BackgroundThis paper responds to the global call to action for respectful maternity care (RMC) by examining whether and how gender inequalities and unequal power dynamics in the health system undermine quality of care or obstruct women’s capacities to exercise their rights as both users and providers of maternity care.MethodsWe conducted a mapping review of peer-reviewed and gray literature to examine whether gender inequality is a determinant of mistreatment during childbirth. A search for peer-reviewed articles published between January 1995 and September 2017 in PubMed, Embase, SCOPUS, and Web of Science databases, supplemented by an appeal to experts in the field, yielded 127 unique articles. We reviewed these articles using a gender analysis framework that categorizes gender inequalities into four key domains: access to assets, beliefs and perceptions, practices and participation, and institutions, laws, and policies. A total of 37 articles referred to gender inequalities in the four domains and were included in the analysis.ResultsThe mapping indicates that there have been important advances in documenting mistreatment at the health facility, but less attention has been paid to addressing the associated structural gender inequalities. The limited evidence available shows that pregnant and laboring women lack information and financial assets, voice, and agency to exercise their rights to RMC. Women who defy traditional feminine stereotypes of chastity and serenity often experience mistreatment by providers as a result. At the same time, mistreatment of women inside and outside of the health facility is normalized and accepted, including by women themselves. As for health care providers, gender discrimination is manifested through degrading working conditions, lack of respect for their abilities, violence and harassment,, lack of mobility in the community, lack of voice within their work setting, and limited training opportunities and professionalization. All of these inequalities erode their ability to deliver high quality care.ConclusionWhile the evidence base is limited, the literature clearly shows that gender inequality—for both clients and providers—contributes to mistreatment and abuse in maternity care. Researchers, advocates, and practitioners need to further investigate and build upon lessons from the broader gender equality, violence prevention, and rights-based health movements to expand the agenda on mistreatment in childbirth and develop effective interventions.Electronic supplementary materialThe online version of this article (10.1186/s12978-018-0584-6) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

In this commentary, the authors point out that there are important gender determinants to both men's and women's vulnerabilities to COVID-19, and call on the global health community to unpack and address these early in the COVID-19 pandemic response. They point to best practices and tools from two decades of engaging men in research and programming in the sexual and reproductive health field.

A growing evidence base supports expansion of partner notification in HIV testing services (HTS) in sub-Saharan Africa. In 2015, a cross-sectional study was conducted in Njombe region, Tanzania, to evaluate partner notification within facility-based HTS. Men and women newly diagnosed with HIV were enrolled as index clients and asked to list current or past sexual partners for referral to HTS. Successful partner referral was 2.5 times more likely among married compared to unmarried index clients and 2.2 times more likely among male compared to female index clients. In qualitative analysis, male as well as female index clients mentioned difficulties notifying past or casual partners, and noted disease symptoms as a motivating factor for HIV testing. Female index clients mentioned gender-specific challenges to successful referral. Women may need additional support to overcome challenges in the partner notification process. In addition to reducing barriers to partner notification specific to women, a programmatic emphasis on social strengths of males in successfully referring partners should be considered.

No abstract

Background Rwanda has made great progress in improving reproductive, maternal, and newborn health (RMNH) care; however, barriers to ensuring timely and full RMNH service utilization persist, including women’s limited decision-making power and poor-quality care. This study sought to better understand whether and how gender and power dynamics between providers and clients affect their perceptions and experiences of quality care during antenatal care, labor and childbirth. Methods This mixed methods study included a self-administered survey with 151 RMNH providers with questions on attitudes about gender roles, RMNH care, provider-client relations, labor and childbirth, which took place between January to February 2018. Two separate factor analyses were conducted on provider responses to create a Gender Attitudes Scale and an RMNH Quality of Care Scale. Three focus group discussions (FGDs) conducted in February 2019 with RMNH providers, female and male clients, explored attitudes about gender norms, provision and quality of RMNH care, provider-client interactions and power dynamics, and men’s involvement. Data were analyzed thematically. Results Inequitable gender norms and attitudes – among both RMNH care providers and clients – impact the quality of RMNH care. The qualitative results illustrate how gender norms and attitudes influence the provision of care and provider-client interactions, in addition to the impact of men’s involvement on the quality of care. Complementing this finding, the survey found a relationship between health providers’ gender attitudes and their attitudes towards quality RMNH care: gender equitable attitudes were associated with greater support for respectful, quality RMNH care. Conclusions Our findings suggest that gender attitudes and power dynamics between providers and their clients, and between female clients and their partners, can negatively impact the utilization and provision of quality RMNH care. There is a need for capacity building efforts to challenge health providers’ inequitable gender attitudes and practices and equip them to be aware of gender and power dynamics between themselves and their clients. These efforts can be made alongside community interventions to transform harmful gender norms, including those that increase women’s agency and autonomy over their bodies and their health care, promote uptake of health services, and improve couple power dynamics.

