Challenges in Accessing and Delivering Maternal and Child Health Services during the COVID-19 Pandemic: A Cross-Sectional Rapid Survey from Six States of India.

BACKGROUND/OBJECTIVES: Globally, the COVID-19 pandemic and its prevention and control policies have impacted maternal and child health (MCH) services. This study documents the challenges faced by patients in accessing MCH services, and the experiences of health care providers in delivering those services during the COVID-19 outbreak, explicitly focusing on the lockdown period in India. METHODS: A cross-sectional study (rapid survey) was conducted in 18 districts from 6 states of India during March to June, 2020. The sample size included 540 MCH patients, 18 gynaecologists, 18 paediatricians, 18 district immunisation officers and 108 frontline health workers. Bivariate analysis and multivariable analysis were used to assess the association between sociodemographic characteristics, and challenges faced by the patients. RESULTS: More than one-third of patients (n = 212; 39%) reported that accessing MCH services was a challenge during the lockdown period, with major challenges being transportation-related difficulties (n = 99; 46%) unavailability of hospital-based services (n = 54; 23%) and interrupted outreach health services (n = 39; 18.4%). The supply-side challenges mainly included lack of infrastructural preparedness for outbreak situations, and a shortage of human resources. CONCLUSIONS/RECOMMENDATIONS: A holistic approach is required that focuses on both preparedness and response to the outbreak, as well reassignment and reinforcement of health care professionals to continue catering to and maintaining essential MCH services during the pandemic.

Factors associated with COVID-19 stigma during the onset of the global pandemic in India: A cross-sectional study

Objective To assess factors associated with COVID-19 stigmatizing attitudes in the community and stigma experiences of COVID-19 recovered individuals during first wave of COVID-19 pandemic in India. Methods A cross-sectional study was conducted in 18 districts located in 7 States in India during September 2020 to January 2021 among adults > 18 years of age selected through systematic random sampling. Data on socio demographic and COVID-19 knowledge were collected from 303 COVID-19 recovered and 1,976 non-COVID-19 infected individuals from community using a survey questionnaire. Stigma was assessed using COVID-19 Stigma Scale and Community COVID-19 Stigma Scale developed for the study. Informed consent was sought from the participants. Univariate and multivariate binary logistic regression analysis were conducted. Results Half of the participants (51.3%) from the community reported prevalence of severe stigmatizing attitudes toward COVID-19 infected while 38.6% of COVID-19 recovered participants reported experiencing severe stigma. Participants from the community were more likely to report stigmatizing attitudes toward COVID-19 infected if they were residents of high prevalent COVID-19 zone (AOR: 1.5;CI: 1.2–1.9), staying in rural areas (AOR: 1.5;CI:1.1–1.9), belonged to the age group of 18–30 years (AOR: 1.6;CI 1.2–2.0), were male (AOR: 1.6;CI: 1.3–1.9), illiterate (AOR: 2.7;CI: 1.8–4.2), or living in Maharashtra (AOR: 7.4;CI: 4.8–11.3). COVID-19 recovered participants had higher odds of experiencing stigma if they had poor knowledge about COVID-19 transmission (AOR: 2.8;CI: 1.3–6.3), were staying for 6–15 years (AOR: 3.24;CI: 1.1–9.4) in the current place of residence or belonged to Delhi (AOR: 5.3;CI: 1.04–26.7). Conclusion Findings indicated presence of stigmatizing attitudes in the community as well as experienced stigma among COVID-19 recovered across selected study sites in India during the first wave of COVID-19 pandemic. Study recommends timely dissemination of factual information to populations vulnerable to misinformation and psychosocial interventions for individuals affected by stigma.

Psychological distress and burnout among healthcare worker during COVID-19 pandemic in India-A cross-sectional study.

BACKGROUND: COVID-19 has inundated the entire world disrupting the lives of millions of people. The pandemic has stressed the healthcare system of India impacting the psychological status and functioning of health care workers. The aim of this study is to determine the burnout levels and factors associated with the risk of psychological distress among healthcare workers (HCW) engaged in the management of COVID 19 in India. METHODS: A cross-sectional study was conducted from 1 September 2020 to 30 November 2020 by telephonic interviews using a web-based Google form. Health facilities and community centres from 12 cities located in 10 states were selected for data collection. Data on socio-demographic and occupation-related variables like age, sex, type of family, income, type of occupation, hours of work and income were obtained was obtained from 967 participants, including doctors, nurses, ambulance drivers, emergency response teams, lab personnel, and others directly involved in COVID 19 patient care. Levels of psychological distress was assessed by the General health Questionnaire -GHQ-5 and levels of burnout was assessed using the ICMR-NIOH Burnout questionnaire. Multivariable logistic regression analysis was performed to identify factors associated with the risk of psychological distress. The third quartile values of the three subscales of burnout viz EE, DP and PA were used to identify burnout profiles of the healthcare workers. RESULTS: Overall, 52.9% of the participants had the risk of psychological distress that needed further evaluation. Risk of psychological distress was significantly associated with longer hours of work (≥ 8 hours a day) (AOR = 2.38, 95% CI(1.66-3.41), income≥20000(AOR = 1.74, 95% CI, (1.16-2.6); screening of COVID-19 patients (AOR = 1.63 95% CI (1.09-2.46), contact tracing (AOR = 2.05, 95% CI (1.1-3.81), High Emotional exhaustion score (EE ≥16) (AOR = 4.41 95% CI (3.14-6.28) and High Depersonalisation score (DP≥7) (AOR = 1.79, 95% CI (1.28-2.51)). About 4.7% of the HCWs were overextended (EE>18); 6.5% were disengaged (DP>8) and 9.7% HCWs were showing signs of burnout (high on all three dimensions). CONCLUSION: The study has identified key factors that could have been likely triggers for psychological distress among healthcare workers who were engaged in management of COVID cases in India. The study also demonstrates the use of GHQ-5 and ICMR-NIOH Burnout questionnaire as important tools to identify persons at risk of psychological distress and occurrence of burnout symptoms respectively. The findings provide useful guide to planning interventions to mitigate mental health problems among HCW in future epidemic/pandemic scenarios in the country.

Emerging trends from COVID-19 research registered in the Clinical Trials Registry - India.

Since the beginning of the year, the deadly coronavirus pandemic, better known as coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), brought the entire world to an unprecedented halt. In tandem with the global scenario, researchers in India are actively engaged in the conduct of clinical research to counter the pandemic. This review attempts to provide a comprehensive overview of the COVID-19 research in India including design aspects, through the clinical trials registered in the Clinical Trials Registry - India (CTRI) till June 5, 2020. One hundred and twenty two registered trials on COVID-19 were extracted from the CTRI database. These trials were categorized into modern medicine (n=42), traditional medicine (n=67) and miscellaneous (n=13). Of the 42 modern medicine trials, 28 were on repurposed drugs, used singly (n=24) or in combination (n=4). Of these 28 trials, 23 were to evaluate their therapeutic efficacy in different severities of the disease. There were nine registered trials on cell- and plasma-based therapies, two phytopharmaceutical trials and three vaccine trials. The traditional medicine trials category majorly comprised Ayurveda (n=45), followed by homeopathy (n=14) and others (n=8) from Yoga, Siddha and Unani. Among the traditional medicine category, 31 trials were prophylactic and 36 were therapeutic, mostly conducted on asymptomatic or mild-to-moderate COVID-19 patients. This review would showcase the research being conducted on COVID-19 in the country and highlight the research gaps to steer further studies.