Project description:IntroductionThe novel coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) continues to disrupt the availability and utilization of routine and emergency health care services, with differing impacts in jurisdictions across the world. In this scoping review, we set out to synthesize documentation of the direct and indirect effect of the pandemic, and national responses to it, on maternal, newborn and child health (MNCH) in Africa.MethodsA scoping review was conducted to provide an overview of the most significant impacts identified up to March 15, 2022. We searched MEDLINE, Embase, HealthSTAR, Web of Science, PubMed, and Scopus electronic databases. We included peer reviewed literature that discussed maternal and child health in Africa during the COVID-19 pandemic, published from January 2020 to March 2022, and written in English. Papers that did not focus on the African region or an African country were excluded. A data-charting form was developed by the two reviewers to determine which themes to extract, and narrative descriptions were written about the extracted thematic areas.ResultsFour-hundred and seventy-eight articles were identified through our literature search and 27 were deemed appropriate for analysis. We identified three overarching themes: delayed or decreased care, disruption in service provision and utilization and mitigation strategies or recommendations. Our results show that minor consideration was given to preserving and promoting health service access and utilization for mothers and children, especially in historically underserved areas in Africa.ConclusionsReviewed literature illuminates the need for continued prioritization of maternity services, immunization, and reproductive health services. This prioritization was not given the much-needed attention during the COVID-19 pandemic yet is necessary to shield the continent's most vulnerable population segments from the shocks of current and future global health emergencies.
Project description:IntroductionThe novel SARS-CoV-2 pandemic has provided a set of unique challenges for paediatric patients requiring emergency care across the globe. Reduction in paediatric emergency department (ED) usage during the COVID-19 pandemic has been widely reported, but no studies to date have consolidated and described what ramifications these reductions may have on neonatal and infant health. This scoping review aims to characterise the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on infant ED visits and neonatal and infant health.Methods and analysisA comprehensive literature search will be conducted from March 2020 to July 2022 using the following databases: Embase (Ovid), Web of Science (Clarivate Analytics), Medline (Ovid) and CINAHL (EBSCOhost). This scoping review will use a five-step framework to guide the selection, extraction and analysis of data from eligible studies, with an additional sixth step for clinical consultation. Studies in English reporting the effect of the COVID-19 pandemic on infant ED visits, as well as neonatal and infant health, will be included for screening. Key findings will be reported according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses Extension for Scoping Reviews.Ethics and disseminationResearch ethics board approval will not be required due to the nature of the study design. The results of this scoping review will be disseminated through publication in a peer-reviewed journal and presentation at academic conferences.
Project description:The objective of this scoping review is to determine to what extent the recommendations on perinatal care protect breastfeeding during the COVID-19 pandemic. The review follows the PRISMA ScR Extension guidelines. The research was conducted in Scopus, Medline via Pubmed, and Web of Science databases from 1 March 2020 to 31 May 2021, using 392 combinations of keywords. We searched for reviews and original papers published in English providing recommendations on delivery mode, companion during labor, the possibility of skin-to-skin contact (SSC), breastfeeding, and visitors policy. After screening, 86 out of 8416 publications qualified for data extraction. The majority of them indicated that COVID-19 infection is not a sufficient reason for a cesarean section; however, on a national level, cesarean births in severely ill patients were overrepresented. A significant number of recommendations deprived mothers of the necessary support during their labor and stay in the maternity ward. A shared decision-making model was hardly visible. Only the earliest COVID-19 recommendations suspended direct breastfeeding; in later publications, decisions were related to the mother's health, but other options of natural feeding were rarely discussed.
