Sepsis is a global health priority with nearly 50 million cases annually. Cardiovascular dysfunction is common, frequently manifesting as hypotension that persists despite fluid resuscitation. Most affected patients require the use of intravenous (IV) vasoactive agents, typically necessitating intensive care unit (ICU)-level monitoring, invasive interventions and contributing substantially to healthcare costs. Midodrine, an oral alpha-1 agonist approved for orthostatic hypotension, has increasingly been used off-label as a vasopressor-sparing (reducing IV vasopressor use) strategy in sepsis, despite limited and inconsistent evidence. This pragmatic, randomised, open-label trial evaluates the efficacy and safety of midodrine in patients with sepsis-associated hypotension. We hypothesise that, compared with standard care, midodrine administration will reduce the duration of IV vasopressor use.
A total of 308 adult patients with sepsis-associated hypotension will be enrolled (154 per arm). The intervention group will, in addition to standard of care, receive enteral midodrine 10 mg three times daily. Outcomes will be ascertained pragmatically via electronic health record-based data retrieval and adjudicated by research coordinators blinded to treatment assignment. The primary outcome is time alive and off IV vasopressors in the first 28 days (in hours) after randomisation. Secondary outcomes include cumulative vasopressor exposure; use and duration of central venous access; cumulative fluid balance over the first 48 hours and up to 7 days of ICU stay; ICU and hospital length of stay; and ICU-, hospital-, and organ support-free days through day 28. Safety outcomes include adverse events potentially attributable to midodrine during hospitalisation including acute kidney injury. Primary analyses will follow an intention-to-treat framework, including all randomised participants according to their assigned treatment groups. Primary and secondary outcomes will be compared using a van Elteren test stratified by randomisation factors. A predefined secondary Bayesian analysis of the primary outcome will provide complementary estimates of treatment effect. Safety outcomes will be summarised descriptively without formal between-arm hypothesis testing.
The Mayo Clinic Institutional Review Board approved this protocol and required written informed consent from all participants (IRB# 24–0 00 121). Findings will be disseminated through peer-reviewed publications and international conference presentations.
by Emmanuel O. Adewuyi, Asa Auta, Olumuyiwa Omonaiye, Mary I. Adewuyi, Victory Olutuase, Kazeem Adefemi, Olumide A. Odeyemi, Yun Zhao, Gizachew A. Tessema, Gavin Pereira
IntroductionNigeria currently has the highest maternal mortality ratio and one of the highest neonatal mortality rates worldwide. Home birth—childbirth outside health facilities, often without skilled attendance or timely access to emergency obstetric care—may contribute to these disproportionate and avoidable adverse maternal and neonatal outcomes. National estimates often mask substantial sub-national disparities. This study examines the prevalence of home birth and associated factors across national, rural, and urban settings in Nigeria.
MethodsWe analysed data from the nationally representative cross-sectional Nigeria Demographic and Health Survey 2018, guided by Andersen’s Behavioural Model. Multivariable logistic regression was used to examine the associations between home birth and various predictor variables at the national level, as well as separately for rural and urban areas in Nigeria.
ResultsNationally, 58.1% (95% CI: 56.5, 59.7) of mothers gave birth at home, with prevalence twice as high in rural areas (72.4%, 95% CI: 70.7, 74.0) compared to urban areas (36.1%, 95% CI: 33.6, 38.7) (p Conclusion
Home birth remains highly prevalent in Nigeria, particularly in rural settings and in the northern and South-South regions, where prevalence is disproportionately high. Reducing home births requires a comprehensive approach that addresses the interplay of factors identified in this study. From a social justice and health determinants perspective, these factors are interconnected and can influence both access to and use of services. In rural areas, policies should enhance women’s decision-making autonomy, reduce distance barriers, and address region-specific challenges (e.g., insecurity in northern regions). In urban areas, it is essential to address financial barriers, support young mothers, and provide culturally and religiously sensitive care. Nationally, efforts should focus on improving education, expanding and strengthening antenatal care, and increasing access to media and the internet. From an equity perspective, interventions must be tailored to specific contexts to reduce unsafe home births and ensure that all mothers, regardless of location, have equitable access to skilled, respectful, and high-quality childbirth care.