Search

The decision regarding delivery in the context of a prior cesarean birth is complex because both trial of labor after cesarean and elective repeat cesarean birth have risks and benefits.Our research objective was to understand the perspective of women and obstetricians regarding factors influencing mode of birth for women with a history of prior cesarean.In February 2020, qualitative data was collected at Coatepeque Hospital in Coatepeque, Guatemala. In-depth interviews were conducted with obstetricians and women at the Center for Human Development in the Southwest Trifinio region. Interviews were recorded, transcribed, translated, and analyzed using conceptual content analysis of key informant interviews to analyze the meaning of themes and concepts related to mode of delivery for women with a history of prior cesarean birth.Women described feeling conflicted about their preferences on the location and attendant of their future births, but suggested that the hospital setting, and physician providers were more capable of managing complications. Physicians felt trial of labor after cesarean was the safer option but described multiple reasons that made repeat cesarean birth the more common mode of birth.There is a need for innovative approaches to patient messaging and education around mode of delivery after a prior cesarean in the Southwest Region in Guatemala. Findings from this study underscore the need to improve the quality and dissemination of the educational information given, medical history collected during prenatal care, and pain control during labor. Finally, there is a need for obstetric training to support vaginal birth in the facility setting for the successful implementation of evidence-based practices around trial of labor after cesarean at Coatepeque Hospital.

Background Health care for stigmatized reproductive practices in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) often remains illegal; when legal, it is often inadequate, difficult to find and / or stigmatizing, which results in women deferring care or turning to informal information sources and providers. Women seeking an induced abortion in LMICs often face obstacles of this kind, leading to unsafe abortions. A growing number of studies have shown that abortion seekers confide in social network members when searching for formal or informal care. However, results have been inconsistent; in some LMICs with restricted access to abortion services (restrictive LMICs), disclosure appears to be limited. Main body This systematic review aims to identify the degree of disclosure to social networks members in restrictive LMICs, and to explore the differences between women obtaining an informal medical abortion and other abortion seekers. This knowledge is potentially useful for designing interventions to improve information on safe abortion or for developing network-based data collection strategies. We searched Pubmed, POPLINE, AIMS, LILACS, IMSEAR, and WPRIM databases for peer-reviewed articles, published in any language from 2000 to 2018, concerning abortion information seeking, communication, networking and access to services in LMICs with restricted access to abortion services. We categorized settings into four types by possibility of anonymous access to abortion services and local abortion stigma: (1) anonymous access possible, hyper stigma (2) anonymous access possible, high stigma (3) non-anonymous access, high stigma (4) non-anonymous access, hyper stigma. We screened 4101 references, yielding 79 articles with data from 33 countries for data extraction. We found a few countries (or groups within countries) exemplifying the first and second types of setting, while most studies corresponded to the third type. The share of abortion seekers disclosing to network members increased across setting types, with no women disclosing to network members beyond their intimate circle in Type 1 sites, a minority in Type 2 and a majority in Type 3. The informal use of medical abortion did not consistently modify disclosure to others. Conclusion Abortion-seeking women exhibit widely different levels of disclosure to their larger social network members across settings/social groups in restrictive LMICs depending on the availability of anonymous access to abortion information and services, and the level of stigma. Supplementary Information The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12978-021-01165-0., Plain Language summary Women seeking an induced abortion in LMICs often face inexistent or inadequate, difficult to find and/ or stigmatizing legal services, leading to the use of informal methods and providers, and unsafe abortions. A growing number of studies have shown that abortion seekers contact social network members beyond their intimate circle when seeking care. However, results have been inconsistent. We searched Pubmed, POPLINE, AIMS, LILACS, IMSEAR, and WPRIM databases for peer-reviewed articles published in any language from 2000 to 2018, concerning abortion information seeking, communication, networking and access to services in restrictive LMICs. We screened 4101 references, yielding 79 articles with data from 33 countries for extraction. We grouped countries (or social groups within countries) into four types of settings: (1) anonymous access possible, hyper stigma; (2) anonymous access possible, high stigma; (3) non-anonymous access, high stigma; (4) non-anonymous access, hyper stigma. Most studies fitted Type 3. Disclosing to network members increased across setting types: no women confided in network members in Type 1 settings, a minority in Type 2 and a majority in Type 3. No setting fitted Type 4. The informal use of medical abortion did not modify disclosure to others. Abortion seekers in restrictive LMICs frequently contact their social network in some settings/groups but less frequently in others, depending on the availability of anonymous access to abortion care and the level of stigma. This knowledge is useful for designing interventions to improve information on safe abortion and for developing network-based data collection strategies. Supplementary Information The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12978-021-01165-0.

