Search

Background: Delays in accessing skilled delivery services are a major contributor to high maternal mortality in resource-limited settings. In 2015, the government of The Gambia initiated a results-based financing intervention that sought to increase uptake of skilled delivery. We performed a midline evaluation to determine the impact of the intervention and explore causes of delays.Methods: A mixed methods design was used to measure changes in uptake of skilled delivery and explore underlying reasons, with communities randomly assigned to four arms: (1) community-based intervention, (2) facility-based intervention, (3) community- and facility-based intervention, and (4) control. We obtained quantitative data from household surveys conducted at baseline (n = 1423) and midline (n = 1573). Qualitative data came from semi-structured interviews (baseline n = 20; midline n = 20) and focus group discussions (baseline n = 27; midline n = 39) with a range of stakeholders. Multivariable linear regression models were estimated using pooled data from baseline and midline. Qualitative data were recorded, transcribed, translated and thematically analyzed.Results: No increase was found in uptake of skilled delivery services between baseline and midline. However, relative to the control group, significant increases in referral to health facilities for delivery were found in areas receiving the community-based intervention (beta = 0.078, p < 0.10) and areas receiving both the community-based and facility-based interventions (beta = 0.198, p < 0.05). There was also an increase in accompaniment to health facilities for delivery in areas receiving only community-based interventions (beta = 0.095, p < 0.05). Transportation to health facilities for delivery increased in areas with both interventions (beta = 0.102, p < 0.05). Qualitative data indicate that delays in the decision to seek institutional delivery usually occurred when women had limited knowledge of delivery indications. Delays in reaching a health facility typically occurred due to transportation-related challenges. Although health workers noted shortages in supplies and equipment, women reported being supported by staff and experiencing minimal delays in receiving skilled delivery care once at the facility.Conclusions: Focusing efforts on informing the decision to seek care and overcoming transportation barriers can reduce delays in care-seeking among pregnant women and facilitate efforts to increase uptake of skilled delivery services through results-based financing mechanisms. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Neuronal nitric oxide synthase is involved in diverse signaling cascades that regulate neuronal development and functions via S-Nitrosylation-mediated mechanism or the soluble guanylate cyclase (sGC)/cyclic guanosine monophosphate (cGMP) pathway activated by nitric oxide. Although it has been studied extensively in vitro and in invertebrate animals, effects on mammalian brain development and underlying mechanisms remain poorly understood. Here we report that genetic deletion of "Nos1" disrupts dendritic development, whereas pharmacological inhibition of the sGC/cGMP pathway does not alter dendritic growth during cerebral cortex development. Instead, nuclear distribution element-like (NDEL1), a protein that regulates dendritic development, is specifically S-nitrosylated at cysteine 203, thereby accelerating dendritic arborization. This post-translational modification is enhanced by N-methyl-D-aspartate receptor-mediated neuronal activity, the main regulator of dendritic formation. Notably, we found that disruption of S-Nitrosylation of NDEL1 mediates impaired dendritic maturation caused by developmental alcohol exposure, a model of developmental brain abnormalities resulting from maternal alcohol use. These results highlight S-Nitrosylation as a key activity-dependent mechanism underlying neonatal brain maturation and suggest that reduction of S-Nitrosylation of NDEL1 acts as a pathological factor mediating neurodevelopmental abnormalities caused by maternal alcohol exposure., (© The Author 2016. Published by Oxford University Press. All rights reserved. For Permissions, please e-mail: journals.permissions@oup.com.)