Project description:IntroductionThe COVID-19 pandemic has spread globally and has been reported in every known country. The effects can be felt in universities and schools, shifting their learning to online platforms. However, medical schools bear the burden of protecting students and ensuring the continuation of the education process. The rapid transition to online learning, coupled with the lack of preparation from the educational system, leads to stresses that affect students' academic performance, mental health and social life. Nevertheless, no review tried to synthesise the complete picture of the pandemic's effects. Therefore, this scoping review aims to identify and explore the available literature on the effects or impacts of the pandemic on medical students without limiting it to specific dimensions.MethodsThis review was conducted according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for Scoping Reviews and the Joanna Briggs Institute manual for evidence synthesis. We examine articles reporting data from any country. However, only articles written in English will be included. For studies to be included, they must report any form of impact on medical students, qualitatively or quantitatively. Furthermore, the impact must occur within the context of the COVID-19 pandemic. Searches will be done on Medline, EMBASE, ERIC, the Cochrane Library, CINAHL and PsycInfo. After data extraction, we will narratively synthesise the data and explore the types of impacts COVID-19 has on medical students.Ethics and disseminationNo formal ethical approval is required. The scoping review will be published in peer-reviewed journals and as conference presentations and summaries, wherever appropriate.
Project description:Purpose of reviewThe COVID-19 pandemic and its associated restrictions have had a significant impact on people's everyday lives, including the lives of Autistic adults. We aimed to (a) synthesise all papers currently published on the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on autistic adults and (b) identify lessons for the care and support of Autistic adults in pandemic and post-pandemic times.Recent findingsFifty-five papers met the inclusion criteria. Most studies focused on the pandemic's impact on the wellbeing of Autistic adults. Several studies focused on the use of (telehealth) services or the risk of COVID-19 infection/hospitalisation.SummaryAutistic adults were significantly impacted by the pandemic, both directly as indicated by higher COVID-19 infection and hospitalisation rates, but also indirectly due to severe service disruptions and social restrictions. Even though there were large differences observed both between as well as within individuals in terms of the negative/positive effects of the COVID-19 pandemic, most studies reported a negative effect on Autistic adults' mental health. We draw several lessons from this review for the future care and support of Autistic adults, all of which must be underpinned by participatory research methods, that is, where Autistic community members are actively involved in setting research questions, testing the acceptability of the methods and interpreting and disseminating the results.Supplementary informationThe online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s40474-023-00268-6.
Project description:BackgroundCOVID-19 has challenged health systems worldwide, especially the health workforce, a pillar crucial for health systems resilience. Therefore, strengthening health system resilience can be informed by analyzing health care workers' (HCWs) experiences and needs during pandemics. This review synthesizes qualitative studies published during the first year of the COVID-19 pandemic to identify factors affecting HCWs' experiences and their support needs during the pandemic. This review was conducted using the Joanna Briggs Institute methodology for scoping reviews. A systematic search on PubMed was applied using controlled vocabularies. Only original studies presenting primary qualitative data were included.Results161 papers that were published from the beginning of COVID-19 pandemic up until 28th March 2021 were included in the review. Findings were presented using the socio-ecological model as an analytical framework. At the individual level, the impact of the pandemic manifested on HCWs' well-being, daily routine, professional and personal identity. At the interpersonal level, HCWs' personal and professional relationships were identified as crucial. At the institutional level, decision-making processes, organizational aspects and availability of support emerged as important factors affecting HCWs' experiences. At community level, community morale, norms, and public knowledge were of importance. Finally, at policy level, governmental support and response measures shaped HCWs' experiences. The review identified a lack of studies which investigate other HCWs than doctors and nurses, HCWs in non-hospital settings, and HCWs in low- and lower middle income countries.DiscussionThis review shows that the COVID-19 pandemic has challenged HCWs, with multiple contextual factors impacting their experiences and needs. To better understand HCWs' experiences, comparative investigations are needed which analyze differences across as well as within countries, including differences at institutional, community, interpersonal and individual levels. Similarly, interventions aimed at supporting HCWs prior to, during and after pandemics need to consider HCWs' circumstances.ConclusionsFollowing a context-sensitive approach to empowering HCWs that accounts for the multitude of aspects which influence their experiences could contribute to building a sustainable health workforce and strengthening health systems for future pandemics.
