons that might preclude them from practicing mother-new-born SSC immediately after birth. The most frequently answered reason for not practicing mother-new-born SSC was, keeping newborn under the heater is a usual pattern of activity (54.2%), followed by a misunderstanding that says, putting the new-born on the mother’s abdomen after wrapping it with warm cloth is the right procedure (18.7%) (Fig 1).

Fig 1. Reasons for not practicing mother-new born skin-to-skin contact of health care providers giving new born care during observation in Ilu Abba Bor and Bunno Beddelle zones health facilities, Oromia, Ethiopia 2017.

Fig 1

Factors associated with practice of mother-newborn skin to skin contact of health care providers giving new born care

Educational level, knowledge, maternal request for SSC, health care provider training, complicated delivery, and maternal illness were significantly associated with practice of mother-newborn skin-to-skin contact in bivariate logistic regression. Health care provider knowledge about SSC, training on SSC, complicated delivery, and maternal chronic illness were found to be significantly associated with mother-newborn skin-to-skin contact at a p-value less than 0.05 with a 95 percent confidence interval in a multivariable logistic regression.

The result of multivariable logistic regression indicated that health care professionals who had good knowledge were 4 times more likely to practice mother-newborn skin-to-skin contact than those who had poor knowledge (AOR = 4, 95% CI = 1.7, 10). Health care professionals who had immediate newborn care training were 7 times more likely to practice mother-newborn skin-to-skin contact than those who had no training (AOR = 7, 95% CI = 2, 21).

The study participants who faced complicated delivery were 88% less likely to practice mother-newborn SSC as compared to those who did not face the complicated delivery (AOR = 0.12, 95% CI = 0.03, 0.4), whereas the study subjects who attended delivery with maternal chronic illness are 87% less likely to practice mother-newborn skin to skin contact when compared with those who attend the delivery without maternal illness (AOR = 0.13, 95% CI = 0.03, 0.6) (Table 3).

Table 3. Bivariate and multivariate logistic regression for factors associated with practice of skin-to-skin contact, in health care providers giving newborn care observation in Ilu Abba Bor and Bunno Beddelle Zones health facilities, Oromia, Ethiopia 2017.

Variables Category Practice COR AOR
Yes No (95% CI) (95% CI)
Educational level Diploma 44 (34.4%) 84 (65.6%) 1
BSc degree+ 84 (53.2%) 74(46.8%) 2.17(1.1, 4.3)
Knowledge Poor knowledge 22 (24.4%) 68 (75.6%) 1
Good Knowledge 106 (54.1%) 90 (45.9%) .28 (.13, .6) 4(1.7, 10)*
Maternal request Not requested 110 (41.7%) 144 (58.3%) 1
Requested 26 (81.25%) 90 (45.9%) 6.3(1.3, 30.3)
Training Not trained 82 (36%) 146 (64.0%) 1
Trained 46 (79.3%) 12 (20.7%) 6.8(2.6, 18) 7 (2, 21)*
Maternal complication Not complicated 118 (50%) 118 (50%) 1
Complicated 10 (20%) 40 (80%) .25 (.09, .7) 0.12 (.03, .4)*
Maternal illness Absent 122 (48.8%) 130 (51.2%) 1
Present 4 (12.5%) 28 (87.5%) .15 (.03, .7) 0.13(0.03, 0.6)*

NB: 1 = Reference

* = p-value < 0.05.

Discussion

According to the findings of the current study, 44.7% of health care practitioners practiced skin-to-skin contact between the mother and the newborn within the first hour after birth. This finding is in line with the study conducted in Hawi district, Northwestern Ethiopia, which found that 47.8% of participants put the baby in skin-to-skin contact after removing the wet towel [8].

The finding is lower than two studies conducted in Tigray’s Northwestern and Eastern district health facilities, which found that 52 percent and 86.4 percent of participants practiced skin-to-skin contact to prevent hypothermia [7]. This inconsistency could be due to the difference in study population, socio-demographic characteristics and socio-cultural of the societies.

Good knowledge of health the care health providers was one of the predictors of practice of mother newborn SSC. This is in line with findings from a study conducted in central Ethiopia, which indicated that a lack of good knowledge caused Midwives to ineffectively practice mother-newborn skin-to-skin contact [9]. This is because the knowledge of health-care practitioners is required in order to practice the mother-newborn skin-to-skin contact.

The practice of mother-newborn SSC was found to be strongly associated to skin-to-skin contact or early newborn care training. The current finding is supported by research conducted in Jimma and Northwestern Tigray that found health care providers who took essential newborn care training were more likely to practice mother-newborn SSC than their counterparts [14]. This could be because of the study participants’ skill and knowledge increased as a result of their training essential newborn care.

A complicated delivery and chronic maternal illness were also significantly associated to the practice of mother-new-born SSC right after birth. Study participants who attended a complicated delivery were 88% less likely than those who attended an uncomplicated delivery to practice mother-newborn SSC, and those who attended a delivery with chronic maternal illness were 87% less likely to practice mother-newborn SSC than those who attended a delivery without maternal illness. This is supported by research conducted at Georgetown University on provider utilization of maternal-infant SSC, which found that the majority of midwives used mother-newborn SSC in healthy mothers [10].

