Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Observational Study
. 2021 Mar 26;21(Suppl 1):232.
doi: 10.1186/s12884-020-03356-2.

Birthweight measurement processes and perceived value: qualitative research in one EN-BIRTH study hospital in Tanzania

Miriam E Gladstone #  1 , Nahya Salim #  2   3 , Karama Ogillo  2 , Donat Shamba  2 , Georgia R Gore-Langton  1 , Louise T Day  1 , Hannah Blencowe  1 , Joy E Lawn  4 ; EN-BIRTH Study Group
Collaborators, Affiliations
Observational Study

Birthweight measurement processes and perceived value: qualitative research in one EN-BIRTH study hospital in Tanzania

Miriam E Gladstone et al. BMC Pregnancy Childbirth. .

Abstract

Background: Globally an estimated 20.5 million liveborn babies are low birthweight (LBW) each year, weighing less than 2500 g. LBW babies have increased risk of mortality even beyond the neonatal period, with an ongoing risk of stunting and non-communicable diseases. LBW is a priority global health indicator. Now almost 80% of births are in facilities, yet birthweight data are lacking in most high-mortality burden countries and are of poor quality, notably with heaping especially on values ending in 00. We aimed to undertake qualitative research in a regional hospital in Dar es Salaam, Tanzania, observing birthweight weighing scales, exploring barriers and enablers to weighing at birth as well as perceived value of birthweight data to health workers, women and stakeholders.

Methods: Observations were undertaken on type of birthweight scale availability in hospital wards. In-depth semi-structured interviews (n = 21) were conducted with three groups: women in postnatal and kangaroo mother care wards, health workers involved in birthweight measurement and recording, and stakeholders involved in data aggregation in Temeke Hospital, Tanzania, a site in the EN-BIRTH study. An inductive thematic analysis was undertaken of translated interview transcripts.

Results: Of five wards that were expected to have scales, three had functional scales, and only one of the functional scales was digital. The labour ward weighed the most newborns using an analogue scale that was not consistently zeroed. Hospital birthweight data were aggregated monthly for reporting into the health management information system. Birthweight measurement was highly valued by all respondents, notably families and healthcare workers, and local use of data was considered an enabler. Perceived barriers to high quality birthweight data included: gaps in availability of precise weighing devices, adequate health workers and imprecise measurement practices.

Conclusion: Birthweight measurement is valued by families and health workers. There are opportunities to close the gap between the percentage of babies born in facilities and the percentage accurately weighed at birth by providing accurate scales, improving skills training and increasing local use of data. More accurate birthweight data are vitally important for all babies and specifically to track progress in preventing and improving immediate and long-term care for low birthweight children.

Keywords: Birth; Birthweight; Coverage; Hospital; Maternal; Neonatal; Weighing scale.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

The authors declare that they have no competing interests.

Figures

Fig. 1
Fig. 1
Characteristics of scales observed at Temeke Hospital, EN-BIRTH study. Assessments undertaken in labour and delivery ward, and places of newborn care
Fig. 2
Fig. 2
Flow of birthweight data through the digital health information system at Temeke Hospital, EN-BIRTH study
See this image and copyright information in PMC

References

    1. Blencowe H, Krasevec J, de Onis M, Black RE, An X, Stevens GA, Borghi E, Hayashi C, Estevez D, Cegolon L. National, regional, and worldwide estimates of low birthweight in 2015, with trends from 2000: a systematic analysis. Lancet Glob Health. 2019:7(7);e849–60. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Lawn JE, Blencowe H, Oza S, You D, Lee AC, Waiswa P, Lalli M, Bhutta Z, Barros AJ, Christian P, et al. Every Newborn: progress, priorities, and potential beyond survival. Lancet. 2014;384(9938):189–205. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(14)60496-7. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Wardlaw T, Blanc A, Zupan J, Ahman E. Low Birthweight: Country, Regional and Global Estimates. New York: The United Nations Children’s Fund and World Health Organization. [https://www.unicef.org/publications/index_24840.html]. Accessed 15 Oct 2020.
    1. World Health Organization. Global nutrition targets 2025: low birth weight policy brief (WHO/NMH/NHD/14.5). Geneva: World Health Organization. 2014. [https://www.who.int/nutrition/publications/globaltargets2025_policybrief...]. Accessed 15 Oct 2020.
    1. Risnes KR, Vatten LJ, Baker JL, Jameson K, Sovio U, Kajantie E, Osler M, Morley R, Jokela M, Painter RC, et al. Birthweight and mortality in adulthood: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Int J Epidemiol. 2011;40(3):647–661. doi: 10.1093/ije/dyq267. - DOI - PubMed

Publication types

MeSH terms