Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Scoping review maps simulation-based neonatal resuscitation training evidence for healthcare providers in LMICs, highlighting effective strategies and challenges.
Neonatal mortality remains high in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs), where simulation-based training could enhance frontline providers’ resuscitation skills. This scoping review maps evidence on simulation-based neonatal resuscitation training for nurses, midwives, and birth attendants in LMICs. Following PRISMA-ScR guidelines, three databases (Pubmed, Google scholar and Epistemonikos) were searched from 2015 to 2025 for studies on simulation training targeting nurses/midwives in LMICs. Two reviewers screened titles/abstracts and full texts, charting data on intervention design, outcomes, facilitators, and barriers. Seventeen studies were included, mainly from Tanzania ( n = 6), India ( n = 4), Uganda, Kenya, Pakistan, Zambia, Liberia, and Latin America. Interventions included Helping Babies Breathe (HBB; n = 9), PRONTO ( n = 3), and low-dose refreshers, varying in duration (1–6 days), fidelity (low-high), and follow-up (immediate to 12 months). Providers showed gains in knowledge, skills (bag-mask ventilation proficiency), and confidence, but retention waned without refreshers. Barriers encompassed equipment scarcity, staffing shortages, and integration challenges. Simulation training is feasible and effective short-term for LMIC providers, supporting scalable models like HBB with mentoring. Gaps in long-term neonatal outcomes and qualitative insights warrant randomized trials and policy focus on sustainability.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Chaudhary et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: