Explore the vast range of titles available.

The postnatal period is an underserved aspect of maternity care. Guidelines for postnatal care are not usually informed by what matters to the women who use it. This qualitative systematic review was undertaken to identify what matters to women in the postnatal period, to inform the scope of a new World Health Organization (WHO) postnatal guideline. We searched MEDLINE, CINAHL, PsycINFO, POPLINE, Global Index Medicus, EMBASE, LILACS, AJOL, and reference lists of eligible studies published January 2000-July 2019, reporting qualitative data on women's beliefs, expectations, and values relating to the postnatal period. Author findings were extracted, coded and synthesised using techniques derived from thematic synthesis. Confidence in the quality, coherence, relevance and adequacy of data underpinning the resulting findings was assessed using GRADE-CERQual. We included 36 studies from 15 countries, representing the views of more than 800 women. Confidence in most results was moderate to high. What mattered to women was a positive postnatal experience where they were able to adapt to their new self-identity and develop a sense of confidence and competence as a mother; adjust to changes in their intimate and family relationships, including their relationship to their baby; navigate ordinary physical and emotional challenges; and experience the dynamic achievement of personal growth as they adjust to the 'new normal' of motherhood and parenting in their own cultural context. This review provides evidence that what matters to women in the postnatal period is achieving positive motherhood (including maternal self-esteem, competence, and autonomy), as well as fulfilling adaptation to changed intimate and family relationships, and (re)gaining health and wellbeing for both their baby, and themselves. Where this process is optimal, it also results in joy, self-confidence, and an enhanced capacity to thrive in the new integrated identity of 'woman and mother'.

Design and provision of good quality maternity care should incorporate what matters to childbearing women. This qualitative systematic review was undertaken to inform WHO intrapartum guidelines. Using a pre-determined search strategy, we searched Medline, CINAHL, PsycINFO, AMED, EMBASE, LILACS, AJOL, and reference lists of eligible studies published 1996-August 2016 (updated to January 2018), reporting qualitative data on womens' childbirth beliefs, expectations, and values. Studies including specific interventions or health conditions were excluded. PRISMA guidelines were followed. Authors' findings were extracted, logged on a study-specific data form, and synthesised using meta-ethnographic techniques. Confidence in the quality, coherence, relevance and adequacy of data underpinning the resulting themes was assessed using GRADE-CERQual. A line of argument synthesis was developed. 35 studies (19 countries) were included in the primary search, and 2 in the update. Confidence in most results was moderate to high. What mattered to most women was a positive experience that fulfilled or exceeded their prior personal and socio-cultural beliefs and expectations. This included giving birth to a healthy baby in a clinically and psychologically safe environment with practical and emotional support from birth companions, and competent, reassuring, kind clinical staff. Most wanted a physiological labour and birth, while acknowledging that birth can be unpredictable and frightening, and that they may need to 'go with the flow'. If intervention was needed or wanted, women wanted to retain a sense of personal achievement and control through active decision-making. These values and expectations were mediated through womens' embodied (physical and psychosocial) experience of pregnancy and birth; local familial and sociocultural norms; and encounters with local maternity services and staff. Most healthy childbearing women want a positive birth experience. Safety and psychosocial wellbeing are equally valued. Maternity care should be designed to fulfil or exceed womens' personal and socio-cultural beliefs and expectations.

