Postpartum depression (PPD) is a significant public health concern due to the physical, emotional, economic, and life course outcomes. Rates of PPD are significantly higher for marginalised populations and can impact low-income, minority, and/or immigrant women differently when compared to white middle-class women. Commonly studied negative effects of PPD include poor health outcomes, mother-child bonding challenges, and negative child educational outcomes. However, research surveying the postpartum experience and negative outcomes among marginalised women is sparse. This study implemented a qualitative meta-interpretive synthesis (QIMS) methodology to synthesise themes across 12 qualitative research articles surveying postpartum experiences of marginalised women in North American countries. Articles included in the QIMS were extracted from online databases from a 10-year window spanning January 2008-2018. The guiding research question was "What are the PPD experiences of women belonging to marginalized populations?" Constant comparative analysis was used with coding in atlas.ti and themes were synthesised with input of all three authors. Five main themes emerged. The themes are (a) intersections of PPD and poverty, (b) culture and PPD, (c) pressures of mothering, (d) strengths and coping, and (e) abuse affects my PPD experience. Subthemes such as "I keep it to myself" relating to cultural response to PPD and idealised mothering were also discovered. Implications for social workers, nurses, and future research are discussed.

No abstract

Most recent infection outbreaks caused by unsafe injection practices in the United States have occurred in ambulatory settings. We utilized direct observation and a survey to assess injection practices at 31 clinics. Improper vial use was observed at 13 clinics (41.9%). Pharmacy support and healthcare worker education may improve injection practices. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol 2017;38:614-616.

OBJECTIVEIdentify factors referred to as barriers and facilitators that can prevent or assist safe injection practices in ambulatory care settings to guide quality improvement.DESIGNIn this mixed-methods study, we utilized observations and interviews.SETTINGThis study was conducted at ambulatory clinics at a midwestern academic medical center from May through August 2017. Sites included a variety of clinical settings that performed intramuscular, intradermal, intravenous, or intra-articular injections.PARTICIPANTS AND INTERVENTIONSDirect observations of injections and interviews of ambulatory care staff were conducted. An observation checklist was created, including standards of injection safety from nationally recognized guidelines. Interview questions were developed using the System Engineering Initiative for Patient Safety (SEIPS) model. Interviews were recorded, transcribed, and then coded by 2 investigators.RESULTSIn total, 106 observations and 36 interviews were completed at 21 clinics. Injection safety standards with the lowest adherence included using needleless access devices to prepare injections (33%) and the proper use of multidose vials (<80%). Of 819 coded interview segments, 461 (56.3%) were considered facilitators of safe injection practices. The most commonly identified barriers were patient movement during administration, feeling rushed, and inadequate staffing. The most commonly identified facilitators were availability of supplies, experience in the practice area, and availability of safety needles and prefilled syringes.CONCLUSIONSPerceived barriers and facilitators to infection control elements of injection safety are interconnected with SEIPS elements of persons, organizations, technologies, tasks, and environment. Direct observations demonstrated that knowledge of safety injection standards does not necessarily translate to best practices and may not match self-reported data.Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol 2018;39:841-848.

No abstract