Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 9 de 9
Filter
1.
Lancet Reg Health Eur ; 13: 100268, 2022 Feb.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2309474

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Multi-country studies assessing the quality of maternal and newborn care (QMNC) during the COVID-19 pandemic, as defined by WHO Standards, are lacking. METHODS: Women who gave birth in 12 countries of the WHO European Region from March 1, 2020 - March 15, 2021 answered an online questionnaire, including 40 WHO Standard-based Quality Measures. FINDINGS: 21,027 mothers were included in the analysis. Among those who experienced labour (N=18,063), 41·8% (26·1%- 63·5%) experienced difficulties in accessing antenatal care, 62% (12·6%-99·0%) were not allowed a companion of choice, 31·1% (16·5%-56·9%) received inadequate breastfeeding support, 34·4% (5·2%-64·8%) reported that health workers were not always using protective personal equipment, and 31·8% (17·8%-53·1%) rated the health workers' number as "insufficient". Episiotomy was performed in 20·1% (6·1%-66·0%) of spontaneous vaginal births and fundal pressure applied in 41·2% (11·5% -100%) of instrumental vaginal births. In addition, 23·9% women felt they were not treated with dignity (12·8%-59·8%), 12·5% (7·0%-23·4%) suffered abuse, and 2·4% (0·1%-26·2%) made informal payments. Most findings were significantly worse among women with prelabour caesarean birth (N=2,964). Multivariate analyses confirmed significant differences among countries, with Croatia, Romania, Serbia showing significant lower QMNC Indexes and Luxemburg showing a significantly higher QMNC Index than the total sample. Younger women and those with operative births also reported significantly lower QMNC Indexes. INTERPRETATION: Mothers reports revealed large inequities in QMNC across countries of the WHO European Region. Quality improvement initiatives to reduce these inequities and promote evidence-based, patient-centred respectful care for all mothers and newborns during the COVID-19 pandemic and beyond are urgently needed. FUNDING: The study was financially supported by the Institute for Maternal and Child Health IRCCS Burlo Garofolo, Trieste, Italy. STUDY REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04847336.

2.
Bundesgesundheitsblatt, Gesundheitsforschung, Gesundheitsschutz ; : 2023/10/01 00:00:00.000, 2023.
Article in German | EuropePMC | ID: covidwho-2228002

ABSTRACT

Einleitung Die COVID-19-Pandemie könnte die Vulnerabilität von Frauen gegenüber einer Verletzung ihrer Integrität während der Geburt verstärken. In einer Querschnittsstudie (März 2020 bis März 2022) wurde untersucht, wie Gebärende die Geburtshilfe während der Pandemie in Deutschland erlebten und welche Faktoren mit Geburtsintegrität assoziiert sind. Methodik In der Befragung (validierter Fragebogen und zwei offene Fragen) beschrieben Frauen ≥ 18 Jahre ihre Erfahrungen mit geburtshilflicher Versorgung. Die quantitative Auswertung erfolgte durch deskriptive Statistik und logistische Regressionsanalysen zum Zusammenhang von Erfahrungen mit geburtshilflicher Versorgung und dem Gefühl, würdevoll behandelt und emotional unterstützt zu sein, gedeutet als gewahrte Geburtsintegrität. Die offenen Fragen wurden mittels qualitativer induktiver Inhaltsanalyse analysiert. Ergebnisse Daten von 1271 Gebärenden und 214 Kommentare wurden ausgewertet. Die Mehrheit fühlte sich emotional unterstützt (71 %) und mit Würde behandelt (76 %). Ein Drittel gab an, manchmal oder nie in die Entscheidungsfindung involviert worden zu sein, 14 % sahen sich körperlichen, verbalen oder emotionalen Übergriffen ausgesetzt. Für 57 % der Frauen war die Begleitperson nur begrenzt oder nicht anwesend. Diese Faktoren sind alle mit der Chance assoziiert, sich würdevoll behandelt und emotional unterstützt zu fühlen. Die qualitativen Kommentare geben Aufschluss darüber, was Frauen als integritätsverletzend wahrnehmen. Diskussion Während der COVID-19-Pandemie zeigt sich die Vulnerabilität von Gebärenden gegenüber Integritätsverletzungen. Maßnahmen zur Förderung einer respektvollen Geburtshilfe umfassen strukturelle und politische Lösungen sowie Forschung zu weiteren Determinanten von Geburtsintegrität.