This could be because it is difficult for healthcare workers to practice mother-newborn skin-to-skin contact for mothers who have had a complicated birth or who have chronic maternal sickness. Some difficulties or illnesses may take longer to resolve, and the environment may not be favorable to skin-to-skin contact between the mother and the newborn.

Conclusion

In general, health-care providers’ practices regarding mother-new-born skin-to-skin contact within the first hour after birth was low. Knowledge status of health-care providers, training, complicated delivery and maternal chronic illnesses were factors significantly associated with mother-newborn SSC within the first 24 hours after birth.

Update and implement the policy on immediate newborn care, monitoring, and training health care providers on how to perform mother-newborn SSC right after birth is compulsory to implement the mother-newborn SSC.

Supporting information

S1 File. Questionaire—English version.

(DOCX)

S2 File. Questionaire—Local language version (Afaan Oromoo).

(DOCX)

Acknowledgments

All of my respects and thanks go to almighty "God," the provider of many benefits and wisdom, from the beginning. Second, I want to express my heartfelt gratitude to my friends for their unwavering support and encouragement during my efforts. I’d also like to thank the Ethio-Canada MCH project and Saint Paul Millennium Medical College (SPMMC) for providing me with the opportunity to work and for inspiring me to perform this research.

Abbreviations

AOR

Adjusted odds ratio

BF

Breast feeding

CI

Confidence interval

COR

Crude odds ratio

KMC

Kangaroo mother care

NICU

Neonatal intensive care unit

PPH

Post-partum hemorrhage

SSC

Skin to skin contact

SPSS

Statistical Package for Social Science

WHO

World Health Organization

Data Availability

The data used to support the findings of this study are included in the article and its supporting information files.

Funding Statement

The author(s) received no specific funding for this work.

References

  • 1.Bedaso, et al. Assessment of skin‑to‑skin contact (SSC) during the postpartum stay and its determinant factors among mothers at public health institutions in Ethiopia BMC Res Notes (2019) 12:136 10.1186/s13104-019-4176-5. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 2.Widstrom, et al. Skin-to-skin contact the first hour after birth, underlying implications and clinical practice 2019.Acta Pædiatrica ISSN 0803-5253. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 3.Almgren M., et al. Benefits of skin-to-skin contact during the neonatal period: Governed by epigenetic mechanisms, Genes & Diseases (2018) 5, 24–26, http://ees.elsevier.com/gendis/default.asp. doi: 10.1016/j.gendis.2018.01.004 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 4.Yibeltal Asmamaw Yitayew, et al. Neonatal Hypothermia and Associated Factors among Newborns Admitted in the Neonatal Intensive Care Unit of Dessie Referral Hospital, Amhara Region, Northeast Ethiopia 2020; Hindawi International Journal of Pediatrics Volume 2020, Article ID 3013427, 8 pages doi: 10.1155/2020/3013427 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 5.Jill Baley MD. Skin-to-Skin Care for Term and Preterm Infants in the Neonatal ICU2021, Pediatrics Volume 136, number 3. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 6.Shrivastava SR, Shrivastava PS. Utility of kangaroo mother care in preterm and low birth weight infants S Afr Fam Pract 2013;55(4):340–344. [Google Scholar]
  • 7.Adeli M, Azmoudeh E. Influential Factors of Mother-Infant Skin-to-Skin Contact Based on the Precede-Proceed Model from the Perspective of Midwives in Torbat Heydariyeh Hospitals. Journal of Midwifery and Reproductive Health. 2016; 4(3): 644–653. [Google Scholar]
  • 8.Callaghan-Koru, et al. Newborn care practices at mhome and in health facilities in 4 regions of Ethiopia. BMC Pediatrics 2013. 13:198. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 9.Nigatu D, et al. Maternal Health Service Uptake Is Associated with a Higher Skin-to-Skin Care Practice in Ethiopia: Result from a National Survey Hindawi BioMed Research International Volume 2020, Article ID 8841349, 10 10.1155/2020/8841349. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 10.Berhe, et al. Knowledge and practice of immediate newborn care among health care providers in eastern zone public health facilities, Tigray, Ethiopia, 2016 BMC Pediatrics (2017) 17:157 doi: 10.1186/s12887-017-0915-8 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 11.Ayenew A, et al. Essential Newborn Care and Associated Factors among Obstetrical Care Providers in Awi Zone Health Facilities, Northwest Ethiopia: An Institutional-Based Cross- Sectional Study Pediatric Health, Medicine and Therapeutics 2020:11. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 12.Murugan R, et al. Knowledge and practice of immediate new-born care among midwives in central zone public health Facilities, Tigray, Ethiopia: cross sectional study doi: 10.21203/rs.2.11489/v3 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 13.Negussie BB, Hailu FB, Megenta AD. (2018) Knowledge and Practice of Essential Newborn Care and Associated Factors among Nurses and Midwives Working at Health Centers in Jimma Zone, Ethiopia, 2016. J Nurs Care 7: 446. doi: 10.4172/2167-1168.1000446 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 14.Tasew, et al. Immediate newborn care of knowledge, practice and associated factors among health care providers in Northwestern Zonal health facilities Tigray, Ethiopia, 2018 BMC Res Notes (2019) 12:427 doi: 10.1186/s13104-019-4465-z [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

Decision Letter 0

Sajid Bashir Soofi

17 Aug 2021

PONE-D-21-11913

The practice of early mother-newborn skin-to-skin contact after delivery of healthy term neonate and associated factors among health care providers at health facilities of Southwestern Oromia, Ethiopia 2017.

