Influence of the COVID-19 pandemic on labor and childbirth care practices in Brazil: a cross-sectional study.

BACKGROUND: It has been hypothesized that the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic may have changed the conduct of obstetric practices at the time of labor, delivery, and birth. In Brazil, many practices lacking scientific evidence are implemented in this care, which is charcaterized by excessive use of unnecessary interventions. This scenario may have been worsened by the pandemic. Thus, we analyzed the effects of the pandemic on care during prenatal care and delivery by comparing the results of two surveys (one was administered before the pandemic and the other during the pandemic) in public hospitals in Belo Horizonte - Minas Gerais (MG), Brazil. METHODS: This cross-sectional and comparative study analyzed preliminary data from the study "Childbirth and breastfeeding in children of mothers infected with SARS-CoV-2", which was conducted in three referral maternity hospitals in Belo Horizonte - MG during the pandemic in the first half of 2020 in Brazil. The final sample consisted of 1532 eligible women. These results were compared with data from 390 puerperae who gave birth in the three public hospitals in the study "Birth in Belo Horizonte: labor and birth survey", conducted before the pandemic to investigate the changes in practices of labor and delivery care for the mother and her newborn, with or without COVID-19 infection, before and during the pandemic. In this research, "Birth in Belo Horizonte: labor and birth survey", data collection was performed between November 2011 and March 2013 by previously trained nurses. Between study comparisons were performed using Pearson's chi-square test, with a confidence level of 95%, and using Stata statistical program. RESULTS: We found a significant increase in practices recommended by the World Health Organization during the pandemic including the following: diet offering (48.90 to 98.65%), non-pharmacological pain relief (43.84 to 67.57%), and breastfeeding in the newborn´s first hour of life (60.31 to 77.98%) (p < 0.001). We found a significant reduction of non-recommended interventions, such as routine use of episiotomy (15.73 to 2.09%), the Kristeller maneuver (16.55 to 0.94%), oxytocin infusion misused (45.55 to 28.07%), amniotomy (30.81 to 15.08%), and lithotomy position during labor (71.23 to 6.54%) (p < 0.001). CONCLUSION: Our study revealed a statistically significant increase in the proportion of use of recommended practices and a reduction in non-recommended practices during labor and delivery. However, despite advances in the establishment of World Health Organization recommended practices in labor, delivery, and birth, the predominance of interventionist and medicalized practices persists, which is worsened by events, such as the pandemic.

Coexistence and prevalence of obstetric interventions: an analysis based on the grade of membership.

BACKGROUND: Obstetric interventions performed during delivery do not reflect improvements in obstetric care. Several practices routinely performed during childbirth, without any scientific evidence or basis - such as Kristeller maneuver, routine episiotomy, and movement or feeding restriction - reflect a disrespectful assistance reality that, unfortunately, remains in place in Brazil. The aims of the current study are to assess the coexistence and prevalence of obstetric interventions in maternity hospitals in Belo Horizonte City, based on the Grade of Membership (GoM) method, as well as to investigate sociodemographic and obstetric factors associated with coexistence profiles generated by it. METHODS: Observational study, based on a cross-sectional design, carried out with data deriving from the study "Nascer em Belo Horizonte: Inquérito sobre o Parto e Nascimento" (Born in Belo Horizonte: Survey on Childbirth and Birth). The herein investigated interventions comprised practices that are clearly useful and should be encouraged; practices that are clearly harmful or ineffective and should be eliminated; and practices that are inappropriately used, in contrast to the ones recommended by the World Health Organization. The analyzed interventions comprised: providing food to parturient women, allowing them to have freedom to move, use of partogram, adopting non-pharmacological methods for pain relief, enema, perineal shaving, lying patients down for delivery, Kristeller maneuver, amniotomy, oxytocin infusion, analgesia and episiotomy. The current study has used GoM to identify the coexistence of the adopted obstetric interventions. Variables such as age, schooling, skin color, primigravida, place-of-delivery financing, number of prenatal consultations, gestational age at delivery, presence of obstetric nurse at delivery time, paid work and presence of companion during delivery were taken into consideration at the time to build patients' profile. RESULTS: Results have highlighted two antagonistic obstetric profiles, namely: profile 1 comprised parturient women who were offered diet, freedom to move, use of partogram, using non-pharmacological methods for pain relief, giving birth in lying position, patients who were not subjected to Kristeller maneuver, episiotomy or amniotomy, women did not receive oxytocin infusion, and analgesia using. Profile 2, in its turn, comprised parturient women who were not offered diet, who were not allowed to have freedom to move, as well as who did not use the partograph or who were subjected to non-pharmacological methods for pain relief. They were subjected to enema, perineal shaving, Kristeller maneuver, amniotomy and oxytocin infusion. In addition, they underwent analgesia and episiotomy. This outcome emphasizes the persistence of an obstetric care model that is not based on scientific evidence. Based on the analysis of factors that influenced the coexistence of obstetric interventions, the presence of obstetric nurses in the healthcare practice has reduced the likelihood of parturient women to belong to profile 2. In addition, childbirth events that took place in public institutions have reduced the likelihood of parturient women to belong to profile 2. CONCLUSION(S): Based on the analysis of factors that influenced the coexistence of obstetric interventions, financing the hospital for childbirth has increased the likelihood of parturient women to belong to profile 2. However, the likelihood of parturient women to belong to profile 2 has decreased when hospitals had an active obstetric nurse at the delivery room. The current study has contributed to discussions about obstetric interventions, as well as to improve childbirth assistance models. In addition, it has emphasized the need of developing strategies focused on adherence to, and implementation of, assistance models based on scientific evidence.