Background: Long-acting reversible contraception (LARC) initiated immediately postpartum can reduce unintended or mistimed pregnancies, and contribute to proper pregnancy spacing. Data on use and continuation of postpartum LARC in low- and middle-income countries (LMIC) is limited. Methods: We searched PubMed, OVID, Embase, Google Scholar, Cochrane, POPLINE, Global Health (CABI), and LILACS databases for relevant terms. Studies of any design, published in English, were screened for relevance based on six-month continuation rates of postpartum LARC, location of study, and LARC insertion within 48 hours after vaginal or cesarean birth. We found no relevant studies of implant or hormonal intrauterine device (IUD). Therefore, analysis was limited to studies of the copper IUD only. Two authors used the Cochrane Public Health Group Data Extraction and Assessment Template to guide data extraction to estimate pooled six-month continuation rates, and the Cochrane Risk of Bias Tool for Randomized Controlled Trials and the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute (NHLBI) Quality Assessment Tool for Observational Cohort and Cross-Sectional Studies to rate the quality of the studies. A random-effects meta-analysis of proportions was performed. Results: Immediate-postpartum copper IUDs have a six-month continuation rate of 87% (95% CI 80-92%) in LMIC. The pooled estimated rates of six-month adverse outcomes were 6% (95% CI 5-9%) for expulsion, 5% (95% CI 4-7%) for removal, and 0.2% (95% CI 0.0-0.9%) for infection. Conclusions: High six-month continuation rates and a low rate of adverse outcomes suggest immediate postpartum copper IUD insertion is a feasible and acceptable postpartum contraceptive option for women living in LMIC.

Importance Religious leaders of the Catholic church created guidelines for practicing medicine, that involve reproductive care restrictions that may conflict with professional obligations. Objective To explore how Catholic obstetrician-gynecologists integrate their religious values and professional obligations related to family planning services. Design, setting, and participants In this qualitative investigation, in 2018, US-based obstetrician-gynecologists were recruited through an online survey and were invited to participate in audio-recorded telephone interviews using a semistructured interview guide. Participants were obstetrician-gynecologists who self-identified as Catholic and reported providing reproductive health care as follows: (1) provide natural family planning only (low practitioners), (2) provide additional contraceptive methods (moderate practitioners), and (3) provide family planning services including abortion (high practitioners). The study purposively sampled those with higher self-reported religiosity. Data were analyzed from November 2018 to February 2019. Main outcomes and measures The primary outcome was understanding how participants describe integration of Catholic values with family planning service provision. The telephone interviews explored their integration of Catholic values and professional obligations, and 3 coders analyzed the responses using grounded theory. Results Among the 34 Catholic obstetrician-gynecologists interviewed (27 women [79.4%]), there were 10 low, 15 moderate, and 9 high practitioners from 19 states. Participants' description of morality was consistent with Albert Bandura's Social-Cognitive Theory of Moral Thought and Action. The findings were used to create a modified framework. Within each group of physicians, 3 themes demonstrating their reconciliations between Catholic values and professional obligations emerged; each of these themes reflected one of the medical ethical principles of autonomy, beneficence, nonmaleficence, or justice. All 10 low practitioners primarily promoted natural family planning approaches to avoid iatrogenic risks and none provided abortion, reflecting nonmaleficence. Alternatively, moderate practitioners focused on nonmaleficence by offering contraception to prevent abortions. High practitioners primarily promoted patient autonomy by separating religious doctrine from medical practice. All had concerns for beneficence. In each group, 1 of the 4 medical ethical principles was underrepresented. Conclusions and relevance In this qualitative analysis, Catholic obstetrician-gynecologists establish their family planning care provision practices by emphasizing certain moral and/or ethical principles over others. These findings highlight how physician morality in the realm of family planning service provision often involves certain religious and/or professional reconciliations. Understanding the dilemmas Catholic obstetrician-gynecologists face can guide professional development efforts and inform ongoing discussions about conscientious objection and provision.