PLOS ONE

Dear Dr. Dirirsa 

Thank you for submitting your manuscript to PLOS ONE. After careful consideration, we feel that it has merit but does not fully meet PLOS ONE’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. The paper needs major revision.

Please submit your revised manuscript by 16 September 2021. If you will need more time than this to complete your revisions, please reply to this message or contact the journal office at plosone@plos.org. When you're ready to submit your revision, log on to https://www.editorialmanager.com/pone/ 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 academic 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'.

If you would like to make changes to your financial disclosure, please include your updated statement in your cover letter. Guidelines for resubmitting your figure files are available below the reviewer comments at the end of this letter.

If applicable, we recommend that you deposit your laboratory protocols in protocols.io to enhance the reproducibility of your results. Protocols.io assigns your protocol its own identifier (DOI) so that it can be cited independently in the future. For instructions see: http://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/submission-guidelines#loc-laboratory-protocols. Additionally, PLOS ONE offers an option for publishing peer-reviewed Lab Protocol articles, which describe protocols hosted on protocols.io. Read more information on sharing protocols at https://plos.org/protocols?utm_medium=editorial-email&utm_source=authorletters&utm_campaign=protocols.

We look forward to receiving your revised manuscript.

Kind regards,

Prof Sajid Soofi

Academic Editor

PLOS ONE

Journal requirements:

When submitting your revision, we need you to address these additional requirements.

1. Please ensure that your manuscript meets PLOS ONE's style requirements, including those for file naming. The PLOS ONE style templates can be found at https://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/file?id=wjVg/PLOSOne_formatting_sample_main_body.pdf and https://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/file?id=ba62/PLOSOne_formatting_sample_title_authors_affiliations.pdf.

2. Please amend your current ethics statement to address the following concerns: Please explain why written consent was not obtained, how you recorded/documented participant consent, and if the ethics committees/IRBs approved this consent procedure.

3. Please include additional information regarding the checklist and questionnaire used in the study and ensure that you have provided sufficient details that others could replicate the analyses. For instance, if you developed a questionnaire as part of this study and it is not under a copyright more restrictive than CC-BY, please include a copy, in both the original language and English, as Supporting Information. If the original language is written in non-Latin characters, for example Amharic, Chinese, or Korean, please use a file format that ensures these characters are visible.

4. Please state whether you validated the questionnaire prior to testing on study participants. Please provide details regarding the validation group within the methods section.

5. Thank you for stating the following in the Acknowledgments/Funding Section of your manuscript:

“The entire necessary costs (material and humanitarian) for the study were covered by Ethio-Canada MCH project funded this study.”

We note that you have provided funding information that is not currently declared in your Funding Statement. However, funding information should not appear in the Acknowledgments section or other areas of your manuscript. We will only publish funding information present in the Funding Statement section of the online submission form.

Please remove any funding-related text from the manuscript and let us know how you would like to update your Funding Statement. Currently, your Funding Statement reads as follows:

“The author(s) received no specific funding for this work.”

Please include your amended statements within your cover letter; we will change the online submission form on your behalf.

6. Please note that in order to use the direct billing option the corresponding author must be affiliated with the chosen institute. Please either amend your manuscript to change the affiliation or corresponding author, or email us at plosone@plos.org with a request to remove this option.

7. PLOS requires an ORCID iD for the corresponding author in Editorial Manager on papers submitted after December 6th, 2016. Please ensure that you have an ORCID iD and that it is validated in Editorial Manager. To do this, go to ‘Update my Information’ (in the upper left-hand corner of the main menu), and click on the Fetch/Validate link next to the ORCID field. This will take you to the ORCID site and allow you to create a new iD or authenticate a pre-existing iD in Editorial Manager. Please see the following video for instructions on linking an ORCID iD to your Editorial Manager account: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_xcclfuvtxQ

8. Please include your full ethics statement in the ‘Methods’ section of your manuscript file. In your statement, please include the full name of the IRB or ethics committee who approved or waived your study, as well as whether or not you obtained informed written or verbal consent. If consent was waived for your study, please include this information in your statement as well.

Additional Editor Comments (if provided):

This is an interesting study focusing on the practice of skin-to-skin contact of term neonates. Please review the comments and revise the paper.