No abstract

Background: This study explored effects of couples' communication and male participation in birth preparedness and complication readiness (BPCR) on delivery in a health facility ("institutional delivery"). A cross-sectional, baseline household survey was conducted in November 2016 prior to an integrated maternal and child health project in Nampula and Sofala Provinces in Mozambique. Methods: The study used the Knowledge, Practices and Coverage survey tool, a condensed version of the Demographic and Health Survey and other tools. The sample included 1422 women. Multivariable logit regression models tested the association of institutional delivery with couples' communication and four elements of BPCR both with and without male partners: 1) saving money, 2) arranging transport, 3) choosing a birth companion, and 4) choosing a delivery site; controlling for partners' attendance in antenatal care and social and demographic determinants (education, wealth, urban/rural location, and province). Results: The odds that women would deliver in a health facility were 46% greater (adjusted odds ratio (aOR) = 1.46, 95% confidence interval (CI) = 1.02-2.10, p = 0.04) amongst women who discussed family planning with their partners than those who did not. Approximately half of this effect was mediated through BPCR. When a woman arranged transport on her own, there was no significant increase in institutional delivery, but with partner involvement, there was a larger, significant association (aOR = 4.31, 2.64-7.02). Similarly, when a woman chose a delivery site on her own, there was no significant association with institutional delivery (aOR 1.52,0.81-2.83), but with her partner, there was a larger and significant association (aOR 1.98, 1.16-3.36). Neither saving money nor choosing a birth companion showed a significant association with institutional delivery-with or without partner involvement. The odds of delivering in a facility were 28% less amongst poor women whose partners did not participate in BPCR than wealthy women, but when partners helped choose a place of delivery and arrange transport, this gap was nearly eliminated.

Background Poor reproductive, maternal, newborn, child, and adolescent health outcomes in Nigeria can be attributed to several factors, not limited to low health service coverage, a lack of quality care, and gender inequity. Providers’ gender-discriminatory attitudes, and men’s limited positive involvement correlate with poor utilization and quality of services. We conducted a study at the beginning of a large family planning (FP) and maternal, newborn, child, and adolescent health program in Kogi and Ebonyi States of Nigeria to assess whether or not gender plays a role in access to, use of, and delivery of health services. Methods We conducted a cross-sectional, observational, baseline quality of care assessment from April–July 2016 to inform a maternal and newborn health project in health facilities in Ebonyi and Kogi States. We observed 435 antenatal care consultations and 47 births, and interviewed 138 providers about their knowledge, training, experiences, working conditions, gender-sensitive and respectful care, and workplace gender dynamics. The United States Agency for International Development’s Gender Analysis Framework was used to analyze findings. Results Sixty percent of providers disagreed that a woman could choose a family planning method without a male partner’s involvement, and 23.2% of providers disagreed that unmarried clients should use family planning. Ninety-eight percent believed men should participate in health services, yet only 10% encouraged women to bring their partners. Harmful practices were observed in 59.6% of deliveries and disrespectful or abusive practices were observed in 34.0%. No providers offered clients information, services, or referrals for gender-based violence. Sixty-seven percent reported observing or hearing of an incident of violence against clients, and 7.9% of providers experienced violence in the workplace themselves. Over 78% of providers received no training on gender, gender-based violence, or human rights in the past 3 years. Conclusion Addressing gender inequalities that limit women’s access, choice, agency, and autonomy in health services as a quality of care issue is critical to reducing poor health outcomes in Nigeria. Inherent gender discrimination in health service delivery reinforces the critical need for gender analysis, gender responsive approaches, values clarification, and capacity building for service providers.