Search

The emergence of the COVID-19 pandemic significantly changed the prenatal care experience, specifically regarding medical appointments and social opportunities. It is critical to capture this change through the narratives of pregnant people, particularly those of marginalized populations, whose voices may often be underrepresented in the literature. This mixed-methods paper summarizes the experiences of 40 pregnant Black/African American (AA) women during the COVID-19 pandemic. A cross-sectional, online survey was administered between 2020 and 2021 to assess prenatal health and the impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic on patients' pregnancy experience. Coping behaviors during the pandemic were self-reported using the COPE-IS. Univariate analyses were conducted. An additional analysis of participants (n = 4) was explored through a week-long qualitative exercise using a photo documentation procedure. Photo-Elicitation Interviews (PEI) were conducted to capture and center their pandemic pregnancy experiences. Sources of stress during the pandemic varied, with the most common being financial concerns (n = 19, 47.5%). Over half of the sample (n = 18, 54.5%) self-reported increases in their positive coping behaviors during the pandemic, such as communicating with friends and family, talking to healthcare providers, listening to music, and engaging in spiritual practices–such as prayer. The four PEI study participants reflected on the impacts of social distancing on their prenatal experience and mentioned hospital and provider-related weariness due to their race. The findings of this study suggest that during the COVID-19 pandemic, Black/AA pregnant women in Charlotte, NC used social support, mindfulness practices, self-advocacy, and health literacy to navigate challenges present during their prenatal health experience. This paper highlights the personal, social, and structural experiences of pregnant women during a public health crisis so that responsive and effective programs or policies can be planned in the future. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

During the early months of the COVID-19 pandemic, 12 states banned or restricted abortion access under elective-procedure restrictions. The rationale was preserving hospital capacity and personal protective equipment (PPE); however, abortions commonly take place in clinics and use less PPE than childbirth. This paper investigates the discursive construction of abortions, the people who get them, and the fetuses in this legislation. The authors analyzed 13 antiabortion documents using an iterative process of thematic coding and memo writing. Twenty-three percent of the legislation listed abortion as banned, whereas the remaining laws implied abortion within the terms "elective" or "nonessential." Legislation used common antiabortion tactics, such as the trivialization of abortion, risk discourses, and constructions of motherhood and fetal personhood. Discourses delegitimized abortion providers and used quasi-medical justifications for banning abortion. Finally, legislation constructed abortion clinics as sites of contagion and waste and consequently as risks to public health. The results highlight the vulnerability of abortion and the connection between abortion policy and other conservative policies, and they gesture toward a strategic attempt to ban abortion federally. These findings have several implications for a post-Roe United States and for stakeholders wishing to increase abortion access. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Public health officials promoted COVID-19 vaccines to limit burdens placed on the U.S. healthcare system and end the pandemic. People in some closed religious communities refused to vaccinate and likely acquired temporary immunity through infection. This paper compares the death rates in Amish, Old Order Mennonites, and conservative Mennonite groups to a rate estimated for the U.S. population. Approximately two-thirds of the U.S. population was immunized against COVID-19, while few in the Amish/Mennonite community were. We find divergent patterns. Once vaccines became available, excess deaths declined in the general population and remained elevated among Amish and Mennonites. Vaccination campaigns must consider and value the cultural beliefs of closed religious communities to be effective. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: COVID-19 pandemic negatively influenced the entire life globally including various aspects of patients' care. Its effect on medical research production is not known. The aim of this study is to assess the impact of COVID-19 pandemic on medical research reporting trend. Methods: Advanced search on PubMed was performed over 2011- August, 2021. Monthly comparison was done for the years 2019, 2020, and 2021. Kruskal Wallis test was used to compare continuous distributions. Results: The total publication count showed constant increment over the study period. Faster rise was noticed on 2020 (15.7%). A steady growth in publications over the years and through the pandemic was also seen in seven studied countries with variable, both in total and also after exclusion of COVID-19 related papers. Italy and India have the highest proportions of COVID-19 related publications in comparison to the total papers in 2020, but USA has the highest quantity. Statistically significant differences exist between the first eight months of the last three years with and without counting COVID-19 related publications (p-values=0.0003907 and 0.001084, respectively). Conclusion: Our results reflect that investigators world-wide succeeded to reconfigure their work style and utilize the spared time induced by the lockdown to enrich the medical research platform. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Healthcare professionals are the vanguard of battling the COVID-19 pandemic and they experience major challenges associated with their jobs in the context of this pandemic. We carried out a survey of 253 healthcare professionals and 189 employees working in other domains to explore differences in how they adapted to COVID-19. Our results show that healthcare professionals perceive a higher mortality threat, lower job satisfaction and engage in fewer counterproductive work behaviors compared to respondents from other professions. Building on the tenets of the Terror Management Theory, we show that dispositional differences in death anxiety are the main drivers of perceived mortality threat in relation to COVID-19, yet this positive association is weaker for healthcare professionals, pointing to the engagement of proximal defenses specific to this work domain. Mortality threat mediates the association between death anxiety and job satisfaction only when supervisory support is low, pointing towards the crucial role of social support at work as a buffering mechanism against the deleterious effects of COVID-19 threat. Our paper presents one of the first empirical attempts to compare healthcare professionals with other workers with respect to job satisfaction and counterproductive work behaviors during the pandemic. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: The purpose of the study was to provide a comparative analysis on the psychological and socio-cultural impacts of COVID-19 on victims of intimate partner violence (IPV) in South Africa (SA) and the USA. Design/methodology/approach: The authors collected media and scholarly articles that dealt with IPV victims during the early phase of the pandemic. This study focused solely on SA and the USA because of their unique contexts and the fact that the authors are residents of these countries. The authors observed how both presidents dealt with IPV amidst the COVID 19 pandemic, especially when stay-at-home orders were in place. Aspects relating to the psychological and socio-cultural impacts amidst the pandemic were considered. Findings: The authors found that in both countries, many black women from low socio-economic backgrounds experience IPV. Being in isolated spaces with their perpetrators prohibits victims from reporting the abuse. As the world attempts to curb the spread of COVID-19 infections, effective strategies have been suggested for victims and perpetrators. The authors found the approaches of the two governments (until the Biden Administration in 2021) to be starkly different in terms of effective strategies and the neglect and downplaying of the extent of one or both pandemics (i.e. COVID-19 and IPV). Pro-safety, equality, gender and race-conscious embracing approaches to overcome IPV are urgently needed. Originality/value: The paper focused on IPV during the early phase of the COVID-19 pandemic. It provides relevant information about IPV in both countries, especially when stay-at-home orders are in place. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: Integrated primary care (IPC) models have empirical support for improving access to and quality of behavioral health care and can be effectively implemented in a diverse range of formats1. Various studies have demonstrated that primary care service providers tend to positively endorse IPC models of pediatric behavioral health care, especially in comparison to traditional, non-integrated care2-3. However, there is a paucity of research evaluating parent perceptions and attitudes towards behavioral health care, especially when delivered in an IPC setting. The present paper describes a survey tool designed to better understand and meet patient care needs. Methods and Aims: The Parent Acceptance of Pediatric Integrated Care Survey (PAPICS) was developed by a multidisciplinary panel of integrated care experts at the University of Michigan Medicine to evaluate parent perceptions and acceptance of integrated primary care (IPC) models for treatment of behavioral health problems in children. In response to the COVID-19 pandemic, the PAPICS was expanded to include more items focused on virtual services in IPC and revised to address items with poor factor loadings. Methods include Exploratory Factor Analysis (EFA) and Confirmatory Factor Analysis (CFA) to analyze and validate the survey. Results: The original 35-item PAPICS was distributed to parents pre-pandemic with children under 18 across the United States and was completed by 422 respondents4. Items on this survey largely pertained to face-to-face care within the clinic and an EFA only was conducted to analyze the data. Parents overwhelming favored an IPC model and supported learning skills to help their child. More variability was evidenced for parents' perceptions of one-on-one talk therapy between their child and the psychologist. Some parents had concerns about stigma and privacy, but agreement was more inconsistent. After the World Health Organization (WHO) declared COVID-19 a global pandemic, Michigan Medicine's IPC clinics converted to 100% virtual care. The PAPICS was revised using patient feedback data for applicability to virtual care delivery and was completed by 875 respondents. Conclusions: Data collection from the revised PAPICS was completed in December 2021. Exploratory Factor Analysis (EFA) and Confirmatory Factor Analysis (CFA) are presently be conducted and will be reviewed at ICIC22. Results will provide insight into parent perceptions of virtual IPC and allow for comparison to those for face-to-face care. Implications for applicability/transferability, sustainability, and limitations: The PAPICS survey provides a template for assessing beliefs and preferences of families to provide high-quality, patient-centered behavioral health care in an IPC setting. Though certain items on the survey may not be applicable in some settings, the scale can be adapted as needed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]