5
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
2 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: not found

      Navigating Uncertainty Alone: A grounded theory analysis of women’s psycho-social experiences of pregnancy and childbirth during the COVID-19 Pandemic in London.

      research-article

      Read this article at

      ScienceOpenPublisherPMC
      Bookmark
          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

          Problem

          Maternity care underwent substantial reconfiguration in the United Kingdom during the COVID-19 pandemic.

          Background

          COVID-19 posed an unprecedented public health crisis, risking population health and causing a significant health system shock.

          Aim

          To explore the psycho-social experiences of women who received maternity care and gave birth in South London during the first ‘lockdown’.

          Methods

          We recruited women (N=23) to semi-structured interviews, conducted virtually. Data were recorded, transcribed, and analysed by hand. A Classical Grounded Theory Analysis was followed including line-by-line coding, focused coding, development of super-categories followed by themes, and finally the generation of a theory.

          Findings

          Iterative and inductive analysis generated six emergent themes, sorted into three dyadic pairs: 1 & 2: Lack of relational care vs. Good practice persisting during the pandemic; 3 & 4: Denying the embodied experience of pregnancy and birth vs. Trying to keep everyone safe; and 5 & 6: Removed from support network vs. Importance of being at home as a family. Together, these themes interact to form the theory: ‘Navigating uncertainty alone’.

          Discussion

          Women’s pregnancy and childbirth journeys during the pandemic were reported as having positive and negative experiences which would counteract one-another . Lack of relational care, denial of embodied experiences, and removal from support networks were counterbalanced by good practice which persisted, understanding staff were trying to keep everyone safe, and renewed importance in the family unit.

          Conclusion

          Pregnancy can be an uncertain time for women. This was compounded by having to navigate their maternity journey alone during the COVID-19 pandemic.

          Related collections

          Most cited references43

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: not found
          • Article: not found

          How Many Interviews Are Enough?: An Experiment with Data Saturation and Variability

            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

            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.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Using Zoom Videoconferencing for Qualitative Data Collection: Perceptions and Experiences of Researchers and Participants

              Advances in communication technologies offer new opportunities for the conduct of qualitative research. Among these, Zoom—an innovative videoconferencing platform—has a number of unique features that enhance its potential appeal to qualitative and mixed-methods researchers. Although studies have explored the use of information and communication technologies for conducting research, few have explored both researcher and participant perspectives on the use of web and videoconferencing platforms. Further, data are lacking on the benefits and challenges of using Zoom as a data collection method. In this study, we explore the feasibility and acceptability of using Zoom to collect qualitative interview data within a health research context in order to better understand its suitability for qualitative and mixed-methods researchers. We asked 16 practice nurses who participated in online qualitative interviews about their experiences of using Zoom and concurrently recorded researcher observations. Although several participants experienced technical difficulties, most described their interview experience as highly satisfactory and generally rated Zoom above alternative interviewing mediums such as face-to-face, telephone, and other videoconferencing services, platforms, and products. Findings suggest the viability of Zoom as a tool for collection of qualitative data because of its relative ease of use, cost-effectiveness, data management features, and security options. Further research exploring the utility of Zoom is recommended in order to critically assess and advance innovations in online methods.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                Women Birth
                Women Birth
                Women and Birth
                The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Ltd on behalf of Australian College of Midwives.
                1871-5192
                1878-1799
                17 May 2022
                17 May 2022
                Affiliations
                [a ]Department of Midwifery, Florence Nightingale Faculty of Nursing, Midwifery & Palliative Care, King’s College London, London, United Kingdom
                [b ]Department of Women & Children’s Health, School of Life Course & Population Sciences, King’s College London, London, United Kingdom
                Author notes
                [* ]Correspondence to: Department of Women & Children’s Health, School of Life Course & Population Sciences, King’s College London, Research Office 4, 10 th Floor North Wing, St. Thomas’ Hospital, Westminster Bridge Road, Lambeth, London, SE1 7EH, United Kingdom,
                [1]

                EM & KDB share joint first authorship of this paper

                [2]

                Elsa Montgomery: @elsamwm

                [3]

                0000-0002-4193-1261

                [4]

                Kaat De Backer: @kaatdebacker

                [5]

                0000-0001-5202-2808

                [6]

                Abigail Easter: @DrAbigailEaster

                [7]

                0000-0002-4462-6537

                [8]

                Laura A. Magee: @LauraAMagee1

                [9]

                0000-0002-1355-610X

                [10]

                Jane Sandall: @SandallJane

                [11]

                0000-0003-2000-743X

                [12]

                Sergio A. Silverio: @Silverio_SA_

                [13]

                0000-0001-7177-3471

                Article
                S1871-5192(22)00083-X
                10.1016/j.wombi.2022.05.002
                9110569
                35610170
                3174b092-a236-4420-93a1-4c5d25bcac3f
                © 2022 The Authors

                Since January 2020 Elsevier has created a COVID-19 resource centre with free information in English and Mandarin on the novel coronavirus COVID-19. The COVID-19 resource centre is hosted on Elsevier Connect, the company's public news and information website. Elsevier hereby grants permission to make all its COVID-19-related research that is available on the COVID-19 resource centre - including this research content - immediately available in PubMed Central and other publicly funded repositories, such as the WHO COVID database with rights for unrestricted research re-use and analyses in any form or by any means with acknowledgement of the original source. These permissions are granted for free by Elsevier for as long as the COVID-19 resource centre remains active.

                History
                : 11 November 2021
                : 5 May 2022
                : 5 May 2022
                Categories
                Original Research

                covid-19, the sars-cov-2 novel coronavirus,nhs, national health service,nice, national institute for health and care excellence,ppie, patient and public involvement and engagement,rcog, royal college of obstetricians and gynaecologists,rcm, royal college of midwives,covid-19,maternity care,pregnancy and childbirth,women’s psycho-social experiences,qualitative methods,grounded theory

                Comments

                Comment on this article