IntroductionThe COVID-19 pandemic has substantially impacted maternity care provision worldwide. Studies based on modelling estimated large indirect effects of the pandemic on services and health outcomes. The objective of this study was to prospectively document experiences of frontline maternal and newborn healthcare providers.MethodsWe conducted a global, cross-sectional study of maternal and newborn health professionals via an online survey disseminated through professional networks and social media in 12 languages. Information was collected between 24 March and 10 April 2020 on respondents’ background, preparedness for and response to COVID-19 and their experience during the pandemic. An optional module sought information on adaptations to 17 care processes. Descriptive statistics and qualitative thematic analysis were used to analyse responses, disaggregating by low-income and middle-income countries (LMICs) and high-income countries (HICs).ResultsWe analysed responses from 714 maternal and newborn health professionals. Only one-third received training on COVID-19 from their health facility and nearly all searched for information themselves. Half of respondents in LMICs received updated guidelines for care provision compared with 82% in HICs. Overall, 47% of participants in LMICs and 69% in HICs felt mostly or completely knowledgeable in how to care for COVID-19 maternity patients. Facility-level responses to COVID-19 (signage, screening, testing and isolation rooms) were more common in HICs than LMICs. Globally, 90% of respondents reported somewhat or substantially higher levels of stress. There was a widespread perception of reduced use of routine maternity care services, and of modification in care processes, some of which were not evidence-based practices.ConclusionsSubstantial knowledge gaps exist in guidance on management of maternity cases with or without COVID-19. Formal information-sharing channels for providers must be established and mental health support provided. Surveys of maternity care providers can help track the situation, capture innovations and support rapid development of effective responses.

No abstract

ObjectiveTo prospectively document experiences of frontline maternal and newborn healthcare providers during the COVID-19 pandemic. DesignCross-sectional study via an online survey disseminated through professional networks and social media in 12 languages. We analysed responses using descriptive statistics and qualitative thematic analysis disaggregating by low-and middle-income countries (LMICs) and high-income countries (HICs).Setting 81 countries, between March 24 and April 10, 2020.Participants 714 maternal and newborn healthcare providers. Main outcome measuresPreparedness for and response to COVID-19, experiences of health workers providing care to women and newborns, and adaptations to 17 outpatient and inpatient care processes during the pandemic. ResultsOnly one third of respondents received training on COVID-19 from their health facility and nearly all searched for information themselves. Half of respondents in LMICs received updated guidelines for care provision compared with 82% in HICs. Overall, only 47% of participants in LMICs, and 69% in HICs felt mostly or completely knowledgeable in how to care for COVID-19 maternity patients. Facility-level responses to COVID-19 (signage, screening, testing, and isolation rooms) were more common in HICs than LMICs. Globally, 90% of respondents reported somewhat or substantially higher levels of stress. There was a widespread perception of reduced use of routine maternity care services, and of modification in care processes, some of which were not evidence-based. ConclusionsSubstantial knowledge gaps exist in guidance on management of maternity cases with or without COVID-19. Formal information sharing channels for providers must be established and mental health support provided. Surveys of maternity care providers can help track the situation, capture innovations, and support rapid development of effective responses. We would like to thank the study participants who took time to respond to this survey despite the difficult circumstances and increased workload. We acknowledge the Institutional

HighlightsTo our knowledge, this is the first study to systematically examine recontamination after hand hygiene in a low- and middle-income country.Hand hygiene compliance before aseptic procedures was low (9.6%) among birth attendants in Zanzibar.Birth attendants did not avoid recontamination half of the time after hand rubbing/washing or glove donning.Recontamination should be investigated further to inform better behavior-change strategies.

ObjectiveTo explore linkages between water, sanitation and hygiene (WASH) and maternal and perinatal health via a conceptual approach and a scoping review.MethodsWe developed a conceptual framework iteratively, amalgamating three literature-based lenses. We then searched literature and identified risk factors potentially linked to maternal and perinatal health. We conducted a systematic scoping review for all chemical and biological WASH risk factors identified using text and MeSH terms, limiting results to systematic reviews or meta-analyses. The remaining 10 complex behavioural associations were not reviewed systematically.ResultsThe main ways poor WASH could lead to adverse outcomes are via two non-exclusive categories: 1. ‘In-water’ associations: (a) Inorganic contaminants, and (b) ‘water-system’ related infections, (c) ‘water-based’ infections, and (d) ‘water borne’ infections. 2. ‘Behaviour’ associations: (e) Behaviours leading to water-washed infections, (f) Water-related insect-vector infections, and (g-i) Behaviours leading to non-infectious diseases/conditions. We added a gender inequality and a life course lens to the above framework to identify whether WASH affected health of mothers in particular, and acted beyond the immediate effects. This framework led us to identifying 77 risk mechanisms (67 chemical or biological factors and 10 complex behavioural factors) linking WASH to maternal and perinatal health outcomes.ConclusionWASH affects the risk of adverse maternal and perinatal health outcomes; these exposures are multiple and overlapping and may be distant from the immediate health outcome. Much of the evidence is weak, based on observational studies and anecdotal evidence, with relatively few systematic reviews. New systematic reviews are required to assess the quality of existing evidence more rigorously, and primary research is required to investigate the magnitude of effects of particular WASH exposures on specific maternal and perinatal outcomes. Whilst major gaps exist, the evidence strongly suggests that poor WASH influences maternal and reproductive health outcomes to the extent that it should be considered in global and national strategies.

Hospital cleaning has been shown to impact on rates of healthcare-associated infections (HCAIs) and good environmental hygiene is critical to quality care, yet those tasked with the role of ensuring a safe and clean environment often go unrecognised as members of the healthcare workforce. Sepsis is a leading cause of maternal and newborn death, a significant proportion of these cases are estimated to be due to HCAIs. Deliveries in health institutions have now reached 75% globally, and in low and middle income countries the corresponding increased pressure on facilities  has impacted both quality of care provided and quality of the birth environment in terms of infection prevention and control (IPC) and HCAIs. The paper discusses the neglected role of health facility cleaners, providing evidence from the literature and from needs assessments conducted by The Soapbox Collaborative and partners in Bangladesh, India, The Gambia and Zanzibar. While not the primary focus of the assessments, common themes emerged consistently pointing to institutional neglect of cleaning and cleaners. The paper argues that low status within facilities, wider societal marginalisation, lack of training, and poor pay and working conditions contribute to the lack of prioritisation placed on health facility environmental hygiene. With increased international attention focused towards health facility water, sanitation and hygiene and a growing focus on IPC, now is the time to address the neglect of this frontline healthcare workforce. We propose that provision of and improved training can enable the recognition of the valuable role cleaning staff play, as well as equipping these staff with the tools required to perform their job to the highest standard. In addition to training, wider systems changes are necessary to establish improvements in environmental hygiene and the role of cleaning staff, including addressing resource availability, supportive supervision, and an increased emphasis on preventative healthcare.

Consumption of green or black tea can reduce blood pressure in individuals within prehypertensive and hypertensive ranges, although further investigation with studies of longer duration and stronger methodological quality is warranted to confirm these findings.

BackgroundEstimates of the burden of maternal morbidity are patchy.ObjectiveTo conduct a systematic review of systematic reviews of maternal conditions to: (1) make available the most up‐to‐date frequency estimates; (2) identify which conditions do not have reliable estimates; and (3) scrutinize the quality of the available reviews.Search strategyWe searched Embase, MEDLINE, and CINAHL, combining terms for pregnancy, frequency (e.g. prevalence, incidence), publication type, and specific terms for each of 121 conditions.Selection criteriaWe included peer‐reviewed systematic reviews aiming to estimate the frequency of at least one of the conditions in WHO's list of maternal morbidities, with estimates from at least two countries.Data collection and analysisWe present the frequency estimates with their uncertainty bounds by condition, region, and pregnancy/postpartum period. We also assess and present information on the quality of the systematic reviews.Main resultsOut of 11 930 found, 48 reviews were selected and one more was added. From 49 reviews we extracted 34 direct and 60 indirect frequency estimates covering 35 conditions. No review was available for 71% of the conditions on the WHO list. The extracted estimates show substantial maternal morbidity, spanning the time before and beyond childbirth. There were several gaps in the quality of the reviews. Notably, one‐third of the estimates were based only on facility‐based studies.ConclusionsGood‐quality systematic reviews are needed for several conditions, as a research priority.