3.
Bundesgesundheitsblatt Gesundheitsforschung Gesundheitsschutz ; 66(3): 302-311, 2023 Mar.
Article in German | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2228001

ABSTRACT

INTRODUCTION: The COVID-19 pandemic may increase women's vulnerability through violations of their integrity during birth. In a cross-sectional study (March 2020 to March 2022), we investigated how women giving birth experienced maternity care during the pandemic in Germany and which factors were associated with their birth integrity. METHODS: In a survey (validated questionnaire and two open-ended questions), women ≥ 18 years described their experiences of maternity care. We conducted quantitative analyses using descriptive statistics and logistic regressions to investigate factors associated with dignified care and emotional support, which are understood as proxies of birth integrity. We analysed the open-ended questions through inductive content analysis. RESULTS: We included data from 1271 participants and 214 comments. The majority of respondents felt emotionally supported (71%) and treated with dignity (76%). One third reported not always being involved in decision-making, while 14% felt they were subjected to physical, verbal or emotional abuse. For 57% of women, their companion of choice was absent or their presence limited. Those factors were all associated with the chances of feeling treated with dignity and emotionally supported. The qualitative comments provided an insight into what specifically women perceive as violating their integrity. DISCUSSION: During the COVID-19 pandemic, the vulnerability of parturients lies in the violation of their birth integrity. Measures to promote respectful maternity care of women who give birth include comprehensive structural and political solutions as well as further research on the determinants of birth integrity.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Maternal Health Services , Pregnancy , Female , Humans , Pandemics , Cross-Sectional Studies , COVID-19/epidemiology , Germany/epidemiology
4.
Int J Gynaecol Obstet ; 159 Suppl 1: 39-53, 2022 Dec.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2172993

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE: To describe the perception of quality of maternal and newborn care (QMNC) around the time of childbirth among migrant and nonmigrant women in Europe. METHODS: Women who gave birth at a health facility in 11 countries of the WHO European Region from March 2020 to July 2021 were invited to answer an online questionnaire including demographics and childbirth experience. Data were analyzed and compared for 1781 migrant and 20 653 nonmigrant women. RESULTS: Migrant women who experienced labor perceived slightly more difficulties in attending routine antenatal visits (41.2% vs 39.4%; P = 0.001), more barriers in accessing facilities (32.9% vs 29.9%; P = 0.001), lack of timely care (14.7% vs 13.0%; P = 0.025), inadequate room comfort and equipment (9.2% vs 8.5%; P = 0.004), inadequate number of women per room (9.4% vs 8.6%; P = 0.039), being prevented from staying with their baby as they wished (7.8% vs 6.9%; P = 0.011), or suffering abuse (14.5% vs 12.7%; P = 0.022) compared with nonmigrant women. For women who had a prelabor cesarean, migrant women were more likely not to receive pain relief after birth (16.8% vs.13.5%; P = 0.039) and less likely to provide informal payment (1.8% vs 4.4%; P = 0.005) compared with nonmigrant women. Overall, the QMNC index was not significantly different for migrant compared with nonmigrant women. CONCLUSION: Gaps in overall QMNC were reported by both migrant and nonmigrant women, with improvements to healthcare necessary for all.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Transients and Migrants , Infant, Newborn , Female , Pregnancy , Humans , Pandemics , Parturition , World Health Organization , European People
5.
Int J Gynaecol Obstet ; 159 Suppl 1: 9-21, 2022 Dec.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2172990

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE: To investigate potential associations between individual and country-level factors and medicalization of birth in 15 European countries during the COVID-19 pandemic. METHODS: Online anonymous survey of women who gave birth in 2020-2021. Multivariable multilevel logistic regression models estimating associations between indicators of medicalization (cesarean, instrumental vaginal birth [IVB], episiotomy, fundal pressure) and proxy variables related to care culture and contextual factors at the individual and country level. RESULTS: Among 27 173 women, 24.4% (n = 6650) had a cesarean and 8.8% (n = 2380) an IVB. Among women with IVB, 41.9% (n = 998) reported receiving fundal pressure. Among women with spontaneous vaginal births, 22.3% (n = 4048) had an episiotomy. Less respectful care, as perceived by the women, was associated with higher levels of medicalization. For example, women who reported having a cesarean, IVB, or episiotomy reported not feeling treated with dignity more frequently than women who did not have those interventions (odds ratio [OR] 1.37; OR 1.61; OR 1.51, respectively; all: P < 0.001). Country-level variables contributed to explaining some of the variance between countries. CONCLUSION: We recommend a greater emphasis in health policies on promotion of respectful and patient-centered care approaches to birth to enhance women's experiences of care, and the development of a European-level indicator to monitor medicalization of reproductive care.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Medicalization , Female , Humans , Pregnancy , COVID-19/epidemiology , Multilevel Analysis , Pandemics , World Health Organization
6.
Int J Gynaecol Obstet ; 159 Suppl 1: 22-38, 2022 Dec.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2172989

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE: To explore the quality of maternal and newborn care (QMNC) during the COVID-19 pandemic by facility type among 16 European countries, comparing rates of instrumental vaginal birth and cesarean. METHODS: Women who gave birth in the WHO European Region from March 1, 2020, to February 7, 2022, answered a validated online questionnaire. Rates of instrumental birth, instrumental vaginal birth, and cesarean, and a QMNC index were calculated for births in public versus private facilities. RESULTS: Responses from 25 206 participants were analyzed. Women giving birth in private compared with public facilities reported significantly more frequent total cesarean (32.5% vs 19.0%; aOR 1.70; 95% CI 1.52-1.90), elective cesarean (17.3% vs 7.8%; aOR 1.90; 95% CI 1.65-2.19), and emergency cesarean before labor (7.4% vs 3.9%; aOR 1.39; 95% CI 1.14-1.70) (P < 0.001 for all comparisons), with analyses by country confirming these results. QMNC index results were heterogeneous across countries and regions in the same country and were largely affected by geographical distribution of regions rather than by type of facility alone. CONCLUSION: The study confirms that births in private facilities have higher odds of cesarean. It also suggests that QMNC should be closely monitored in all facilities to achieve high-quality care, independent of facility type or geographical distribution. GOV IDENTIFIER: NCT04847336.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Cesarean Section , Female , Humans , Infant, Newborn , Pregnancy , COVID-19/epidemiology , Infant Health , Pandemics , Public Facilities
7.
BMC Pregnancy Childbirth ; 23(1): 32, 2023 Jan 16.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2196111

