Introduction: Maternal birthing positions refer to the various physical postures a pregnant mother may assume at the time of delivery. The World Health Organisation recommends that woman should be given an opportunity to make a choice on the type of position to use during labour. Alternative birth positions are associated with lower incidence rates of performing episiotomy, less perineal tears and less use of instrumental deliveries. Nurses' perspective on women's positions has rarely been explored in India. Present study aims at assessing the knowledge regarding alternative birth positions among nursing officers. Materials and Methods: This cross-sectional observational study was conducted on 52 nursing officers who were posted in the labour room. A pretested questionnaire was administered to them. Data analysis was done using SPSS software version 22. Results: Majority (82.7%) of nursing officers felt that there is a need of giving a choice to the woman regarding alternate birth position. 76.9% of them were aware of position other than lithotomy. Around 48.1% would recommend squatting position to a woman in labour. Ease and convenience in conducting the delivery was the foremost reason chosen in advocating a birth position. Whereas overcrowding in the labour room, ignorance about alternate positions and difficulty in converting to instrumental delivery were cited as reasons of not recommending these positions. Conclusion: Educating nursing officers about emerging evidence regarding birthing positions will enable them to give accurate information to women.

Introduction: Reduction in maternal mortality has been a top priority in low- and lower middle-income countries of Asia-Pacific region. India, being one of them, has a major responsibility of reducing maternal mortality especially in light of the commitment on the part of the Sustainable Development Goals. Despite massive efforts and availability of technology needed to avert maternal deaths, the maternal mortality ratio (MMR) in India continues to be high especially in remote areas. This study aims at collecting the MMR data and analyzing in the context of island infrastructure. Material and Methods: This was a hospital-based cross-sectional study. The records of maternal deaths from January 2010 to December 2019 were collected from the medical record section and analyzed. Results: The MMR was estimated to be 95.63 per 100,000 live births. Majority of the patients were multigravida (82%) in the age group of 21 to 30 years (75%). Around 64% of them were referred cases. Majority (86%) of the deaths occurred in the postpartum period. Hemorrhage was the leading direct cause of maternal deaths (35.7%) followed by hypertensive disorders of pregnancy (HDP) (21.4%). Conclusion: Most maternal deaths are preventable. Early detection of high-risk pregnancies and early referral of such patients to a well-equipped center is the key to curb the catastrophe of mortality. Adopting methods like qSOFA (quick sequential organ failure assessment) for identifying patients requiring intensive care and miniPIERS (Preeclampsia Integrated Estimate of RiSk) model for predicting adverse outcome in HDP is the need of hour. More efforts should be made to retain the specialists in the islands.

Among our sample of women, we found a prevalence of domestic violence (32.5%), with the most common form being verbal abuse and the majority of abuse committed by the spouse or mother-in-law. n Only 6.8% of these women reported calling helplines or lodged a formal complaint.n While the medical community focuses on controlling the spread of coronavirus disease (COVID-19), women who experience domestic violence may be neglected in light of health care system challenges caused by the pandemic.

No abstract

No abstract

Background: One of the major threats to the COVID-19 vaccines rollout and successful mitigation of the pandemic is vaccine hesitancy. Vaccine hesitancy refers to delay in acceptance or refusal of vaccination despite availability of vaccination services. The COVID-19 vaccine trials generated very limited data on safety and efficacy for pregnant women and children, since pregnant women were not included in any of the phase I/II or III trials. Hence the authors made an attempt to understand vaccine hesitancy among women healthcare and frontline workers with a focus on vaccination during pregnancy and lactation. Methods: The recruitment of participants was done by purposive snowballing technique over a period of 15 days. The data collection was done through an online questionnaire generated with the help of Google forms. After excluding women who exceeded the age criteria and incompletely filled questionnaires, 101 responses were considered for analysis. Data analysis was done using SPSS software version 22. Results: From a total of 101 responses for analysis, 26% had comorbidities. Of the 9 women who were pregnant, majority was in the second trimester (55.6%). Majority of the women, 63.6% had been feeding for more than six months. Of the respondents who had refused vaccination, most wanted to wait longer for further research on safety and efficacy (47.8%). Conclusions: The reasons for pregnant women to decline COVID-19 vaccination during pregnancy even if the vaccine were safe and free were that they did not want to expose their developing baby to any possible harmful side effects, would like to see more safety data among pregnant women and unclear recommendations from the healthcare provider. As HCWs are envoys for evidence based medical interventions, and they are critical in promoting vaccine acceptance amongst the general population, it is important to design effective strategies to improve vaccine acceptance amongst this population.

No abstract

No abstract