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

Reviewers' comments:

Reviewer's Responses to Questions

Comments to the Author

1. Is the manuscript technically sound, and do the data support the conclusions?

The manuscript must describe a technically sound piece of scientific research with data that supports the conclusions. Experiments must have been conducted rigorously, with appropriate controls, replication, and sample sizes. The conclusions must be drawn appropriately based on the data presented.

Reviewer #1: Partly

Reviewer #2: Partly

**********

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

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #2: Yes

**********

3. Have the authors made all data underlying the findings in their manuscript fully available?

The PLOS Data policy requires authors to make all data underlying the findings described in their manuscript fully available without restriction, with rare exception (please refer to the Data Availability Statement in the manuscript PDF file). 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

**********

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

PLOS ONE 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: Yes

**********

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: • How did you measure the practice? Relevant results should be stated

• Explain more about tools and Validity and reliability of the tools

• Remove results (For example (P=0.002, AOR=4, CI=1.7, 10…) from the discussion section

• You can use the following articles in the introduction and discussion sections

1. Karimi FZ, Miri HH, Khadivzadeh T, Maleki-Saghooni N. The effect of mother-infant skin-to-skin contact immediately after birth on exclusive breastfeeding: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Journal of the Turkish German Gynecological Association. 2020 Mar;21(1):46.

2. Karimi FZ, MIRI HH, Salehian M, Khadivzadeh T, Bakhshi M. The Effect of Mother-Infant Skin to Skin Contact after Birth on Third Stage of Labor: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. Iranian journal of public health. 2019 Apr;48(4):612.

3. Karimi A, Bagheri S, Khadivzadeh T, Mirzaii Najmabadi Kh. The Effect of an Interventional Program, Based on the Theory of Ethology, on Breastfeeding Competence of Infants. Iranian Journal of Neonatology 2014; 5(3): 10-12.

4. Karimi A, khadivzadeh T, Bagheri S. Effect of immediate and continuous mother- infant skin to skin contact on breastfeeding selfefficacy of primiparous women. Women and birth 2014; 27:37-40.

5. Karimi FZ, Khadivzadeh T, Saeidi M, Bagheri S. The Effect of Kangaroo Mother Care Immediately after Delivery on Mother-infant Attachment and on Maternal Anxiety about the Baby 3- Months after Delivery: a Randomized Controlled Trial. Int J Pediatr 2016; 4(9): 3561-70

6. Karimi A, Tara F, Khadivzadeh T, Aghamohammadian Sharbaf HR. The Effect of Skin to Skin Contact Immediately after Delivery on the Maternal Attachment and Anxiety Regarding Infant. The Iranian Journal of Obstetrics, Gynecology and Infertility 2013; 16(67): 7-15.

7. Karimi FZ, Bagheri S, Tara F, Khadivzadeh T, Mousavi Bazaz SM. Effect of Kangaroo Mother Care on breastfeeding self-efficacy in primiparous women, 3 month after child birth. The Iranian Journal of Obstetrics, Gynecology and Infertility 2014; 17(120): 1-8.

8. Khadivzadeh T, Karimi FZ, Tara F, Bagheri S. The Effect of Postpartum Mother– Infant Skin-to-Skin Contact on Exclusive Breastfeeding In neonatal period: A Randomized Controlled Trial. Int J Pediatr 2016; 4(5): 5409-17.

9. Khadivzadeh, T., Karimi, F., Tara, F. Effects of early mother-neonate skin-to-skin contact on the duration of the third stage of labor: A randomized clinical trial. The Iranian Journal of Obstetrics, Gynecology and Infertility, 2018; 21(2): 23-29

10. Karimi FZ, Sadeghi R, Maleki-Saghooni N, Khadivzadeh T. The effect of mother-infant skin to skin contact on success and duration of first breastfeeding: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Taiwanese Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology. 2019 Jan 1; 58(1):1-9.

Reviewer #2: General: This is an interesting study that focus on the practice of skin to skin contact post delivery among new mothers in Ethiopia.

Introduction: Although the authors mentioned about Ethiopia's maternal care. However, the authors should elaborate on the national policy and maternal care services. The world prevalence is not very important in this case; rather the reader would be more interested on Ethiopia's national policy on maternal delivery and care; as well as the maternity services / labour services available. Why are 90% of birth occuring at home? is that cultural practice or due to insufficient maternity hospital? transport or distance to hospital? Suggest to focus solely on Ethiopia, describing its maternal healthcare services, national policy, home birth rate and why it is so prevalent and then on the practices of skin-to-skin contact post delivery in Ethiopia; Also, to add if other similar studies have been done in Ethiopia and what are the current known findings (if any)

Statement of the problem: paragraph 5 - this paragraph is not clear in terms of what the authors are saying. Please reword the sentences.

Method: please explain why convenience sampling was applied? Also, the method states that pre-testing was done. What kind of pre-testing? was reliability of the questiionnaire measured? What was the result of the pre-testing? In data collection, it stated that the healthcare providers were unaware they were being observed however, consent was taken before they were recruited so, how was that achieved? Please explain.

Results: Please check table 3 maternal illness if your significance level is correct?

Discussion: could be better written at the end to tally all the four factors and how it can be used to improve the skin to skin practice in Ethiopia.

**********

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.

If you choose “no”, your identity will remain anonymous but your review may still be made public.

Do you want your identity to be public for this peer review? 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 One. 2022 Dec 14;17(12):e0274594. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0274594.r002

Author response to Decision Letter 0


18 Oct 2021

Revision

Please ensure that your manuscript meets PLOS ONE's style requirements, including those for file naming. (Ensured)

Please amend your current ethics statement to address the following concerns: Please explain why written consent was not obtained, how you recorded/documented participant consent:

Answer: it is optional to use the written or verbal consent.

For this study verbal consent was used because the participants permit to take only verbal consent and the consent taken by reading the format prepared with the questioner and checklist, i.e. ‘’ the data collectors has been read the informed consent for the participants by informing them about benefit, procedures, duration, alternatives of participation (whether participated or not) and confidentiality. By asking the participants the question ‘’could I have your permission to continue?’’

1. If yes, will continue to distribute the questionnaire.

2. If no, skip to the next participant by writing reasons for his/her refusal.

3. Please include additional information regarding the checklist and questionnaire used in the study and ensure that you have provided sufficient details that others could replicate the analyses. For instance, if you developed a questionnaire as part of this study and it is not under a copyright more restrictive than CC-BY, please include a copy, in both the original language and English.

Answer: Self-administered questionnaire and observational checklist were developed by reviewing different related literatures, and prepared in English.

The following is the copy of questionnaire and Checklist

Annexes:

ENGLISH VERSION QUESTIONNAIRE AND CHECKLIST

Practice of early mother-newborn skin-to-skin contact after delivery of healthy term neonate and associated factors among health care providers at health facilities of Southwestern Oromia, Ethiopia 2017.

Greeting:

Hello, My name is_____________________. I am here today to collect data on Assessment of Practice of early mother-newborn skin-to-skin contact (SSC) after delivery of healthy term neonate and associated factors among health care providers at health facilities of Southwestern Oromia, Ethiopia 2017. The purpose of this study is to explore and describe about health care providers’ practice related to early SSC and its associated factors. I request you to take part in this study and to respond genuinely.

Your cooperation and willingness is greatly helpful in identifying problems related to early SSC in mothers who gave birth. The study will be conducted through self-administer questionnaire and you are being asked for a little of your time, about 20 min, to help us in this study.

Your name will not be written in this form and will never be used in connection with any information you will tell us. There is no possible risk associated with participating in this study except the time spent for responding to the questionnaire. All information given by you will be kept strictly confidential. Your participation will be voluntary and you are not obligated to answer any question you do not wish to answer. If you feel discomfort with the question, it is your right to drop it any time you want. If you have questions regarding this study or would like to be informed of the results after its completion.

Could I have your permission to continue?

1. If yes, will continue to distribute the questionnaire.

2. If no, skip to the next participant by writing reasons for his/her refusal

Informed consent Certified by

Data collectors Name--------------------------------signature-------------------

Date of Data collection-----------------Time started---------------------- Time completed----------

Result of data collection:

1. Completed---------

2. Respondent not available--------

3. Refused------

4. Partially completed.........

Checked by..............................................................

ANNEX-A: CONSENT FORM AND QUESTIONNAIRE

Consent form before distributing the q

Attachment

Submitted filename: Response to Reviewers PDF.pdf

Decision Letter 1

Sajid Bashir Soofi

30 Dec 2021

PONE-D-21-11913R1The Practice of early mother-newborn skin-to-skin contact after delivery of healthy term neonate and associated factors among health care providers at health facilities of Southwestern Ethiopia: A cross-sectional studyPLOS ONE

Dear Dr. Dejene Edosa Dirirsa,

Thank you for submitting your manuscript to PLOS ONE. After careful consideration, we feel that it has merit but does not fully meet PLOS ONE’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 address MINOR comments by the reviewers 

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

Please submit your revised manuscript by 30 Jan 2022. If you will need more time than this to complete your revisions, please reply to this message or contact the journal office at plosone@plos.org. When you're ready to submit your revision, log on to https://www.editorialmanager.com/pone/ 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 academic 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'.

If you would like to make changes to your financial disclosure, please include your updated statement in your cover letter. Guidelines for resubmitting your figure files are available below the reviewer comments at the end of this letter.

If applicable, we recommend that you deposit your laboratory protocols in protocols.io to enhance the reproducibility of your results. Protocols.io assigns your protocol its own identifier (DOI) so that it can be cited independently in the future. For instructions see: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/submission-guidelines#loc-laboratory-protocols. Additionally, PLOS ONE offers an option for publishing peer-reviewed Lab Protocol articles, which describe protocols hosted on protocols.io. Read more information on sharing protocols at https://plos.org/protocols?utm_medium=editorial-email&utm_source=authorletters&utm_campaign=protocols.

We look forward to receiving your revised manuscript.

Kind regards,

Sajid Bashir Soofi

Academic Editor

PLOS ONE

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):

Please address point by point some minor comments by the reviewer

[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: (No Response)

Reviewer #2: All comments have been addressed

**********

2. Is the manuscript technically sound, and do the data support the conclusions?

The manuscript must describe a technically sound piece of scientific research with data that supports the conclusions. Experiments must have been conducted rigorously, with appropriate controls, replication, and sample sizes. The conclusions must be drawn appropriately based on the data presented.

Reviewer #1: (No Response)

Reviewer #2: Yes

**********

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

Reviewer #1: (No Response)

Reviewer #2: Yes

**********

4. Have the authors made all data underlying the findings in their manuscript fully available?

The PLOS Data policy requires authors to make all data underlying the findings described in their manuscript fully available without restriction, with rare exception (please refer to the Data Availability Statement in the manuscript PDF file). 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: (No Response)

Reviewer #2: Yes

**********

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

PLOS ONE 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 Response)

Reviewer #2: No

**********

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: The title and objective is not consistent with the results of the article

Items such as maternal factors are mentioned in the results that are not mentioned in the title or objective

The number of references is low, Suggested articles for use in this manuscript

1. Karimi FZ, Sadeghi R, Maleki-Saghooni N, Khadivzadeh T. The effect of mother-infant skin to skin contact on success and duration of first breastfeeding: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Taiwanese Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology. 2019 Jan 1; 58(1):1-9.

2. Karimi FZ, MIRI HH, Salehian M, Khadivzadeh T, Bakhshi M. The Effect of Mother-Infant Skin to Skin Contact after Birth on Third Stage of Labor: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. Iranian journal of public health. 2019 Apr;48(4):612.

3. karimi FZ, Miri HH, Khadivzadeh T, Maleki-Saghooni N. The effect of mother-infant skin-to-skin contact immediately after birth on exclusive breastfeeding: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Journal of the Turkish German Gynecological Association. 2020 Mar;21(1):46

4. Karimi A, Bagheri S, Khadivzadeh T, Mirzaii Najmabadi Kh. The Effect of an Interventional Program, Based on the Theory of Ethology, on Breastfeeding Competence of Infants. Iranian Journal of Neonatology 2014; 5(3): 10-12.

5. Karimi FZ, Khadivzadeh T, Saeidi M, Bagheri S. The Effect of Kangaroo Mother Care Immediately after Delivery on Mother-infant Attachment and on Maternal Anxiety about the Baby 3- Months after Delivery: a Randomized Controlled Trial. Int J Pediatr 2016; 4(9): 3561-70

6. Karimi A, Tara F, Khadivzadeh T, Aghamohammadian Sharbaf HR. The Effect of Skin to Skin Contact Immediately after Delivery on the Maternal Attachment and Anxiety Regarding Infant. The Iranian Journal of Obstetrics, Gynecology and Infertility 2013; 16(67): 7-15.

7. Karimi FZ, Bagheri S, Tara F, Khadivzadeh T, Mousavi Bazaz SM. Effect of Kangaroo Mother Care on breastfeeding self-efficacy in primiparous women, 3 month after child birth. The Iranian Journal of Obstetrics, Gynecology and Infertility 2014; 17(120): 1-8.

8. Khadivzadeh T, Karimi FZ, Tara F, Bagheri S. The Effect of Postpartum Mother– Infant Skin-to-Skin Contact on Exclusive Breastfeeding In neonatal period: A Randomized Controlled Trial. Int J Pediatr 2016; 4(5): 5409-17.

9. Khadivzadeh, T., Karimi, F., Tara, F. Effects of early mother-neonate skin-to-skin contact on the duration of the third stage of labor: A randomized clinical trial. The Iranian Journal of Obstetrics, Gynecology and Infertility, 2018; 21(2): 23-29

Reviewer #2: There are several gramatical error of the manuscript, especially in the abstract section that may benefit from copyediting. Thank you.

**********

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.

If you choose “no”, your identity will remain anonymous but your review may still be made public.

Do you want your identity to be public for this peer review? 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 One. 2022 Dec 14;17(12):e0274594. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0274594.r004

Author response to Decision Letter 1


17 Feb 2022

Tittle: The Practice of early mother-newborn skin-to-skin contact after delivery of healthy term neonate and associated factors among health care providers at health facilities of Southwestern Ethiopia: A cross-sectional study

The responses of reviewed manuscript for academic editor & reviewers

Academic Editor

Comment 1: 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.

Response: We have used five references that recommended by the reviewer #1 (Ref: Number 2, 6, 7, 8, 12): these are listed below under the response for reviewer #1.

Reviewer#1:

Comment 1: The title and objective is not consistent with the results of the article

Items such as maternal factors are mentioned in the results that are not mentioned in the title or objective.

Response: thank you for your constructive comments.

• Un-necessary factors mentioned in the result like ‘maternal factors’ removed from the result part, which are not related with title and objectives.

Comment 2: The number of references is low, Suggested articles for use in this manuscript.

• I considered the references that you suggested and 5 of them cited (Ref: Number 2, 6, 7, 8, 12). These are:

• Karimi FZ, Sadeghi R, Maleki-Saghooni N, Khadivzadeh T. The effect of mother-infant skin to skin contact on success and duration of first breastfeeding: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Taiwanese Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology. 2019 Jan 1; 58(1):1-9.