Project description:ObjectiveTo examine the extent, nature and quality of literature on the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on the mental health of imprisoned people and prison staff.DesignScoping review.Data sourcesPubMed, Embase, CINAHL, Global Health, Cochrane, PsycINFO, PsychExtra, Web of Science and Scopus were searched for any paper from 2019 onwards that focused on the mental health impact of COVID-19 on imprisoned people and prison staff. A grey literature search focused on international and government sources and professional bodies representing healthcare, public health and prison staff was also performed. We also performed hand searching of the reference lists of included studies.Eligibility criteria for selection of studiesAll papers, regardless of study design, were included if they examined the mental health of imprisoned people or prison staff specifically during the COVID-19 pandemic. Imprisoned people could be of any age and from any countries. All languages were included. Two independent reviewers quality assessed appropriate papers.ResultsOf 647 articles found, 83 were eligible for inclusion, the majority (58%) of which were opinion pieces. The articles focused on the challenges to prisoner mental health. Fear of COVID-19, the impact of isolation, discontinuation of prison visits and reduced mental health services were all likely to have an adverse effect on the mental well-being of imprisoned people. The limited research and poor quality of articles included mean that the findings are not conclusive. However, they suggest a significant adverse impact on the mental health and well-being of those who live and work in prisons.ConclusionsIt is key to address the mental health impacts of the pandemic on people who live and work in prisons. These findings are discussed in terms of implications for getting the balance between infection control imperatives and the fundamental human rights of prison populations.
Project description:Background:The current COVID-19 pandemic has challenged the infrastructure of the healthcare systems. To cope with the pandemic, substantial changes were introduced to surgical practice and education all over the world. Methods:A scoping search in PubMed and Google Scholar was done using the search terms: "Coronavirus," "COVID-19", "SARS-CoV-2", "nCoV-2019", and "surgery." They were either searched individually or in combination. All relevant articles of any study design (published within December 15, 2019, till the mid of June 2020), were included and narratively discussed in this review. Results:Sixty-six articles were reviewed in this article. Through these articles, we provide guidance and recommendations on the preoperative preparation and safety precautions, intraoperative precautions, postoperative precautions, postoperative complications (related to COVID-19), surgical scheduling, emergency surgeries, elective surgeries, cancer surgery, psychological impact on surgical teams, and surgical training during the COVID-19 pandemic. Conclusion:COVID-19 pandemic has affected nearly all aspects of surgical procedures, scheduling, and staffing. Special precautions were taken before, during, or after surgeries. New treatment and teaching modalities emerged in response to the pandemic. Psychological support and training platforms are necessary for the surgical team.
Project description:Our primary objective was to document COVID-19 induced changes to perinatal care across the USA and examine the implication of these changes for maternal mental health. We performed an observational cross-sectional study with convenience sampling using direct patient reports from 1918 postpartum and 3868 pregnant individuals collected between April 2020 and December 2020 from 10 states across the USA. We leverage a subgroup of these participants who gave birth prior to March 2020 to estimate the pre-pandemic prevalence of specific birthing practices as a comparison. Our primary analyses describe the prevalence and timing of perinatal care changes, compare perinatal care changes depending on when and where individuals gave birth, and assess the linkage between perinatal care alterations and maternal anxiety and depressive symptoms. Seventy-eight percent of pregnant participants and 63% of postpartum participants reported at least one change to their perinatal care between March and August 2020. However, the prevalence and nature of specific perinatal care changes occurred unevenly over time and across geographic locations. The separation of infants and mothers immediately after birth and the cancelation of prenatal visits were associated with worsened depression and anxiety symptoms in mothers after controlling for sociodemographic factors, mental health history, number of pregnancy complications, and general stress about the COVID-19 pandemic. Our analyses reveal widespread changes to perinatal care across the US that fluctuated depending on where and when individuals gave birth. Disruptions to perinatal care may also exacerbate mental health concerns, so focused treatments that can mitigate the negative psychiatric sequelae of interrupted care are warranted.