Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 7 de 7
Filter
2.
Sex Reprod Health Matters ; 29(3): 2105284, 2021.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1991980

ABSTRACT

Self-care interventions for health are becoming increasingly available, and among the preferred options, including during the COVID-19 pandemic. This research assessed the extent of attention to laws and policies, human rights and gender in the implementation of self-care interventions for sexual and reproductive health (SRH), to identify where additional efforts to ensure an enabling environment for their use and uptake will be useful. A literature review of relevant studies published between 2010 and 2020 was conducted using PubMed, Scopus and Web of Science. Relevant data were systematically abstracted from 61 articles. In March-April 2021, semi-structured interviews were conducted with 10 key informants, selected for their experience implementing self-care interventions for SRH, and thematically analysed. Laws and policies, rights and gender are not being systematically addressed in the implementation of self-care interventions for SRH. Within countries, there is varied attention to the enabling environment including the acceptability of interventions, privacy, informed consent and gender concerns as they impact both access and use of specific self-care interventions, while other legal considerations appear to have been under-prioritised. Operational guidance is needed to develop and implement supportive laws and policies, as well as to ensure the incorporation of rights and gender concerns in implementing self-care interventions for SRH.

3.
BMC Pregnancy Childbirth ; 22(1): 454, 2022 May 31.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1951113

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: The World Health Organization (WHO) recommends self-monitoring of blood pressure (SMBP) for hypertension management. In addition, during the COVID-19 response, WHO guidance also recommends SMBP supported by health workers although more evidence is needed on whether SMBP of pregnant individuals with hypertension (gestational hypertension, chronic hypertension, or pre-eclampsia) may assist in early detection of pre-eclampsia, increase end-user autonomy and empowerment, and reduce health system burden. To expand the evidence base for WHO guideline on self-care interventions, we conducted a systematic review of SMBP during pregnancy on maternal and neonatal outcomes. METHODS: We searched for publications that compared SMBP with clinic-based monitoring during antenatal care. We included studies measuring any of the following outcomes: maternal mortality, pre-eclampsia, long-term risk and complications, autonomy, HELLP syndrome, C-section, antenatal hospital admission, adverse pregnancy outcomes, device-related issues, follow-up care with appropriate management, mental health and well-being, social harms, stillbirth or perinatal death, birthweight/size for gestational age, and Apgar score. After abstract screening and full-text review, we extracted data using standardized forms and summarized findings. We also reviewed studies assessing values and preferences as well as costs of SMBP. RESULTS: We identified 6 studies meeting inclusion criteria for the effectiveness of SMBP, 6 studies on values and preferences, and 1 study on costs. All were from high-income countries. Overall, when comparing SMBP with clinic-monitoring, there was no difference in the risks for most of the outcomes for which data were available, though there was some evidence of increased risk of C-section among pregnant women with chronic hypertension. Most end-users and providers supported SMBP, motivated by ease of use, convenience, self-empowerment and reduced anxiety. One study found SMBP would lower health sector costs. CONCLUSION: Limited evidence suggests that SMBP during pregnancy is feasible and acceptable, and generally associated with maternal and neonatal health outcomes similar to clinic-based monitoring. However, more research is needed in resource-limited settings. SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION: PROSPERO CRD42021233839 .


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Hypertension, Pregnancy-Induced , Pre-Eclampsia , Blood Pressure , Blood Pressure Monitoring, Ambulatory , Female , Humans , Hypertension, Pregnancy-Induced/diagnosis , Infant, Newborn , Pre-Eclampsia/diagnosis , Pregnancy
4.
BMJ Open ; 12(3): e054122, 2022 03 14.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1741631

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE: To synthesise evidence around over-the-counter (OTC) emergency contraceptive pills (ECPs) to expand the evidence base on self-care interventions. DESIGN: Systematic review (PROSPERO# CRD42021231625). ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA: We included publications comparing OTC or pharmacy-access ECP with prescription-only ECPs and measuring ECP uptake, correct use, unintended pregnancy, abortion, sexual practices/behaviour, self-efficacy and side-effects/harms. We also reviewed studies assessing values/preferences and costs of OTC ECPs. DATA SOURCES: We searched PubMed, CINAL, LILACS, EMBASE, clinicaltrials.gov, WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform, Pan African Clinical Trials Registry, Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry, Cochrane Fertility Regulation and International Consortium for Emergency Contraception through 2 December 2020. RISK OF BIAS: For trials, we used Cochrane Collaboration's tool for assessing risk of bias; for other studies, we used the Evidence Project risk of bias tool. DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS: We summarised data in duplicate using Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) Evidence Profile tables, reporting findings by study design and outcome. We qualitatively synthesised values/preferences and cost data. RESULTS: We included 19 studies evaluating effectiveness of OTC ECP, 56 on values/preferences and 3 on costs. All studies except one were from high-income and middle-income settings. Broadly, there were no differences in overall ECP use, pregnancy or sexual behaviour, but an increase in timely ECP use, when comparing OTC or pharmacy ECP to prescription-only ECP groups. Studies showed similar/lower abortion rates in areas with pharmacy availability of ECPs. Users and providers generally supported OTC ECPs; decisions for use were influenced by privacy/confidentiality, convenience, and cost. Three modelling studies found pharmacy-access ECPs would lower health sector costs. CONCLUSION: OTC ECPs are feasible and acceptable. They may increase access to and timely use of effective contraception. Existing evidence suggests OTC ECPs do not substantively change reproductive health outcomes. Future studies should examine OTC ECP's impacts on user costs, among key subgroups and in low-resource settings.


