Experiences Navigating the Pregnancy Care Continuum During the COVID-19 Pandemic.

INTRODUCTION: The COVID-19 pandemic led to unprecedented changes in care delivery across the pregnancy care continuum. Our primary objective with this research was to characterize the range of ways that the early months of the COVID-19 pandemic affected pregnancy, childbirth, and postpartum care experiences. METHODS: Pregnant and recently pregnant patients (n = 20) from obstetrics and gynecology clinical sites associated with Massachusetts General Hospital were interviewed about their experiences with prenatal care, childbirth, and postpartum care during the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic. Interview transcripts were analyzed for emergent themes. RESULTS: This sample included 20 pregnant and postpartum people, including 11 individuals who tested positive for COVID-19 during pregnancy or postpartum and nine with suspected infection. The ways in which COVID-19 or suspected COVID-19 affected experiences of prenatal care, childbirth, and postpartum care were complex and varied. Three themes were identified across narratives of pregnancy, birth, and postpartum care: patient perceptions of diminished access to care, stigma due to COVID-19 infection, and limited capacity of providers to honor patient preferences. CONCLUSIONS: A better understanding of pregnant and recently pregnant people's experiences during the early months of the COVID-19 pandemic can inform infection control policies and clinical care delivery practices that are more congruent with the needs and values of pregnant, birthing, and postpartum people as institutions craft responses to future pandemics. Approaches that maximize meaningful access across the pregnancy care continuum, center patients' priorities within adapted care models, and honor patient preferences as much as possible are important aspects of an appropriate response to future waves of COVID-19 and other pandemics.

Provider confidence in counseling preconception, pregnant, and postpartum patients regarding COVID-19 vaccination: A cross-sectional survey study.

Background and Aims: Healthcare provider counseling surrounding COVID-19 vaccine in pregnancy and lactation is essential to vaccination uptake in this population; however, provider knowledge and confidence are not well characterized. We aimed to assess knowledge and confidence in COVID-19 vaccine counseling among practitioners who provide care to pregnant persons and to describe factors associated with confidence in counseling. Methods: A web-based anonymous survey was distributed via email to a cross-sectional convenience sample of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Primary Care, and Internal Medicine faculty at three hospitals in a single healthcare network in Massachusetts, United States. Individual demographics and institution-specific variables were included in the survey along with questions assessing both attitudes toward COVID-19 illness and confidence in counseling regarding the use of the vaccine in pregnancy. Results: Almost all providers (151, 98.1%) reported that they received a COVID-19 vaccine, and most (111, 72.1%) reported that they believe the benefits of the vaccine in pregnancy outweigh the risks. Forty-one (26.6%) reported feeling very confident in counseling patients who primarily speak English about the evidence for messenger ribonucleic acid vaccination in pregnancy, and 36 (23%) reported feeling very confident in counseling patients who are not primarily English-speaking. Forty-three providers (28.1%) expressed strong confidence in their comfort talking to individuals with vaccine hesitancy based on historic and continued racism and systemic injustices. The sources that survey respondents most used to find information regarding COVID-19 vaccination in pregnancy were the Centers for Disease Control (112, 74.2%), hospital-specific resources (94, 62.3%), and the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (82, 54.3%). Conclusion: Ensuring that providers feel comfortable bridging the gap between their belief that the vaccine is beneficial for pregnant patients and their comfort with holding conversations with patients regarding vaccination is paramount to ensure equitable access to vaccines for pregnant patients.

Emotional Experiences of Pregnant and Postpartum People with Confirmed or Suspected COVID-19 Infection During the Initial Surge of the Pandemic.

Objectives: The COVID-19 pandemic may have a unique emotional impact on pregnant people. This qualitative study aimed to characterize the emotional effects of the COVID-19 pandemic on pregnant and recently pregnant patients who had either suspected or confirmed COVID-19 infection during the initial 6 months of the pandemic. Methods: Pregnant and recently pregnant participants (n = 20) from Massachusetts General Hospital Obstetrics and Gynecology clinical sites with suspected or confirmed COVID-19 infection were interviewed about their experiences during the COVID-19 pandemic. Interviews were transcribed and coded using NVivo 12 software. Using data display matrices, thematic analysis was performed to identify emergent, crosscutting themes. Results: Twenty pregnant and postpartum patients participated of whom 12 had confirmed COVID-19 infection and 8 had suspected infection. The most frequently described emotions were anxiety (90%), uncertainty (80%), fear (70%), relief (65%), and sadness (60%). The following three crosscutting themes were identified: risk, protection, and change. The ways in which participants articulated their emotional reactions to the themes of risk, protection, and change were complex and varied. Conclusions: There was a broad range of negative and positive emotional experiences of pregnancy, birth, and the postpartum period during the first 4 months of the COVID-19 pandemic. A better understanding of pregnant people's emotional experiences may lead to changes in clinical practice and institutional policies that are more supportive of their needs and congruent with their values.

