"First was to sit down and bring our minds together". A qualitative study on safer conception decision-making among HIV sero-different couples in Zimbabwe.

Decision-making on childbearing and safer conception use in HIV sero-different couples involves an intricate balance of individual desires and perceived HIV acquisition risk. This paper addresses an important knowledge gap regarding HIV sero-different couples' considerations and the relationship and power dynamics involved when deciding to use a safer conception method. Between February and June 2019, we conducted semi-structured in-depth interviews among 14 men and 17 women, representing 17 couples, who exited the SAFER study - a pilot study assessing the feasibility, acceptability and cost-effectiveness of a safer conception programme for HIV sero-different couples in Zimbabwe. All couples in SAFER were provided with a choice of safer conception methods and were followed for up to 12 months of pregnancy attempts and 3 months following pregnancy. While couples generally perceived their safer conception discussions to be easy and consensus-driven, the decision-making process also involved complex gender dynamics and trade-offs in relationship power, which resulted in differing interpretations of what constituted a joint or shared couple decision. Participants regarded effective couple communication as an essential component of and precursor to good safer conception conversations and requested additional training in couple communication. Couples relied on information from healthcare providers to kickstart their safer conception discussions. Safer conception programmes should address relationship power imbalances, promote effective couple communication and offer healthcare provider support to enable HIV sero-different couples to make informed choices about conception in a manner that upholds their safety and reproductive autonomy.

Our study explored how HIV sero-different couples in Zimbabwe made decisions on the use of safer conception methods. We interviewed 14 men and 17 women who participated in the SAFER study ­ a pilot study looking at how feasible, acceptable and cost-effective a safer conception programme for HIV sero-different couples is in Zimbabwe. We sought to understand the relationship dynamics, considerations and power trade-offs involved in choosing a safer conception method. Couples reported that their conversations about safer conception were easy and agreeable. At the same time, we found that both gender norms and HIV status shaped the couples' decision-making process, with male gender and partners with an HIV-negative status often having more influence in the final decision of which method to use. Effective couple communication was deemed crucial to support safer conception conversations, with participants requesting additional training in this area. The findings emphasise the importance of providing safer conception methods in a context that addresses power disparities, fosters good communication and includes healthcare providers' support to uphold HIV sero-different couples' reproductive rights and help them achieve their reproductive goals.

Cost analysis of an intrapartum quality improvement package for improving preterm survival and reinforcing best practices in Kenya and Uganda.

INTRODUCTION: Preterm birth is a leading cause of under-5 mortality, with the greatest burden in lower-resource settings. Strategies to improve preterm survival have been tested, but strategy costs are less understood. We estimate costs of a highly effective Preterm Birth Initiative (PTBi) intrapartum intervention package (data strengthening, WHO Safe Childbirth Checklist, simulation and team training, quality improvement collaboratives) and active control (data strengthening, Safe Childbirth Checklist). METHODS: In our analysis, we estimated costs incremental to current cost of intrapartum care (in 2020 $US) for the PTBi intervention package and active control in Kenya and Uganda. We costed the intervention package and control in two scenarios: 1) non-research implementation costs as observed in the PTBi study (Scenario 1, mix of public and private inputs), and 2) hypothetical costs for a model of implementation into Ministry of Health programming (Scenario 2, mostly public inputs). Using a healthcare system perspective, we employed micro-costing of personnel, supplies, physical space, and travel, including 3 sequential phases: program planning/adaptation (9 months); high-intensity implementation (15 months); lower-intensity maintenance (annual). One-way sensitivity analyses explored the effects of uncertainty in Scenario 2. RESULTS: Scenario 1 PTBi package total costs were $1.11M in Kenya ($48.13/birth) and $0.74M in Uganda ($17.19/birtth). Scenario 2 total costs were $0.86M in Kenya ($23.91/birth) and $0.28M in Uganda ($5.47/birth); annual maintenance phase costs per birth were $16.36 in Kenya and $3.47 in Uganda. In each scenario and country, personnel made up at least 72% of total PTBi package costs. Total Scenario 2 costs in Uganda were consistently one-third those of Kenya, largely driven by differences in facility delivery volume and personnel salaries. CONCLUSIONS: If taken up and implemented, the PTBi package has the potential to save preterm lives, with potential steady-state (maintenance) costs that would be roughly 5-15% of total per-birth healthcare costs in Uganda and Kenya.

Unequal impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic on women's fertility preferences: Evidence from a longitudinal cohort in the United States.

•The COVID-19 pandemic suppressed fertility desires among US women.•Impacts on fertility preferences persisted from summer 2020 to early 2021.•The fertility preferences of younger women, women of color and those facing financial stress were most impacted.