• Karimi A, Bagheri S, Khadivzadeh T, Mirzaii Najmabadi Kh. The Effect of an Interventional Program, Based on the Theory of Ethology, on Breastfeeding Competence of Infants. Iranian Journal of Neonatology 2014; 5(3): 10-12.

• Karimi FZ, Khadivzadeh T, Saeidi M, Bagheri S. The Effect of Kangaroo Mother Care Immediately after Delivery on Mother-infant Attachment and on Maternal Anxiety about the Baby 3- Months after Delivery: a Randomized Controlled Trial. Int J Pediatr 2016; 4(9): 3561-70.

• Karimi FZ, MIRI HH, Salehian M, Khadivzadeh T, Bakhshi M. The Effect of Mother-Infant Skin to Skin Contact after Birth on Third Stage of Labor: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. Iranian journal of public health. 2019 Apr;48(4):612.

• Khadivzadeh T, Karimi FZ, Tara F, Bagheri S. The Effect of Postpartum Mother–Infant Skin-to-Skin Contact on Exclusive Breastfeeding In neonatal period: A Randomized Controlled Trial. Int J Pediatr 2016; 4(5): 5409-17. DOI: 10.22038/ijp.2016.7522.

Reviewer#2:

Comment 1: There are several grammatical error of the manuscript, especially in the abstract section that may benefit from copyediting.

Response: Thank you for your positive and constructive comments. As much as possible I tried to correct the whole document for grammatical errors including the abstract part.

Attachment

Submitted filename: Response to Reviewers.docx

Decision Letter 2

Jianhong Zhou

18 Jul 2022

PONE-D-21-11913R2The Practice of early mother-newborn skin-to-skin contact after delivery of healthy term neonate and associated factors among health care professionals at health facilities of Southwestern Oromia, Ethiopia: A cross-sectional studyPLOS ONE

Dear Dr. Dirirsa,

Thank you for submitting your manuscript to PLOS ONE. After careful consideration, we feel that it has merit but does not fully meet PLOS ONE’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.

Specifically, we require that the article is presented in an intelligible fashion and is written in standard English. We noted multiple language issues, especially in Abstract. Please have your manuscript carefully copyedited and correct any language errors this time In addition, we note that one or more reviewers has recommended that you cite specific previously published works. As always, we recommend that you please review and evaluate the requested works to determine whether they are relevant and should be cited. It is not a requirement to cite these works. For instance, we feel that the suggested references 2,5,6,7,8, and 12 are not so relevant and you are optional to cite them. Furthermore, We note that you have indicated that “All relevant data are within the manuscript”. However, members of the editorial team have assessed the provided data and are concerned that the data provided do not meet our expectations for minimal datasets. PLOS defines the minimal data set to consist of the data required to replicate all study findings reported in the article, as well as related metadata and methods (see (https://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/data-availability). For example, authors should submit the following data:

> The values behind the means, standard deviations and other measures reported;

> The values used to build graphs;

> The points extracted from images for analysis.

Please ensure that you have provided a datafile to meet these requirements with your manuscript.

Finally, we noted the following conflicted data statements:

-On the submission details page: "No - some restrictions will apply" and "All relevant data are within the manuscript"

-In the manuscript: "The data used or analyzed throughout the current study will be obtained up on request from the corresponding author and coauthors." Please comment on this and keep your data statements consistent.

Please submit your revised manuscript by Aug 29 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 plosone@plos.org. When you're ready to submit your revision, log on to https://www.editorialmanager.com/pone/ 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 academic 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'.

If you would like to make changes to your financial disclosure, please include your updated statement in your cover letter. Guidelines for resubmitting your figure files are available below the reviewer comments at the end of this letter.

If applicable, we recommend that you deposit your laboratory protocols in protocols.io to enhance the reproducibility of your results. Protocols.io assigns your protocol its own identifier (DOI) so that it can be cited independently in the future. For instructions see: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/submission-guidelines#loc-laboratory-protocols. Additionally, PLOS ONE offers an option for publishing peer-reviewed Lab Protocol articles, which describe protocols hosted on protocols.io. Read more information on sharing protocols at https://plos.org/protocols?utm_medium=editorial-email&utm_source=authorletters&utm_campaign=protocols.

We look forward to receiving your revised manuscript.

Kind regards,

Jianhong Zhou

Staff Editor

PLOS ONE

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.

[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. Is the manuscript technically sound, and do the data support the conclusions?

The manuscript must describe a technically sound piece of scientific research with data that supports the conclusions. Experiments must have been conducted rigorously, with appropriate controls, replication, and sample sizes. The conclusions must be drawn appropriately based on the data presented.

Reviewer #1: Yes

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?

The PLOS Data policy requires authors to make all data underlying the findings described in their manuscript fully available without restriction, with rare exception (please refer to the Data Availability Statement in the manuscript PDF file). 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 ONE 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: 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 #2: Dear Author, thank you for preparing the corrections. Improvements have been made to the manuscript and is satisfactory. All comments of the reviewers were answered. Well done!