AbstractObjectiveTo determine the clinical manifestations, risk factors, and maternal and perinatal outcomes in pregnant and recently pregnant women with suspected or confirmed coronavirus disease 2019 (covid-19).DesignLiving systematic review and meta-analysis.Data sourcesMedline, Embase, Cochrane database, WHO COVID-19 database, China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI), and Wanfang databases from 1 December 2019 to 6 October 2020, along with preprint servers, social media, and reference lists.Study selectionCohort studies reporting the rates, clinical manifestations (symptoms, laboratory and radiological findings), risk factors, and maternal and perinatal outcomes in pregnant and recently pregnant women with suspected or confirmed covid-19.Data extractionAt least two researchers independently extracted the data and assessed study quality. Random effects meta-analysis was performed, with estimates pooled as odds ratios and proportions with 95% confidence intervals. All analyses will be updated regularly.Results192 studies were included. Overall, 10% (95% confidence interval 7% to 12%; 73 studies, 67 271 women) of pregnant and recently pregnant women attending or admitted to hospital for any reason were diagnosed as having suspected or confirmed covid-19. The most common clinical manifestations of covid-19 in pregnancy were fever (40%) and cough (41%). Compared with non-pregnant women of reproductive age, pregnant and recently pregnant women with covid-19 were less likely to have symptoms (odds ratio 0.28, 95% confidence interval 0.13 to 0.62; I2=42.9%) or report symptoms of fever (0.49, 0.38 to 0.63; I2=40.8%), dyspnoea (0.76, 0.67 to 0.85; I2=4.4%) and myalgia (0.53, 0.36 to 0.78; I2=59.4%). The odds of admission to an intensive care unit (odds ratio 2.13, 1.53 to 2.95; I2=71.2%), invasive ventilation (2.59, 2.28 to 2.94; I2=0%) and need for extra corporeal membrane oxygenation (2.02, 1.22 to 3.34; I2=0%) were higher in pregnant and recently pregnant than non-pregnant reproductive aged women. Overall, 339 pregnant women (0.02%, 59 studies, 41 664 women) with confirmed covid-19 died from any cause. Increased maternal age (odds ratio 1.83, 1.27 to 2.63; I2=43.4%), high body mass index (2.37, 1.83 to 3.07; I2=0%), any pre-existing maternal comorbidity (1.81, 1.49 to 2.20; I2=0%), chronic hypertension (2.0, 1.14 to 3.48; I2=0%), pre-existing diabetes (2.12, 1.62 to 2.78; I2=0%), and pre-eclampsia (4.21, 1.27 to 14.0; I2=0%) were associated with severe covid-19 in pregnancy. In pregnant women with covid-19, increased maternal age, high body mass index, non-white ethnicity, any pre-existing maternal comorbidity including chronic hypertension and diabetes, and pre-eclampsia were associated with serious complications such as admission to an intensive care unit, invasive ventilation and maternal death. Compared to pregnant women without covid-19, those with the disease had increased odds of maternal death (odds ratio 2.85, 1.08 to 7.52; I2=0%), of needing admission to the intensive care unit (18.58, 7.53 to 45.82; I2=0%), and of preterm birth (1.47, 1.14 to 1.91; I2=18.6%). The odds of admission to the neonatal intensive care unit (4.89, 1.87 to 12.81, I2=96.2%) were higher in babies born to mothers with covid-19 versus those without covid-19.ConclusionPregnant and recently pregnant women with covid-19 attending or admitted to the hospitals for any reason are less likely to manifest symptoms such as fever, dyspnoea, and myalgia, and are more likely to be admitted to the intensive care unit or needing invasive ventilation than non-pregnant women of reproductive age. Pre-existing comorbidities, non-white ethnicity, chronic hypertension, pre-existing diabetes, high maternal age, and high body mass index are risk factors for severe covid-19 in pregnancy. Pregnant women with covid-19 versus without covid-19 are more likely to deliver preterm and could have an increased risk of maternal death and of being admitted to the intensive care unit. Their babies are more likely to be admitted to the neonatal unit.Systematic review registrationPROSPERO CRD42020178076.Readers’ noteThis article is a living systematic review that will be updated to reflect emerging evidence. Updates may occur for up to two years from the date of original publication. This version is update 1 of the original article published on 1 September 2020 (BMJ 2020;370:m3320), and previous updates can be found as data supplements (https://www.bmj.com/content/370/bmj.m3320/related#datasupp). When citing this paper please consider adding the update number and date of access for clarity.

Effective postnatal care is important for optimal care of women and newborns-to promote health and wellbeing, identify and treat clinical and psychosocial concerns, and to provide support for families. Yet uptake of formal postnatal care services is low and inequitable in many countries. As part of a larger study examining the views of women, partners, and families requiring both routine and specialised care, we analysed a subset of data on the views and experiences of women related to routine postnatal care. We undertook a qualitative evidence synthesis, using a framework analysis approach. We included studies published up to December 2019 with extractable qualitative data, with no language restriction. We focused on women in the general population and their accounts of routine postnatal care utilization. We searched MEDLINE, PUBMED, CINAHL, EMBASE, EBM-Reviews, and grey literature. Two reviewers screened each study independently; inclusion was agreed by consensus. Data abstraction and scientific quality assessment were carried out using a study-specific extraction form and established quality assessment tools. The analysis framework was developed a priori based on previous knowledge and research on the topic and adapted. Due to the number of included texts, the final synthesis was developed inductively from the initial framework by iterative sampling of the included studies, until data saturation was achieved. Findings are presented by high versus low/middle income country, and by confidence in the finding, applying the GRADE-CERQual approach. Of 12,678 papers, 512 met the inclusion criteria; 59 articles were sampled for analysis. Five themes were identified: access and availability; physical and human resources; external influences; social norms; and experience of care. High confidence study findings included the perceived low value of postnatal care for healthy women and infants; concerns around access and quality of care; and women's desire for more emotional and psychosocial support during the postnatal period. These findings highlight multiple missed opportunities for postnatal care promotion and ensuring continuity of care. Factors that influence women's utilization of postnatal care are interlinked, and include access, quality, and social norms. Many women recognised the specific challenges of the postnatal period and emphasised the need for emotional and psychosocial support in this time, in addition to clinical care. While this is likely a universal need, studies on mental health needs have predominantly been conducted in high-income settings. Postnatal care programmes and related research should consider these multiple drivers and multi-faceted needs, and the holistic postpartum needs of women and their families should be studied in a wider range of settings. This protocol is registered in the PROSPERO database for systematic reviews: CRD42019139183.