Subject(s)
Contraception, Postcoital , Contraceptives, Postcoital , Pharmacies , Australia , Contraceptives, Postcoital/therapeutic use , Female , Humans , Nonprescription Drugs/therapeutic use , Pregnancy
5.
BMJ Open ; 12(2): e054120, 2022 Feb 28.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1714411

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVES: Urine pregnancy tests are often inaccessible in low-income settings. Expanded provision of home pregnancy testing could support self-care options for sexual and reproductive health and rights. We conducted a systematic review of pregnancy self-testing effectiveness, values and preferences and cost. DESIGN: Systematic review and meta-analysis using the Grading of Recommendation, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) approach. DATA SOURCES: PubMed, CINAHL, LILACS and EMBASE and four trial registries were searched through 2 November 2020. ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA FOR SELECTING STUDIES: We included trials and observational studies that compared urine self-testing for pregnancy to health worker-led pregnancy testing on effectiveness outcomes; quantitative and qualitative studies describing values and preferences of end users and health workers and costs of pregnancy self-testing. DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS: Two independent reviewers used standardised methods to search, screen and code included studies. Risk of bias was assessed using the Cochrane Collaboration and Evidence Project tools. Meta-analysis was conducted using random effects models. Findings were summarised in GRADE evidence profiles and synthesised qualitatively. RESULTS: For effectiveness, four randomised trials following 5493 individuals after medical abortion showed no difference or improvements in loss to follow-up with home pregnancy self-testing compared with return clinic visits. One additional trial of community health workers offering home pregnancy tests showed a significant increase in pregnancy knowledge and antenatal counselling among 506 clients. Eighteen diverse values and preferences studies found support for pregnancy self-testing because of quick results, convenience, confidentiality/privacy, cost and accuracy. Most individuals receiving pregnancy self-tests for postabortion home management preferred this option. No studies reported cost data. CONCLUSION: Pregnancy self-testing is acceptable and valued by end users. Effectiveness data come mostly from articles on postabortion care, and cost data are lacking. Greater availability of pregnancy self-tests, including in postabortion care and CHW programs, may lead to improved health outcomes. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42021231656.


Subject(s)
Abortion, Induced , Self-Testing , Female , Health Personnel , Humans , Pregnancy , Qualitative Research
6.
BMJ Glob Health ; 6(5)2021 05.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1476477

ABSTRACT

INTRODUCTION: While the use of folic acid pre-pregnancy and iron and folic acid (IFA) during pregnancy and postnatal have been demonstrated to be effective and are recommended interventions by WHO, ensuring individuals adhere to the supplementation regimen can be a challenge. Self-care interventions that support an individual's ability to promote their own health with or without the support of health workers could help promote the uptake and adherence to supplementation. This systematic review assessed the evidence around self-management of IFA or folic acid supplementation accessed over-the-counter during pre-pregnancy, pregnancy and postnatal periods. METHODS: Peer-reviewed studies were included if they compared self-management of IFA or folic acid supplementation with health worker-initiated supplement use on maternal and/or fetal and newborn health outcomes, end-users' or health workers' values and preferences, or cost and/or cost-effectiveness. We searched PubMed, CINAHL, LILACS and EMBASE for articles published through November 2020, hand-searched clinical trial registries, reviewed databases and contacted experts in the field. Abstract screening and full-text review were conducted independently by two reviewers. RESULTS: Overall, 2344 results were identified, and 28 studies were identified for full-text review. All studies were excluded, as they were not primary research, lacked the outcomes of interest, lacked specificity in supplement type, and/or lacked a comparison group. CONCLUSION: No evidence was identified that distinguishes self-management of folic acid supplements pre-pregnancy and of IFA supplements during pregnancy and postnatal, highlighting a gap in our current understanding of self-care related to dietary supplementation in pregnancy. The findings of this review identify an area for further research to support the current movement towards self-care interventions as an added choice to help individuals more fully attain their reproductive health and rights. SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION NUMBER: PROSPERO CRD42020205548.


Subject(s)
Iron , Self-Management , Dietary Supplements , Female , Folic Acid , Humans , Infant, Newborn , Pregnancy , Prenatal Care
7.
Health Res Policy Syst ; 18(1): 107, 2020 Sep 18.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-781474

ABSTRACT

Self-care interventions and remote care offer innovative and equitable ways to strengthen access to sexual and reproductive health services. Self-isolation during COVID-19 provided the opportunity for obstetric facilities and healthcare providers to integrate and increase the usage of interventions for self-care and remote care for pregnant women and to improve the quality of care overall.


Subject(s)
Coronavirus Infections , Health Services Accessibility , Maternal Health Services , Pandemics , Patient Care/methods , Pneumonia, Viral , Pregnant Women , Social Isolation , Betacoronavirus , COVID-19 , Coronavirus Infections/epidemiology , Coronavirus Infections/virology , Female , Health Facilities , Health Personnel , Humans , Pneumonia, Viral/epidemiology , Pneumonia, Viral/virology , Pregnancy , SARS-CoV-2 , Self Care
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL