Trust, Care Avoidance, and Care Experiences among Kenyan Women Who Delivered during the COVID-19 Pandemic

There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

Abstract

We explore how the COVID-19 pandemic was associated with avoidance of, and challenges with, antenatal, childbirth and postpartum care among women in Kiambu and Nairobi counties, Kenya; and whether this was associated with a report of declined trust in the health system due to the pandemic. Women who delivered between March and November 2020 were invited to participate in a phone survey about their care experiences (n = 1122 respondents). We explored associations between reduced trust and care avoidance, delays and challenges with healthcare seeking, using logistic regression models adjusted for women’s characteristics. Approximately half of respondents said their trust in the health care system had declined due to COVID-19 (52.7%, n = 591). Declined trust was associated with higher likelihood of reporting barriers accessing antenatal care (aOR 1.59 [95% CI 1.24, 2.05]), avoiding care for oneself (aOR 2.26 [95% CI 1.59, 3.22]) and for one’s infant (aOR 1.77 [95% CI 1.11, 2.83]), and of feeling unsafe accessing care (aOR 1.52 [95% CI 1.19, 1.93]). Since March 2020, emergency services, routine care and immunizations were avoided most often. Primary reported reasons for avoiding care and challenges accessing care were financial barriers and problems accessing the facility. Declined trust in the health care system due to COVID-19 may have affected health care-seeking for women and their children in Kenya, which could have important implications for their health and well-being. Programs and policies should consider targeted special “catch-up” strategies that include trust-building messages and actions for women who deliver during emergencies like the COVID-19 pandemic.

Related collections

Most cited references 96

Record: found
Abstract: found
Article: found

Is Open Access

The impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on cancer deaths due to delays in diagnosis in England, UK: a national, population-based, modelling study

Camille Maringe, James Spicer, Melanie Morris … (2020)

Summary Background Since a national lockdown was introduced across the UK in March, 2020, in response to the COVID-19 pandemic, cancer screening has been suspended, routine diagnostic work deferred, and only urgent symptomatic cases prioritised for diagnostic intervention. In this study, we estimated the impact of delays in diagnosis on cancer survival outcomes in four major tumour types. Methods In this national population-based modelling study, we used linked English National Health Service (NHS) cancer registration and hospital administrative datasets for patients aged 15–84 years, diagnosed with breast, colorectal, and oesophageal cancer between Jan 1, 2010, and Dec 31, 2010, with follow-up data until Dec 31, 2014, and diagnosed with lung cancer between Jan 1, 2012, and Dec 31, 2012, with follow-up data until Dec 31, 2015. We use a routes-to-diagnosis framework to estimate the impact of diagnostic delays over a 12-month period from the commencement of physical distancing measures, on March 16, 2020, up to 1, 3, and 5 years after diagnosis. To model the subsequent impact of diagnostic delays on survival, we reallocated patients who were on screening and routine referral pathways to urgent and emergency pathways that are associated with more advanced stage of disease at diagnosis. We considered three reallocation scenarios representing the best to worst case scenarios and reflect actual changes in the diagnostic pathway being seen in the NHS, as of March 16, 2020, and estimated the impact on net survival at 1, 3, and 5 years after diagnosis to calculate the additional deaths that can be attributed to cancer, and the total years of life lost (YLLs) compared with pre-pandemic data. Findings We collected data for 32 583 patients with breast cancer, 24 975 with colorectal cancer, 6744 with oesophageal cancer, and 29 305 with lung cancer. Across the three different scenarios, compared with pre-pandemic figures, we estimate a 7·9–9·6% increase in the number of deaths due to breast cancer up to year 5 after diagnosis, corresponding to between 281 (95% CI 266–295) and 344 (329–358) additional deaths. For colorectal cancer, we estimate 1445 (1392–1591) to 1563 (1534–1592) additional deaths, a 15·3–16·6% increase; for lung cancer, 1235 (1220–1254) to 1372 (1343–1401) additional deaths, a 4·8–5·3% increase; and for oesophageal cancer, 330 (324–335) to 342 (336–348) additional deaths, 5·8–6·0% increase up to 5 years after diagnosis. For these four tumour types, these data correspond with 3291–3621 additional deaths across the scenarios within 5 years. The total additional YLLs across these cancers is estimated to be 59 204–63 229 years. Interpretation Substantial increases in the number of avoidable cancer deaths in England are to be expected as a result of diagnostic delays due to the COVID-19 pandemic in the UK. Urgent policy interventions are necessary, particularly the need to manage the backlog within routine diagnostic services to mitigate the expected impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on patients with cancer. Funding UK Research and Innovation Economic and Social Research Council.

0 comments Cited 832 times – based on 0 reviews      Review now

Bookmark

Record: found
Abstract: found
Article: not found

Early estimates of the indirect effects of the COVID-19 pandemic on maternal and child mortality in low-income and middle-income countries: a modelling study

Timothy Roberton, Emily Carter, Victoria Chou … (2020)

Summary Background While the COVID-19 pandemic will increase mortality due to the virus, it is also likely to increase mortality indirectly. In this study, we estimate the additional maternal and under-5 child deaths resulting from the potential disruption of health systems and decreased access to food. Methods We modelled three scenarios in which the coverage of essential maternal and child health interventions is reduced by 9·8–51·9% and the prevalence of wasting is increased by 10–50%. Although our scenarios are hypothetical, we sought to reflect real-world possibilities, given emerging reports of the supply-side and demand-side effects of the pandemic. We used the Lives Saved Tool to estimate the additional maternal and under-5 child deaths under each scenario, in 118 low-income and middle-income countries. We estimated additional deaths for a single month and extrapolated for 3 months, 6 months, and 12 months. Findings Our least severe scenario (coverage reductions of 9·8–18·5% and wasting increase of 10%) over 6 months would result in 253 500 additional child deaths and 12 200 additional maternal deaths. Our most severe scenario (coverage reductions of 39·3–51·9% and wasting increase of 50%) over 6 months would result in 1 157 000 additional child deaths and 56 700 additional maternal deaths. These additional deaths would represent an increase of 9·8–44·7% in under-5 child deaths per month, and an 8·3–38·6% increase in maternal deaths per month, across the 118 countries. Across our three scenarios, the reduced coverage of four childbirth interventions (parenteral administration of uterotonics, antibiotics, and anticonvulsants, and clean birth environments) would account for approximately 60% of additional maternal deaths. The increase in wasting prevalence would account for 18–23% of additional child deaths and reduced coverage of antibiotics for pneumonia and neonatal sepsis and of oral rehydration solution for diarrhoea would together account for around 41% of additional child deaths. Interpretation Our estimates are based on tentative assumptions and represent a wide range of outcomes. Nonetheless, they show that, if routine health care is disrupted and access to food is decreased (as a result of unavoidable shocks, health system collapse, or intentional choices made in responding to the pandemic), the increase in child and maternal deaths will be devastating. We hope these numbers add context as policy makers establish guidelines and allocate resources in the days and months to come. Funding Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, Global Affairs Canada.

0 comments Cited 631 times – based on 0 reviews      Review now

Bookmark

Record: found
Abstract: found
Article: not found

Effects of the COVID-19 pandemic on maternal and perinatal outcomes: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Barbara Chmielewska, Imogen Barratt, Rosemary Townsend … (2021)

