Search

Sex trafficking, trafficking for the purpose of forced sexual exploitation, is a widespread form of human trafficking that occurs in all regions of the world, affects mostly women and girls, and has far-reaching health implications. Studies suggest that up to 50 % of sex trafficking victims in the USA seek medical attention while in their trafficking situation, yet it is unclear how the healthcare system responds to the needs of victims of sex trafficking. To understand the intersection of sex trafficking and public health, we performed in-depth qualitative interviews among 277 antitrafficking stakeholders across eight metropolitan areas in five countries to examine the local context of sex trafficking. We sought to gain a new perspective on this form of gender-based violence from those who have a unique vantage point and intimate knowledge of push-and-pull factors, victim health needs, current available resources and practices in the health system, and barriers to care. Through comparative analysis across these contexts, we found that multiple sociocultural and economic factors facilitate sex trafficking, including child sexual abuse, the objectification of women and girls, and lack of income. Although there are numerous physical and psychological health problems associated with sex trafficking, health services for victims are patchy and poorly coordinated, particularly in the realm of mental health. Various factors function as barriers to a greater health response, including low awareness of sex trafficking and attitudinal biases among health workers. A more comprehensive and coordinated health system response to sex trafficking may help alleviate its devastating effects on vulnerable women and girls. There are numerous opportunities for local health systems to engage in antitrafficking efforts while partnering across sectors with relevant stakeholders. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background Postpartum hemorrhage remains the leading cause of maternal mortality worldwide. Administration of uterotonics during the third stage of labor is a simple and well established intervention that can significantly decrease the development of postpartum hemorrhage. Little is known about the use of prophylactic uterotonics in peripheral health centers, where the majority of normal deliveries occur. The purpose of this study is to assess health provider current practices and determinants to the use of prophylactic uterotonics in Sierra Leone, a country with one of the highest maternal mortality ratios worldwide. Methods This is a mixed methods study using descriptive cross-sectional survey and qualitative interviews in community health facilities in Freetown, Sierra Leone following a comprehensive training on postpartum hemorrhage. Facilities and providers were surveyed between May and June 2014. Qualitative methods were used to identify barriers and facilitators to the use of prophylactic uterotonics. Results A total of 134 providers were surveyed at 39 periphreal health facilities. Thirteen facilities (39 %) reported an inconsistent supply of oxytocin. The majority of facilities (64 %) stored oxytocin at room temperature. Provider level, in-service training, and leadership role were significantly associated with prophylactic uterotonic use. Overall, 62 % of providers reported routine use. Midwives were most likely to routinely administer uterotonics (93 %), followed by community health officers/assistants (78 %), maternal and child health aides (56 %), and state-enrolled community health nurses (52 %). Of the providers who received in-service training, 67 % reported routine use; of those with no in-service training, 42 % reported routine use. Qualitative analysis revealed that facility protocols, widespread availability, and provider perception of utility facilitated routine use. Common barriers reported included inconsistent supply of uterotonics, lack of knowledge regarding timely administration, and provider attitude regarding utility of uterotonics following normal deliveries. Conclusion There is considerable room for improvement in availability and administration of prophylactic uterotonics. Understanding barriers to routine use may aid in developing multifaceted pre-service and in-service training interventions designed to improve routine intrapartum care.

The corrected order of the authors is as reflected in this erratum. Sebastian Suarez and Ayla Senay are co-second authors. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]