The novel coronavirus disease (COVID-19) outbreak was first declared in China in December 2019, and WHO declared the pandemic on 11 March 2020. A fast-rising number of confirmed cases has been observed in all continents, with Europe at the epicentre of the outbreak at this moment. Sexual and reproductive health (SRH) and rights is a significant public health issue during the epidemics. The novel coronavirus (SARS-CoV-2) is new to humans, and only limited scientific evidence is available to identify the impact of the disease COVID-19 on SRH, including clinical presentation and outcomes of the infection during pregnancy, or for persons with STI/HIV-related immunosuppression. Beyond the clinical scope of SRH, we should not neglect the impacts at the health system level and disruptions or interruptions in regular provision of SRH services, such as pre- and postnatal checks, safe abortion, contraception, HIV/AIDS and sexually transmitted infections. Furthermore, other aspects merit attention such as the potential increase of gender-based violence and domestic abuse, and effects of stigma and discrimination associated with COVID-19 and their effects on SRH clients and health care providers. Therefore, there is an urgent need for the scientific community to generate sound clinical, epidemiological, and psycho-social behavioral links between COVID-19 and SRH and rights outcomes.

Informed consent is the cornerstone of the ethical conduct and protection of the rights and wellbeing of participants in clinical research. Therefore, it is important to identify the most appropriate moments for the participants to be informed and to give consent, so that they are able to make a responsible and autonomous decision. However, the optimal timing of consent in clinical research during the intrapartum period remains controversial, and currently, there is no clear guidance. We aimed to describe practices of informed consent in intrapartum care clinical research in the last three decades, as reported in uterotonics for postpartum haemorrhage prevention trials. This is a secondary analysis of the studies included in the Cochrane review entitled \"Uterotonic agents for preventing postpartum haemorrhage: a network meta-analysis\" published in 2018. All the reports included in the Cochrane network meta-analysis were eligible for inclusion in this analysis, except for those reported in languages other than English, French or Spanish. We extracted and synthesized data on the time each of the components of the informed consent process occurred. We assessed data from 192 studies, out of 196 studies included in the Cochrane review. The majority of studies (59.9%, 115 studies) reported that women were informed about the study, without specifying the timing. When reported, most studies informed women at admission to the facility for childbirth. Most of the studies reported that consent was sought, but only 59.9% reported the timing, which in most of the cases, was at admission for childbirth. Among these, 32 studies obtained consent in the active phase of labour, 17 in the latent phase and in 10 studies the labour status was unknown. Women were consented antenatally in 6 studies and in 8 studies the consent was obtained indistinctly during antenatal care or at admission. Most of the studies did not specified who was the person who sought the informed consent. Practices of informed consent in trials on use of uterotonics for prevention of postpartum haemorrhage showed variability and substandard reporting. Informed consent sought at admission for childbirth was the most frequent approach implemented in these trials.

There are concerns about the quality of medicines available in low- and middle-income countries (LMIC) to manage hemorrhage, pre-eclampsia/eclampsia and sepsis. We aimed to identify, critically appraise, and synthesize the findings of studies on the quality of these three types of medicines available in LMIC. This systematic review searched Medline, EMBASE and LILACS (from inception to 25 May 2020) for studies on the quality of selected medicines available in LMIC that provided at least the amount of active pharmaceutical ingredient. We contacted study authors for additional information. We excluded simulation studies. We used the MEDQUARG tool to assess study quality. The main outcome was the prevalence of failed samples. We identified 9699 unique citations and included 34 studies (3159 samples from 40 countries) in the review. Most studies (65%) had low quality (scores <6/12). Overall, 48.9% of 1890 uterotonic samples (19 studies) failed quality tests; failures rates were 75% for ergometrine and nearly 40% each for oxytocin and misoprostol. The overall prevalence of failed injectable antibiotics (1090 samples, 18 studies) was 13.4%, ranging from 2.9% for injectable metronidazole (34 samples, 3 studies) to 16.0% for cefazolin (449 samples, 2 studies). The prevalence of low quality magnesium sulphate (179 samples, 2 studies) was 3.4%. We did not find any studies on the quality of carbetocin, tranexamic acid, or clindamycin. There is a widespread problem with the quality of medicines used to manage life-threatening maternal conditions in LMIC. This can be a contributing factor to high maternal mortality rates in these regions.