Background The COVID-19 pandemic has had a profound impact on health-care systems and potentially on pregnancy outcomes, but no systematic synthesis of evidence of this effect has been undertaken. We aimed to assess the collective evidence on the effects on maternal, fetal, and neonatal outcomes of the pandemic. Methods We did a systematic review and meta-analysis of studies on the effects of the pandemic on maternal, fetal, and neonatal outcomes. We searched MEDLINE and Embase in accordance with PRISMA guidelines, from Jan 1, 2020, to Jan 8, 2021, for case-control studies, cohort studies, and brief reports comparing maternal and perinatal mortality, maternal morbidity, pregnancy complications, and intrapartum and neonatal outcomes before and during the pandemic. We also planned to record any additional maternal and offspring outcomes identified. Studies of solely SARS-CoV-2-infected pregnant individuals, as well as case reports, studies without comparison groups, narrative or systematic literature reviews, preprints, and studies reporting on overlapping populations were excluded. Quantitative meta-analysis was done for an outcome when more than one study presented relevant data. Random-effects estimate of the pooled odds ratio (OR) of each outcome were generated with use of the Mantel-Haenszel method. This review was registered with PROSPERO (CRD42020211753). Findings The search identified 3592 citations, of which 40 studies were included. We identified significant increases in stillbirth (pooled OR 1·28 [95% CI 1·07–1·54]; I 2=63%; 12 studies, 168 295 pregnancies during and 198 993 before the pandemic) and maternal death (1·37 [1·22–1·53; I 2=0%, two studies [both from low-income and middle-income countries], 1 237 018 and 2 224 859 pregnancies) during versus before the pandemic. Preterm births before 37 weeks' gestation were not significantly changed overall (0·94 [0·87–1·02]; I 2=75%; 15 studies, 170 640 and 656 423 pregnancies) but were decreased in high-income countries (0·91 [0·84–0·99]; I 2=63%; 12 studies, 159 987 and 635 118 pregnancies), where spontaneous preterm birth was also decreased (0·81 [0·67–0·97]; two studies, 4204 and 6818 pregnancies). Mean Edinburgh Postnatal Depression Scale scores were higher, indicating poorer mental health, during versus before the pandemic (pooled mean difference 0·42 [95% CI 0·02–0·81; three studies, 2330 and 6517 pregnancies). Surgically managed ectopic pregnancies were increased during the pandemic (OR 5·81 [2·16–15·6]; I 2=26%; three studies, 37 and 272 pregnancies). No overall significant effects were identified for other outcomes included in the quantitative analysis: maternal gestational diabetes; hypertensive disorders of pregnancy; preterm birth before 34 weeks', 32 weeks', or 28 weeks' gestation; iatrogenic preterm birth; labour induction; modes of delivery (spontaneous vaginal delivery, caesarean section, or instrumental delivery); post-partum haemorrhage; neonatal death; low birthweight (<2500 g); neonatal intensive care unit admission; or Apgar score less than 7 at 5 min. Interpretation Global maternal and fetal outcomes have worsened during the COVID-19 pandemic, with an increase in maternal deaths, stillbirth, ruptured ectopic pregnancies, and maternal depression. Some outcomes show considerable disparity between high-resource and low-resource settings. There is an urgent need to prioritise safe, accessible, and equitable maternity care within the strategic response to this pandemic and in future health crises. Funding None.

0 comments Cited 401 times – based on 0 reviews      Review now

Bookmark

All references

Author and article information

Journal

Journal ID (nlm-journal-id): 101697320

Journal ID (pubmed-jr-id): 47732

Journal ID (nlm-ta): Health Syst Reform

Journal ID (iso-abbrev): Health Syst Reform

Title: Health systems and reform

ISSN (Print): 2328-8604

ISSN (Electronic): 2328-8620

Publication date Nihms-submitted: 1 March 2023

Publication date (Print): 01 January 2022

Publication date PMC-release: 08 March 2023

Volume: 8

Issue: 1

Page: 2156043

Affiliations

[a ]Fielding School of Public Health, University of California Los Angeles, Los Angeles, California, USA

[b ]UCLA Center for Health Policy Research, University of California Los Angeles, Los Angeles, California, USA

[c ]Innovations for Poverty Action, Kenya

[d ]Kenya Medical Research Institute, Kenya

[e ] Child.org, Kenya

Author notes

Author contributions

The overall study was conceived and designed by MS; the approach for this analysis was designed by CM and MS. Data collection was led by JM and GG. CM and MS led data analysis and interpretation, with inputs from all coauthors. CM led the drafting of this manuscript with key inputs from JM, DN, GG, MG and MS. All authors provided critical revisions to the manuscript and gave their final approval of the version to be submitted.

CONTACT Corrina Moucheraud, cmoucheraud@ 123456ucla.edu , Fielding School of Public Health, Department of Health Policy and Management, University of California Los Angeles, 650 Charles E. Young Dr. S., Los Angeles, CA 90095

Author information

Corrina Moucheraud http://orcid.org/0000-0001-7862-7928

Article

Manuscript ID: NIHMS1870764

DOI: 10.1080/23288604.2022.2156043

PMC ID: 9995165

PubMed ID: 36534179

SO-VID: 1127a926-9cb9-4e09-b874-a393dbe19912

License:

This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License ( http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

Trust, Care Avoidance, and Care Experiences among Kenyan Women Who Delivered during the COVID-19 Pandemic

Read this article at

Abstract

Related collections

Novel Coronavirus Disease COVID-19

Most cited references 96

The impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on cancer deaths due to delays in diagnosis in England, UK: a national, population-based, modelling study

Early estimates of the indirect effects of the COVID-19 pandemic on maternal and child mortality in low-income and middle-income countries: a modelling study

Effects of the COVID-19 pandemic on maternal and perinatal outcomes: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Author and article information

Journal

Affiliations

Author notes

Author information

Article

History

Categories

Comments

Comment on this article

Similar content 275

Cited by 1

Most referenced authors 2,970