**********

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.

If you choose “no”, your identity will remain anonymous but your review may still be made public.

Do you want your identity to be public for this peer review? For information about this choice, including consent withdrawal, please see our Privacy Policy.

Reviewer #1: No

Reviewer #2: Yes: Assoc. Prof Dr F Ariffin

**********

[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 One. 2022 Dec 14;17(12):e0274594. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0274594.r006

Author response to Decision Letter 2


28 Aug 2022

Tittle: The Practice of early mother-newborn skin-to-skin contact after delivery of healthy term neonate and associated factors among health care providers at health facilities of Southwestern Ethiopia: A cross-sectional study

The responses of reviewed manuscript for academic editor & reviewers

Academic Editor

Comment 1: We noted multiple language issues, especially in Abstract. Please have your manuscript carefully copyedited and correct any language errors this time

Response: We have tried to correct the grammatical errors in th abstract section of the manuscript.

Comment 2: In addition, we note that one or more reviewers has recommended that you cite specific previously published works. As always, we recommend that you please review and evaluate the requested works to determine whether they are relevant and should be cited. It is not a requirement to cite these works. For instance, we feel that the suggested references 2,5,6,7,8, and 12 are not so relevant and you are optional to cite them.

Response: the citations that said irrelevant to our study are removed according to your suggestion.

Comment 3: Furthermore, We note that you have indicated that “All relevant data are within the manuscript”. Finally, we noted the following conflicted data statements:

-On the submission details page: "No - some restrictions will apply" and "All relevant data are within the manuscript" -In the manuscript: "The data used or analyzed throughout the current study will be obtained up on request from the corresponding author and coauthors." Please comment on this and keep your data statements consistent.

Response: we make data statements consistent according to your comment.

Reviewer #1: ‘’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 #2: ‘’Dear Author, thank you for preparing the corrections. Improvements have been made to the manuscript and are satisfactory. All comments of the reviewers were answered. Well done!’’

� Thank you the reviewers and editors for your constructive comments and suggestions. We gain so many experiences from your valuable comments and suggestions. Thank you again!

Attachment

Submitted filename: Response to Reviewers.docx

Decision Letter 3

Jianhong Zhou

1 Sep 2022

The Practice of early mother-newborn skin-to-skin contact after delivery of healthy term neonate and associated factors among health care professionals at health facilities of Southwestern Oromia, Ethiopia: A cross-sectional study

PONE-D-21-11913R3

Dear Dr. Dirirsa,

We’re pleased to inform you that your manuscript has been judged scientifically suitable for publication and will be formally accepted for publication once it meets all outstanding technical requirements.

Within one week, you’ll receive an e-mail detailing the required amendments. When these have been addressed, you’ll receive a formal acceptance letter and your manuscript will be scheduled for publication.

An invoice for payment will follow shortly after the formal acceptance. To ensure an efficient process, please log into Editorial Manager at http://www.editorialmanager.com/pone/, click the 'Update My Information' link at the top of the page, and double check that your user information is up-to-date. If you have any billing related questions, please contact our Author Billing department directly at authorbilling@plos.org.

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 onepress@plos.org.

Kind regards,

Jianhong Zhou

Staff Editor

PLOS ONE

Additional Editor Comments : We still noted multiple language issues. Please pay attention to the Introduction section and have your whole manuscript carefully copyedited and correct any language errors this time.

Reviewers' comments:

Acceptance letter

Jianhong Zhou

5 Dec 2022

PONE-D-21-11913R3

The Practice of early mother-newborn skin-to-skin contact after delivery of healthy term neonate and associated factors among health care professionals at health facilities of Southwestern Oromia, Ethiopia: A cross-sectional study

Dear Dr. Dirirsa:

I'm pleased to inform you that your manuscript has been deemed suitable for publication in PLOS ONE. Congratulations! Your manuscript is now with our production department.

If your institution or institutions have a press office, please let them know about your upcoming paper now to help maximize its impact. If they'll be preparing press materials, please inform our press team within the next 48 hours. Your manuscript will remain under strict press embargo until 2 pm Eastern Time on the date of publication. For more information please contact onepress@plos.org.

If we can help with anything else, please email us at plosone@plos.org.

Thank you for submitting your work to PLOS ONE and supporting open access.

Kind regards,

PLOS ONE Editorial Office Staff

on behalf of

Jianhong Zhou

Staff Editor

PLOS ONE

Associated Data

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

    Supplementary Materials

    S1 File. Questionaire—English version.

    (DOCX)

    S2 File. Questionaire—Local language version (Afaan Oromoo).

    (DOCX)

    Attachment

    Submitted filename: Response to Reviewers PDF.pdf

    Attachment

    Submitted filename: Response to Reviewers.docx

    Attachment

    Submitted filename: Response to Reviewers.docx

    Data Availability Statement

    The data used to support the findings of this study are included in the article and its supporting information files.


    Articles from PLOS ONE are provided here courtesy of PLOS

    RESOURCES