Global disparities in public health guidance for the use of COVID-19 vaccines in pregnancy.

INTRODUCTION: Gaps in information about the safety and efficacy of COVID-19 vaccines in pregnancy have led to substantial global variation in public health guidance regarding the use of COVID-19 vaccines in pregnancy over the course of the pandemic. METHODS: We conducted systematic screenings of public health authorities' websites across 224 countries and territories every 3 weeks to track the development of policies on COVID-19 vaccine use in pregnancy. Policies were categorised using a 1-5 permissiveness scale, with 1 indicating policies that recommended use, and 5 indicating policies that recommended against use. RESULTS: As of 30 September 2021, 176 countries/territories had issued explicit guidance on COVID-19 vaccine use in pregnancy, with 38% recommending use, 28% permitting use, 15% permitting use with qualifications, 2% not recommending but with exceptions, and 17% not recommending use whatsoever. This represented a significant shift from May 2021, when only 6% of countries/territories with such policies recommended the use of COVID-19 vaccines in pregnancy (p<0.001). However, no policy positions could be found for 21% of all countries and territories, the vast majority being low and middle income. Policy positions also varied widely by vaccine product, with Pfizer/BioNTech and Moderna vaccines being most commonly recommended or permitted. CONCLUSION: Our study highlights the evolution of policies regarding COVID-19 vaccine use in pregnancy over a 5-month period in 2021, the role of pregnancy-specific data in shaping these policies and how inequities in access for pregnant people persist, both within countries and globally.

Conspiracy theories and misinformation about COVID-19 in Nigeria: Implications for vaccine demand generation communications.

INTRODUCTION: COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy is a worldwide phenomenon and a serious threat to pandemic control efforts. Until recently, COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy was not the cause of low vaccine coverage in Nigeria; vaccine scarcity was the problem. As the global supply of COVID-19 vaccines improves in the second half of 2021 and more doses are deployed in Nigeria, the supply/demand dynamic will switch. Vaccine acceptance will become a key driver of coverage; thus, amplifying the impact of vaccine hesitancy. Conspiracy theories and misinformation about COVID-19 are rampant and have been shown to drive vaccine hesitancy and refusal. This study systematically elicits the misinformation and conspiracy theories circulating about COVID-19 among the Nigerian public to understand relevant themes and potential message framing for communication efforts to improve vaccine uptake. METHODS: From February 1 to 8, 2021, we conducted 22 focus group discussions and 24 key informant interviews with 178 participants from six states representing the six geopolitical zones. Participants were purposively selected and included sub-national program managers, healthcare workers, and community members. All interviews were iteratively analyzed using a framework analysis approach. RESULTS: We elicited a total of 33 different conspiracy theories or misinformation that participants had heard about the COVID-19 virus, pandemic response, or vaccine. All participants had heard some misinformation. The leading claim was that COVID-19 was not real, and politicians took advantage of the situation and misused funds. People believed certain claims based on distrust of government, their understanding of Christian scripture, or their lack of personal experience with COVID-19. CONCLUSIONS: Our study is the first to report a thematic analysis of the range of circulating misinformation about COVID-19 in Nigeria. Our findings provide new insights into why people believe these theories, which could help the immunization program improve demand generation communication for COVID-19 vaccines by targeting unsubstantiated claims.

Ending the evidence gap for pregnancy, HIV and co-infections: ethics guidance from the PHASES project.

INTRODUCTION: While pregnant people have been an important focus for HIV research, critical evidence gaps remain regarding prevention, co-infection, and safety and efficacy of new antiretroviral therapies in pregnancy. Such gaps can result in harm: without safety data, drugs used may carry unacceptable risks to the foetus or pregnant person; without pregnancy-specific dosing data, pregnant people face risks of both toxicity and undertreatment; and delays in gathering evidence can limit access to beneficial next-generation drugs. Despite recognition of the need, numerous barriers and ethical complexities have limited progress. We describe the process, ethical foundations, recommendations and applications of guidance for advancing responsible inclusion of pregnant people in HIV/co-infections research. DISCUSSION: The 26-member international and interdisciplinary Pregnancy and HIV/AIDS: Seeking Equitable Study (PHASES) Working Group was convened to develop ethics-centred guidance for advancing timely, responsible HIV/co-infections research with pregnant people. Deliberations over 3 years drew on extensive qualitative research, stakeholder engagement, expert consultation and a series of workshops. The guidance, initially issued in July 2020, highlights conceptual shifts needed in framing research with pregnant people, and articulates three ethical foundations to ground recommendations: equitable protection from drug-related risks, timely access to biomedical advances and equitable respect for pregnant people's health interests. The guidance advances 12 specific recommendations, actionable within the current regulatory environment, addressing multiple stakeholders across drug development and post-approval research, and organized around four themes: building capacity, supporting inclusion, achieving priority research and ensuring respect. The recommendations describe strategies towards ethically redressing the evidence gap for pregnant people around HIV and co-infections. The guidance has informed key efforts of leading organizations working to advance needed research, and identifies further opportunities for impact by a range of stakeholder groups. CONCLUSIONS: There are clear pathways towards ethical inclusion of pregnant people in the biomedical research agenda, and strong agreement across the HIV research community about the need for - and the promise of - advancing them. Those who fund, conduct, oversee and advocate for research can use the PHASES guidance to facilitate more, better and earlier evidence to optimize the health and wellbeing of pregnant people and their children.