Over 10% of maternal deaths annually are due to sepsis. Prophylactic antibiotics and antiseptic agents are critical interventions to prevent maternal peripartum infections. We conducted a mixed-method systematic review to better understand factors affecting the use of prophylactic antibiotics and antiseptic agents to prevent peripartum infections. We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, Emcare, CINAHL, Global Health, Global Index Medicus, and Maternity and Infant Care for studies published between 1 January 1990 and 27 May 2022. We included primary qualitative, quantitative, and mixed-methods studies that focused on women, families, and healthcare providers' perceptions and experiences of prophylactic antibiotic and antiseptics during labour and birth in health facilities. There were no language restrictions. We used a thematic synthesis approach for qualitative evidence and GRADE-CERQual approach for assessing confidence in these review findings. Quantitative study results were mapped to the qualitative findings and reported narratively. We included 19 studies (5 qualitative, 12 quantitative and 2 mixed-methods studies), 16 relating to antibiotics, 2 to antiseptic use, and 1 study to both antibiotic and antiseptic use. Most related to providers' perspectives and were conducted in high-income countries. Key themes on factors affecting antibiotic use were providers' beliefs about benefits and harms, perceptions of women's risk of infection, regimen preferences and clinical decision-making processes. Studies on antiseptic use explored women's perceptions of vaginal cleansing, and provider's beliefs about benefits and the usefulness of guidelines. We identified a range of factors affecting how providers use prophylactic antibiotics at birth, which can undermine implementation of clinical guidelines. There were insufficient data for low-resource settings, women's perspectives, and regarding use of antiseptics, highlighting the need for further research in these areas. Implications for practice include that interventions to improve prophylactic antibiotic use should take account of local environments and perceived infection risk and ensure contextually relevant guidance.

Background There is a need for a clear and actionable definition of maternal sepsis, in order to better assess the burden of this condition, trigger timely and effective treatment and allow comparisons across facilities and countries. The objective of this study was to review maternal sepsis definitions and identification criteria and to report on the results of an expert consultation to develop a new international definition of maternal sepsis. Methods All original and review articles and WHO documents, as well as clinical guidelines providing definitions and/or identification criteria of maternal sepsis were included. A multidisciplinary international panel of experts was surveyed through an online consultation in March-April 2016 on their opinion on the existing sepsis definitions, including new definition of sepsis proposed for the adult population (2016 Third International Consensus Definitions for Sepsis and Septic Shock) and importance of different criteria for identification of maternal sepsis. The definition was agreed using an iterative process in an expert face-to-face consensus development meeting convened by WHO and Jhpiego. Results Standardizing the definition of maternal sepsis and aligning it with the current understanding of sepsis in the adult population was considered a mandatory step to improve the assessment of the burden of maternal sepsis by the expert panel. The literature review and expert consultation resulted in a new WHO consensus definition “Maternal sepsis is a life-threatening condition defined as organ dysfunction resulting from infection during pregnancy, child-birth, post-abortion, or post-partum period”. Plans are in progress to validate the new WHO definition of maternal sepsis in a large international population. Conclusion The operationalization of the new maternal sepsis definition requires generation of a set of practical criteria to identify women with sepsis. These criteria should enable clinicians to focus on the timely initiation of actionable elements of care (administration of antimicrobials and fluids, support of vital organ functions, and referral) and improve maternal outcomes.

IntroductionHand hygiene is key in preventing healthcare-associated infections, but it is challenging in maternity settings due to high patient turnover, frequent emergencies and volume of aseptic procedures. We sought to investigate if adaptions to the WHO hand hygiene reminders could improve their acceptability in maternity settings globally, and use these findings to develop new reminders specific to maternity settings.MethodsInformed by Sekhon et al’s acceptability framework, we conducted an online survey, semi-structured interviews and a focus group examining the three WHO central hand hygiene reminders (‘your five moments of hand hygiene’, ‘how to hand wash’ and ‘how to hand rub’) and their acceptability in maternity settings. A convergent mixed-methods study design was followed. Findings were examined overall and by country income status. A WHO expert working group tested the integrated findings, further refined results and developed recommendations to improve acceptability for use in the global maternity community. Findings were used to inform the development of two novel and acceptable hand hygiene reminders for use in high-income country (HIC) and low- and middle-income country (LMIC) maternity settings.ResultsParticipation in the survey (n=342), semi-structured interviews (n=12) and focus group (n=7) spanned 51 countries (14 HICs and 37 LMICs). The highest scoring acceptability constructs were clarity of the intervention (intervention coherence), confidence in performance (self-efficacy), and alignment with personal values (ethicality). The lowest performing were perceived difficulty (burden) and how the intervention made the participant feel (affective attitude). Overfamiliarity reduced acceptability in HICs (perceived effectiveness). In LMICs, resource availability was a barrier to implementation (opportunity cost). Two new reminders were developed based on the findings, using inclusive female images, and clinical examples from maternity settings.ConclusionFollowing methodologically robust adaptation, two novel and inclusive maternity-specific hand hygiene reminders have been developed for use in both HIC and LMICs.