Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 4 de 4
Filter
1.
Women Birth ; 2022 Apr 05.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2236552

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: The national health care response to coronavirus (COVID-19) has varied between countries. The United Kingdom (UK) and the Netherlands (NL) have comparable maternity and neonatal care systems, and experienced similar numbers of COVID-19 infections, but had different organisational responses to the pandemic. Understanding why and how similarities and differences occurred in these two contexts could inform optimal care in normal circumstances, and during future crises. AIM: To compare the UK and Dutch COVID-19 maternity and neonatal care responses in three key domains: choice of birthplace, companionship, and families in vulnerable situations. METHOD: A multi-method study, including documentary analysis of national organisation policy and guidance on COVID-19, and interviews with national and regional stakeholders. FINDINGS: Both countries had an infection control focus, with less emphasis on the impact of restrictions, especially for families in vulnerable situations. Differences included care providers' fear of contracting COVID-19; the extent to which community- and personalised care was embedded in the care system before the pandemic; and how far multidisciplinary collaboration and service-user involvement were prioritised. CONCLUSION: We recommend that countries should 1) make a systematic plan for crisis decision-making before a serious event occurs, and that this must include authentic service-user involvement, multidisciplinary collaboration, and protection of staff wellbeing 2) integrate women's and families' values into the maternity and neonatal care system, ensuring equitable inclusion of the most vulnerable and 3) strengthen community provision to ensure system wide resilience to future shocks from pandemics, or other unexpected large-scale events.

2.
International Journal of Health Promotion and Education ; : 1-12, 2023.
Article in English | Taylor & Francis | ID: covidwho-2187455
3.
PLoS One ; 17(11): e0267415, 2022.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2140385

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 pandemic had a severe impact on women's birth experiences. To date, there are no studies that use both quantitative and qualitative data to compare women's birth experiences before and during the pandemic, across more than one country. AIM: To examine women's birth experiences during the COVID-19 pandemic and to compare the experiences of women who gave birth in the United Kingdom (UK) or the Netherlands (NL) either before or during the pandemic. METHOD: This study is based on analyses of quantitative and qualitative data from the online Babies Born Better survey. Responses recorded by women giving birth in the UK and the NL between June and December 2020 have been used, encompassing women who gave birth between 2017 and 2020. Quantitative data were analysed descriptively, and chi-squared tests were performed to compare women who gave birth pre- versus during pandemic and separately by country. Qualitative data was analysed by inductive thematic analysis. FINDINGS: Respondents in both the UK and the NL who gave birth during the pandemic were as likely, or, if they had a self-reported above average standard of life, more likely to rate their labour and birth experience positively when compared to women who gave birth pre-pandemic. This was despite the fact that those labouring in the pandemic reported a lack of support and limits placed on freedom of choice. Two potential explanatory themes were identified in the qualitative data: respondents had lower expectations of care during the pandemic, and they appreciated the efforts of staff to give individualised care, despite the rules. CONCLUSION: Our study implies that many women labouring during the COVID-19 pandemic experienced restrictions, but their experience was mitigated by staff actions. However, personalised care should not be maintained by the good will of care providers, but should be a priority in maternity care policy to benefit all service users equitably.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Maternal Health Services , Pregnancy , Infant , Infant, Newborn , Female , Humans , Male , COVID-19/epidemiology , Pandemics , Netherlands/epidemiology , Self Report , United Kingdom/epidemiology
4.
Int J Womens Health ; 14: 1447-1457, 2022.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2065260

ABSTRACT

Objective: The aim of this systematic review was to explore the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on breastfeeding support services and continuation rates. Methods: Electronic searches were undertaken in seven databases: Academic Search Complete, Springer Nature Journals, CINAHL Medline, Health Source: Nursing/Academic Edition, Masterfile premier, and SocINDEX. Publications following the COVID-19 pandemic between January 2020 and March 2022 were searched for using the following keywords: impact or effect or influence and breastfeeding support and breastfeeding continuation and COVID-19 or coronavirus. Fifteen studies were included for investigation and extracted to identify seven themes related to breastfeeding support during COVID-19. Results: Factors which impacted breastfeeding support during the COVID-19 pandemic included separation, lack of skin-to-skin contact, insufficient support, online breastfeeding support, the impact of the pandemic on breastfeeding rates and experiences, fears of the pandemic, and the need for additional support. The pandemic mostly influenced breastfeeding support negatively, with a small exception occurring where some mothers experienced lockdown as positive since it protected the mother-infant dyad from unwanted visitors. Virtual breastfeeding support was introduced in many contexts; however, practitioners and mothers reported that this could not replace the need for face-to-face support. Conclusion: Breastfeeding is a lifesaving intervention, especially in the face of a disruption such as a pandemic. This work highlights the need for clear, consistent, and evidence-based information about risks, and for key practices to be maintained including not separating mothers and infants, promoting skin-to-skin contact, and ensuring availability of high-quality breastfeeding support.

SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL