Experiences of birthing people during the COVID-19 pandemic: Analysis of comments from the 2020 Wisconsin Pregnancy Risk Assessment Monitoring System (PRAMS).

BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 pandemic has taken a significant toll on the US population, with birthing people having special clinical needs. The Pregnancy Risk Assessment Monitoring System (PRAMS) is a population-based surveillance system for monitoring birthing people's experiences. Comment data from the PRAMS survey can provide further insight into birthing people's experiences. This study aims to use PRAMS data to describe pandemic-related experiences in a representative sample of birthing people in Wisconsin to help inform future emergency preparedness planning. METHODS: This study analyzed 2020 Wisconsin PRAMS data for births in March or later. Content analysis of pandemic-related comment data was conducted, and quantitative data on demographic characteristics and pandemic-related experiences were examined. RESULTS: Findings from 1406 respondents indicated that many birthing people were affected by the pandemic, including changes in healthcare visits and employment. One hundred respondents commented on pandemic-related experiences; four interrelated themes emerged from content analysis: changed nature and quality of healthcare, limited social support, increased anxiety, stress, or fear, and employment or financial burden. Most comments discussed negative impacts; some expressed positive aspects. DISCUSSION: Findings suggest opportunities for improving support for birthing people during public health emergencies, for example, through developing healthcare policies and public health guidelines that prioritize the protective mechanisms of social support for birthing people, identifying additional and immediately accessible policy protections to support birthing and postpartum people (e.g., insurance and paid leave) during public health emergencies, and implementing additional screening and support to help address increased mental health needs during public health emergencies.

Your neighborhood matters: an ecological social determinant study of the relationship between residential racial segregation and the risk of firearm fatalities.

BACKGROUND: Firearm fatalities are a major public health concern, claiming the lives of 40,000 Americans each year. While firearm fatalities have pervasive effects, it is unclear how social determinants of health (SDOH) such as residential racial segregation, income inequality, and community resilience impact firearm fatalities. This study investigates the relationships between these SDOH and the likelihood of firearm fatalities. METHODS: County-level SDOH data from the Agency for Health Care Research and Quality for 2019 were analyzed, covering 72 Wisconsin counties. The dependent variable was the number of firearm fatalities in each county, used as a continuous variable. The independent variable was residential racial segregation (Dissimilarity Index), defined as the degree to which non-White and White residents were distributed across counties, ranging from 0 (complete integration) to 100 (complete segregation), and higher values indicate greater residential segregation (categorized as low, moderate, and high). Covariates were income inequality ranging from zero (perfect equality) to one (perfect inequality) categorized as low, moderate, and high, community resilience risk factors (low, moderate, and high risks), and rural-urban classifications. Descriptive/summary statistics, unadjusted and adjusted negative binomial regression adjusting for population weight, were performed using STATA/MPv.17.0; P-values ≤ 0.05 were considered statistically significant. ArcMap was used for Geographic Information System analysis. RESULTS: In 2019, there were 802 firearm fatalities. The adjusted model demonstrates that the risk of firearm fatalities was higher in areas with high residential racial segregation compared to low-segregated areas (IRR.:1.26, 95% CI:1.04-1.52) and higher in areas with high-income inequality compared to areas with low-income inequality (IRR.:1.18, 95% CI:1.00-1.40). Compared to areas with low-risk community resilience, the risk of firearm fatalities was higher in areas with moderate (IRR.:0.61, 95% CI:0.48-0.78), and in areas with high risk (IRR.:0.53, 95% CI:0.41-0.68). GIS analysis demonstrated that areas with high racial segregation also have high rates of firearm fatalities. CONCLUSION: Areas with high residential racial segregation have a high rate of firearm fatalities. With high income inequality and low community resilience, the likelihood of firearm fatalities increases.