Advancing research in pregnancy during COVID-19: Missed opportunities and momentum in the US.

Pregnant people's exclusion from COVID-19 vaccine research highlights both the harms of excluding pregnant people from clinical trials and the growing public support for their equitable inclusion. Protectionary tendencies must be challenged for the sake of progress. The COVID-19 pandemic presents an opportunity to translate recognition of an unjust paradigm into action.

The Costs of Contradictory Messages About Live Vaccines in Pregnancy.

The increased risk of harm from COVID-19 infection in pregnancy highlights the importance of including pregnant people in COVID-19 vaccine development and deployment. Promising vaccines being developed include replication-competent platforms, which are typically contraindicated during pregnancy because of theoretical risk. However, replicating vaccines are administered in and around pregnancy, either inadvertently because of unknown pregnancy status or when recommended.The historical cases of Ebola virus, yellow fever, and rubella demonstrate that contradictory messages around the safety of live vaccines in pregnancy have critical public health costs. First, restricting study or use of replicating vaccines in pregnancy may delay or deny access to the only available protection against deadly diseases. Additionally, not vaccinating pregnant people may slow epidemic control. Finally, uncertainty and worry around the safety of live vaccines may lead to terminations of otherwise desired pregnancies after inadvertent vaccination in pregnancy.If one of the vaccines deployed to combat the current global COVID-19 pandemic is replication competent, historical cases offer important lessons for ethical and effective protection for pregnant populations.

Establishing Better Evidence on Remote Monitoring for Postpartum Hypertension: A Silver Lining of the Coronavirus Pandemic.

The transformation of our health care system in response to coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) provides a unique opportunity to examine the use of telehealth for postpartum care. The postpartum period can pose significant risks and challenges, particularly for women with hypertensive disorders of pregnancy. Remote blood pressure monitoring has proven feasible and acceptable among women and providers but has not been widely implemented or researched. Early studies have identified improved outcomes with use of telehealth, including increased compliance with care and decreased disparity in hypertension follow-up. Preliminary data make a compelling case for remote monitoring as a promising treatment strategy to manage postpartum hypertension. Remote monitoring technology should be incorporated as a standard component for the comprehensive management of postpartum hypertension during COVID-19. As a consequence of the pandemic, we now have an opportunity to research the impact of postpartum remote blood pressure monitoring on maternal outcome and disparities within these outcomes.

Pregnant women's perceptions of risks and benefits when considering participation in vaccine trials.

INTRODUCTION: Despite historical exclusion, there has been recent recognition of the need to address the health of pregnant women in research on vaccines against emerging pathogens. However, pregnant women's views and decision-making processes about vaccine research participation during infectious disease outbreaks remain underexplored. This study aims to examine women's decision-making processes around vaccine research participation during infectious disease outbreaks. METHODS: We conducted qualitative semi-structured in-depth interviews with pregnant and recently pregnant women (n = 13), eliciting their views on four hypothetical Zika Virus vaccine research scenarios and probing their decision-making processes around participation. After recorded interviews were transcribed, thematic analysis was conducted based on a priori and emergent themes. RESULTS: Most women interviewed were accepting of vaccine research scenarios. Three broad themes-evidence, risk, and trust-characterized women's decision-making processes. Women varied in how different types and levels of evidence impacted their considerations, which risks were most salient to their decision-making processes, and from whom they trusted recommendations about vaccine research participation. Exemplary quotes from each theme are presented, and lessons for vaccine development during the current COVID-19 pandemic and future outbreaks are discussed. CONCLUSION: Some pregnant women are accepting of participation in vaccine research during infectious disease outbreaks. Incorporating their priorities into trial design may facilitate their participation and generation of evidence for this important population.