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Social media offer women a space to discuss birth-related fears and experiences. This is particularly the case during the COVID-19 pandemic when measures to contain the spread of the virus and high rates of infection have had an impact on the delivery of care, potentially restricting women's rights and increasing the risk of experiencing different forms of mistreatment or violence. Through the lens of birth integrity, we focused on the experiences of women giving birth in Germany as shared on social media, and on what may have sheltered or violated their integrity during birth. METHODS: Using thematic analysis, we identified key themes in 127 comments and associated reactions (i.e. "likes", emojis) posted on a Facebook public page in response to the dissemination of a research survey on maternity care in the first year of the COVID-19 pandemic. RESULTS: Women contributing to the dataset gave birth during March and December 2020. They were most negatively affected by own mask-wearing -especially during the active phase of labour, not being allowed a birth companion of choice, lack of supportive care, and exclusion of their partner from the hospital. Those topics generated the most reactions, revealing compassion from other women and mixed feelings about health measures, from acceptation to anger. Many women explicitly formulated how inhumane or disrespectful the care was. While some women felt restricted by the tight visiting rules, those were seen as positive by others, who benefited from the relative quiet of maternity wards and opportunities for postpartum healing and bonding. CONCLUSION: Exceptional pandemic circumstances have introduced new parameters in maternity care, some of which appear acceptable, necessary, or beneficial to women, and some of which can be considered violations of birth integrity. Our research calls for the investigation of the long-term impact of those violations and the reassessment of the optimal conditions of the delivery of respectful maternity during the pandemic and beyond.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Maternal Health Services , Social Media , Pregnancy , Female , Humans , Pandemics , COVID-19/epidemiology , Parturition , Qualitative Research
8.
Front Glob Womens Health ; 3: 878723, 2022.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2039672

ABSTRACT

Mothers tended to be responsible for most of the (additional) caregiving and domestic tasks during the COVID-19 pandemic while simultaneously having to pursue their work duties. Increased role conflicts, parenting stress, and exhaustion predict adverse mental health. We aimed to examine how women referred to and made sense of dominant gender norms in their arrangements of pandemic daily life and how these beliefs impacted their maternal self-conception. Qualitative interviews with 17 women were analyzed through the lens of "intensive mothering" ideology and "ideal workers" norms, emphasizing notions of maternal guilt rising from a perceived mismatch between the ideal and actual maternal self-conception. We found that mothers' notions of guilt and their decreases in health link to dominant discourses on motherhood and intersect with "ideal worker" norms. As such, these norms amplify the burden of gendered health inequalities.

9.
Womens Health (Lond) ; 18: 17455057221114274, 2022.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2002089

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVES: Mothers of young children have been identified as a particularly vulnerable group during the COVID-19 pandemic. We aimed to explore how occupational, psychosocial and partnership-related factors were associated with their self-reported mental well-being during the first COVID-19 wave. METHODS: Five hundred fifty participants of the BaBi cohort study (est. 2013, Bielefeld, North-Rhine Westphalia, Germany) were invited to complete an online survey and to take part in email interviews (April-May 2020). With survey data, we assessed self-reported mental well-being through validated instruments (eight-item Patient Health Questionnaire; short version of the Symptom Checklist) and ran linear regression models for occupational, psychosocial and partnership-related factors. We performed content analysis on the interviews' data to further understand the determinants of the women's mental well-being. RESULTS: One hundred twenty-four women participated in the survey; of which 17 also participated in the interviews. A perceived lack of support in childcare was associated with higher levels of depressive symptoms, while having a higher internal locus of control was associated with lower levels. Psychological distress was higher in those reporting lack of emotional or childcare support. Interviews confirmed the interplay of potential stressors and highlighted the difficulties to reconcile different expectations of motherhood. DISCUSSION: Occupational, psychosocial and partner-related factors can act (to varying degree) both as resources and stressors to the self-reported mental well-being of mothers of young children. These impacts took different forms and created opportunities or challenges, depending on specific life circumstances, such as work or family situations, relationships and own psychosocial resources. Although not representative, our study contributes to building the COVID-19 evidence base, delineating the mental health toll of the pandemic on mothers of young children and the factors that contribute to it.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , COVID-19/epidemiology , Child , Child, Preschool , Cohort Studies , Female , Germany/epidemiology , Humans , Mental Health , Pandemics , Self Report
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL