The experience of pregnant women and their families who were infected with covid-19 before vaccination: A qualitative approach within a multicenter study in Brazil.

BACKGROUND: Pregnant and postpartum women infected by COVID-19 are at increased risk of adverse outcomes, including negative effects on their mental health. Brazilian maternal mortality rate due to COVID-19 is 2.5 times higher than overall mortality rates. This study aimed to understand how pregnant/postpartum women experienced the COVID-19 suspicion/investigation or confirmed infection in different Brazilian cities, the pandemic's consequences to women and their families, and their needs to improve maternal health services during public health emergencies. METHODS: We conducted a qualitative study with 27 women with COVID-19 and 6 of their family members, as part of a multicenter study among 15 maternity hospitals in Brazil. We applied in-depth interviews through telephone calls when women received the diagnostic or had a suspect infection and after 60 days. Another semi-structured interview was applied to their close family members. The interviews were considered through thematic analysis. RESULTS: From the thematic content analysis three major themes emerged from the first and second interviews: (Cucinotta and Vanelli, 2020) assistance received by the woman and newborn in the medical services; (World Health Organization (WHO) 2021) stigma/fear of contamination from health workers and from family and friends reported by the women; (Allotey et al., 2020) the COVID-19 pandemic impact. CONCLUSION: Before the availability of the COVID-19 vaccine, pregnant women experienced fear of death, hospitalization, quarantine, loss of family members, and financial repercussions, resulting in physical, psychological, and socioeconomic impacts on these women's lives.

Caesarean delivery on maternal request: the perspective of the postpartum women.

BACKGROUND: Caesarean delivery on maternal request (CDMR) is an increasing delivery option among women. As such, we aimed to understand the reasons that led pregnant women to request a caesarean delivery. METHODS: A phenomenological study was conducted with semi-structured interviews, in a convenience sample, for women who had undergone a CDMR between March and June 2023, in a public reference university hospital in Campinas, Brazil. The interviews were recorded, transcribed and subjected to thematic analysis, supported by Nvivo®, and Reshape®. RESULTS: We interviewed eighteen women between 21 and 43 years of age. The reasons for C-section as their choice were: 1) fear of labour pain, 2) fear for safety due to maternal or fetal risks, 3) traumatic previous birth experiences of the patient, family or friends 4) sense of control, and 5) lack of knowledge about the risks and benefits of C-section. CONCLUSIONS: The perception of C-section as the painless and safest way to give birth, the movement of giving voice and respecting the autonomy of pregnant women, as well as the national regulation, contribute to the increased rates of surgical abdominal delivery under request. Cultural change concerning childbirth and better counseling could support a more adequate informed decision-making about delivery mode.

Risk factors related to the SARS-CoV-2 vaccine additional doses hesitancy among pregnant and non-pregnant people of reproductive age and partners: A Brazilian cross-sectional study.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to assess the predictors of acceptance and hesitancy of additional doses of any SARS-CoV-2 (COVID-19) vaccine among pregnant or recently pregnant and non-pregnant people of reproductive age and partners in Brazil. METHODS: We conducted an online cross-sectional study from June 2022 to April 2023 and invited women and partners between 18 and 49 years old to participate. We employed a snowball strategy to reach all potential eligible participants. Our primary outcome was the acceptance rate of the COVID-19 booster vaccine. We estimated the frequency and percentage for the three groups and compared categorical variables using the Chi-square test. Moreover, bivariate, backward stepwise regression, and subgroup analyses were performed to evaluate risk factors and predictors of COVID-19 vaccine booster hesitancy. We reported the effect size as OR with a 95% CI. RESULTS: We included 1487 participants, and among them, 334 (22.5%) were pregnant or recently pregnant people, 905 (60.8%) were non-pregnant people, and 247 (16.6%) were male partners. Pregnant and recently pregnant people showed greater hesitancy for the COVID-19 vaccine booster than non-pregnant people (28% vs 15%, P < 0.001) and male partners (28% vs 16%, P < 0.001). Non-pregnant women accepted the COVID-19 vaccine more often than pregnant or recently pregnant people (OR 1.75; 95% CI: 1.13-2.70). The associated factors to the reduced COVID-19 vaccine booster acceptance were family income between US$ 566-945.00 (54%), evangelic religion (65%), concern about vaccine safety (80%) and perceived common vaccine importance (93%). CONCLUSION: Pregnant people were more hesitant than non-pregnant people to accept the COVID-19 booster vaccine. Family income, religious beliefs, vaccine safety concerns, and perceived common vaccine importance were significant barriers to accepting COVID-19 booster vaccines. The impact of these factors was more evident among pregnant or recently pregnant people, emphasizing the harmful effect of misinformation among this vulnerable population.

The COVID-19 pandemic in Brazilian pregnant and postpartum women: results from the REBRACO prospective cohort study.

Brazil presented a very high number of maternal deaths and evident delays in healthcare. We aimed at evaluating the characteristics of SARS-CoV-2 infection and associated outcomes in the obstetric population. We conducted a prospective cohort study in 15 Brazilian centers including symptomatic pregnant or postpartum women with suspected COVID-19 from Feb/2020 to Feb/2021. Women were followed from suspected infection until the end of pregnancy. We analyzed maternal characteristics and pregnancy outcomes associated with confirmed COVID-19 infection and SARS, determining unadjusted risk ratios. In total, 729 symptomatic women with suspected COVID-19 were initially included. Among those investigated for COVID-19, 51.3% (n = 289) were confirmed COVID-19 and 48% (n = 270) were negative. Initially (before May 15th), only 52.9% of the suspected cases were tested and it was the period with the highest proportion of ICU admission and maternal deaths. Non-white ethnicity (RR 1.78 [1.04-3.04]), primary schooling or less (RR 2.16 [1.21-3.87]), being overweight (RR 4.34 [1.04-19.01]) or obese (RR 6.55 [1.57-27.37]), having public prenatal care (RR 2.16 [1.01-4.68]), planned pregnancies (RR 2.09 [1.15-3.78]), onset of infection in postpartum period (RR 6.00 [1.37-26.26]), chronic hypertension (RR 2.15 [1.37-4.10]), pre-existing diabetes (RR 3.20 [1.37-7.46]), asthma (RR 2.22 [1.14-4.34]), and anaemia (RR 3.15 [1.14-8.71]) were associated with higher risk for SARS. The availability of tests and maternal outcomes varied throughout the pandemic period of the study; the beginning was the most challenging period, with worse outcomes. Socially vulnerable, postpartum and previously ill women were more likely to present SARS related to COVID-19.

Brazilian network of COVID-19 during pregnancy (REBRACO: a multicentre study protocol).

INTRODUCTION: The aim of this study was to evaluate the clinical, epidemiological and laboratory aspects of SARS-CoV-2 infection during pregnancy and postpartum in 16 maternity hospitals. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: A prospective multicentre study, with five axes. First, the prevalence of SARS-CoV-2 infection among women admitted for childbirth will be described in a cross-sectional study. Second, maternal and perinatal outcomes will be assessed in a prospective cohort study including pregnant or postpartum women with suspected COVID-19. Third, a cohort of positive COVID-19 cases with sampling of a variety of biological material. Histopathological and viral analysis of biological maternal and neonatal samples will be performed, and the assessment of nutritional variables to evaluate the association between vitamin D and severity of infection. Fourth, a monitoring and evaluation committee to collect relevant healthcare information and plan actions in centres facing the pandemic. Furthermore, qualitative studies will be performed to study pregnant women, their families and health professionals. Fifth, an ecological study will monitor the number of live births, stillbirths and other outcomes to explore any trend among the periods before, during and after the pandemic. Data will systematically be collected in an electronic platform following standardised operational procedures. For quantitative study components, an appropriate statistical approach will be used for each analysis. For qualitative data, in-depth interviews recorded in audio will be transcribed, checking the text obtained with the recording. Subsequently, thematic analysis with the aid of the NVivo programme will be performed. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Ethical approval was obtained (letters of approval numbers 4.047.168, 4.179.679 and 4.083.988). All women will be fully informed to sign the consent form before enrolment in the study. Findings will be disseminated through peer-reviewed journals and scientific conferences.

"Preterm birth risk, me?" Women risk perception about premature delivery - a qualitative analysis.

BACKGROUND: Risk perception is based on collective indicators, but it is influenced by the individual's self-perception of his health-disease process. This study aims to investigate the risk perception of pregnant women who were identified as high-risk for premature birth and to seek strategies for better management of such cases. METHODS: This is a cross-sectional study where women who had completed their participation in P5 trial were contacted and invited to answer a structured questionnaire with open questions. Data were collected by telephone and analyzed using thematic analysis. The analysis categories were defined, and all the answers were reviewed, categorized, grouped, and a descriptive summary was prepared. RESULTS: Two hundred eight Brazilian women have participated. Three categories were identified: (1) Risk perception mediated by health professionals; (2) Self-perception of risk through personal experiences and relationships; (3) Perception of treatment success. After receiving an explanation from a health professional about short cervix and premature birth, women understood the risk of premature delivery, recognizing the importance of early diagnosis to prevent premature birth. Unsuccessful previous experiences in prior pregnancies influenced women's risk perception. Patients believed in the success of the treatment performed, placing their hopes on the treatment even without research guarantees about benefits. CONCLUSIONS: Pregnant women's risk perception regarding prematurity is based partly on personal and family experiences but mainly on information given by health professionals. The risk perception about preterm birth may contribute to healthy pregnancy, guiding necessary interventions and preventing adverse outcomes. Prevention studies on prematurity should thus focus on neonatal outcomes.

Facing the COVID-19 pandemic inside maternities in Brazil: A mixed-method study within the REBRACO initiative.

INTRODUCTION: COVID-19 pandemic posed major challenges in obstetric health care services. Preparedness, development, and implementation of new protocols were part of the needed response. This study aims to describe the strategies implemented and the perspectives of health managers on the challenges to face the pandemic in 16 different maternity hospitals that comprise a multicenter study in Brazil, called REBRACO (Brazilian network of COVID-19 during pregnancy). METHODS: Mixed-method study, with quantitative and qualitative approaches. Quantitative data on the infrastructure of the units, maternal and perinatal health indicators, modifications on staff and human resources, from January to July/2020. Also, information on total number of cases, and availability for COVID-19 testing. A qualitative study by purposeful and saturation sampling was undertaken with healthcare managers, to understand perspectives on local challenges in facing the pandemic. RESULTS: Most maternities early implemented their contingency plan. REBRACO centers reported 338 confirmed COVID-19 cases among pregnant and post-partum women up to July 2020. There were 29 maternal deaths and 15 (51.8%) attributed to COVID-19. All maternities performed relocation of beds designated to labor ward, most (75%) acquired mechanical ventilators, only the minority (25%) installed new negative air pressure rooms. Considering human resources, around 40% hired extra health professionals and increased weekly workload and the majority (68.7%) also suspended annual leaves. Only one center implemented universal screening for childbirth and 6 (37.5%) implemented COVID-19 testing for all suspected cases, while around 60% of the centers only tested moderate/severe cases with hospital admission. Qualitative results showed that main challenges experienced were related to the fear of the virus, concerns about reliability of evidence and lack of resources, with a clear need for mental health support among health professionals. CONCLUSION: Study findings suggest that maternities of the REBRACO initiative underwent major changes in facing the pandemic, with limitations on testing, difficulties in infrastructure and human resources. Leadership, continuous training, implementation of evidence-based protocols and collaborative initiatives are key to transpose the fear of the virus and ascertain adequate healthcare inside maternities, especially in low and middle-income settings. Policy makers need to address the specificities in considering reproductive health and childbirth during the COVID-19 pandemic and prioritize research and timely testing availability.

Reasons given by pregnant women for participating in a clinical trial aimed at preventing premature delivery: a qualitative analysis.

BACKGROUND: In clinical trials, pregnant women are potentially vulnerable, and the fetus is exposed to the intervention. This study aimed to identify the reasons that led pregnant women at a high risk of premature delivery to participate in a randomized clinical trial. METHODS: The women participating in the main trial were contacted by telephone postpartum and invited to answer an open questionnaire in a cross-sectional study. Data were collected by telephone and analyzed using thematic analysis. After the analysis categories were defined, all the answers were reviewed, categorized and grouped. A descriptive summary of the content of each category was then made. RESULTS: Overall, 208 women from different geographical regions of the country agreed to participate. Four categories were identified: 1) The risk of losing the baby; 2) A previous experience of premature delivery; 3) The role of the doctor and other health professionals, and 4) The availability of quality medical care and free medication. The main reason given for agreeing to participate was to reduce the risks associated with the baby being born prematurely, particularly when the woman herself or someone close to her had already experienced premature delivery. Other reasons were having received clear guidance and explanations from the doctor regarding prematurity and about the study and being given the opportunity to receive free treatment with greater access to the public healthcare system. CONCLUSIONS: The decision to participate in a clinical trial is not easy, particularly when the individual is vulnerable and in a critical situation as in the case of a pregnant woman at a high risk of delivering prematurely. Fears and uncertainties regarding the pregnancy outcome, as well as the woman's previous experiences and her awareness of the actual risks she faces will affect her decision regarding whether or not to participate. Recruitment challenges could be overcome by ensuring that the research team provides adequate information and support, thus creating a bond with participants that would foster a sense of safety and trust in the study proposals.