Search

Background: In response to the COVID-19 pandemic, expectant parents experienced changes in the availability and uptake of both National Health Service (NHS) community and hospital-based healthcare. Objective: To examine how COVID-19 and its societal related restrictions have impacted the provision of healthcare support for pregnant women during the COVID-19 pandemic. Method: A thematic analysis using an inductive approach was undertaken using data from open-ended responses to the national COVID in Context of Pregnancy, Infancy and Parenting (CoCoPIP) Study online survey (n = 507 families). Findings: The overarching theme identified was the way in which the changes to healthcare provision increased parents’ anxiety levels, and feelings of not being supported. Five sub-themes, associated with the first wave of the pandemic, were identified: (1) rushed and/or fewer antenatal appointments, (2) lack of sympathy from healthcare workers, (3) lack of face-to-face appointments, (4) requirement to attend appointments without a partner, and (5) requirement to use PPE. A sentiment analysis, that used quantitative techniques, revealed participant responses to be predominantly negative (50.1%), with a smaller proportion of positive (21.8%) and neutral (28.1%) responses found. Conclusion: This study provides evidence indicating that the changes to healthcare services for pregnant women during the pandemic increased feelings of anxiety and have left women feeling inadequately supported. Our findings highlight the need for compensatory social and emotional support for new and expectant parents while COVID-19 related restrictions continue to impact on family life and society., BACKGROUND: In response to the COVID-19 pandemic, expectant parents experienced changes in the availability and uptake of both National Health Service (NHS) community and hospital-based healthcare. OBJECTIVE: To examine how COVID-19 and its societal related restrictions have impacted the provision of healthcare support for pregnant women during the COVID-19 pandemic. METHOD: A thematic analysis using an inductive approach was undertaken using data from open-ended responses to the national COVID in Context of Pregnancy, Infancy and Parenting (CoCoPIP) Study online survey (n = 507 families). FINDINGS: The overarching theme identified was the way in which the changes to healthcare provision increased parents' anxiety levels, and feelings of not being supported. Five sub-themes, associated with the first wave of the pandemic, were identified: (1) rushed and/or fewer antenatal appointments, (2) lack of sympathy from healthcare workers, (3) lack of face-to-face appointments, (4) requirement to attend appointments without a partner, and (5) requirement to use PPE. A sentiment analysis, that used quantitative techniques, revealed participant responses to be predominantly negative (50.1%), with a smaller proportion of positive (21.8%) and neutral (28.1%) responses found. CONCLUSION: This study provides evidence indicating that the changes to healthcare services for pregnant women during the pandemic increased feelings of anxiety and have left women feeling inadequately supported. Our findings highlight the need for compensatory social and emotional support for new and expectant parents while COVID-19 related restrictions continue to impact on family life and society.

BackgroundExpectant parents worldwide have experienced changes in the way they give birth as a result of COVID-19, including restrictions relating to access to birthing units and the presence of birthing partners during the birth, and changes to birth plans. This paper reports the experiences of women in England.MethodsData were obtained from both closed- and open-ended responses collected as part of the national COVID in Context of Pregnancy, Infancy and Parenting (CoCoPIP) Study online survey (n = 477 families) between 15th July 2020 – 29th March 2021. Frequency data are presented alongside the results of a sentiment analysis; the open-ended data was analysed thematically.ResultsTwo-thirds of expectant women reported giving birth via spontaneous vaginal delivery (SVD) (66.1%) and a third via caesarean section (CS) (32.6%) or ‘other’ (1.3%). Just under half (49.7%) of the CS were reported to have been elective/planned, with 47.7% being emergencies. A third (37.4%) of participants reported having no changes to their delivery, with a further 25% reporting COVID-related changes, and 37.4% reporting non-COVID related changes (e.g., medical intervention). Experiences of COVID-related changes included limited birthing options and reduced feelings of control; difficulties accessing pain-relief and assistance, and feelings of distress and anxiety. Under half of the respondents reported not knowing whether there could be someone present at the birth (44.8%), with 2.3% of respondents reporting no birthing partner being present due to COVID-related restrictions. Parental experiences of communication and advice provided by the hospital prior to delivery were mixed, with significant stress and anxiety being reported in relation to both the fluctuating guidance and lack of certainty regarding the presence of birthing partners at the birth. The sentiment analysis revealed that participant experiences of giving birth during the pandemic were predominately negative (46.9%) particularly in relation to the first national lockdown, with a smaller proportion of positive (33.2%) and neutral responses (19.9%).ConclusionParents reported an overall increase in birthing interventions (e.g., emergency CS), increased uncertainties related to the birth, and poor communication, leading to increased feelings of anxiety and high levels of negative emotions. The implications of these findings are discussed.

Background Expectant parents worldwide have experienced changes in the way they give birth as a result of COVID-19, including restrictions relating to access to birthing units and the presence of birthing partners during the birth, and changes to birth plans. This paper reports the experiences of women in England. Methods Data were obtained from both closed- and open-ended responses collected as part of the national COVID in Context of Pregnancy, Infancy and Parenting (CoCoPIP) Study online survey (n = 477 families) between 15th July 2020 – 29th March 2021. Frequency data are presented alongside the results of a sentiment analysis; the open-ended data was analysed thematically. Results Two-thirds of expectant women reported giving birth via spontaneous vaginal delivery (SVD) (66.1%) and a third via caesarean section (CS) (32.6%) or ‘other’ (1.3%). Just under half (49.7%) of the CS were reported to have been elective/planned, with 47.7% being emergencies. A third (37.4%) of participants reported having no changes to their birth (as set out in their birthing plan), with a further 25% reporting COVID-related changes, and 37.4% reporting non-COVID related changes (e.g., changes as a result of birthing complications). One quarter of the sample reported COVID-related changes to their birth plan, including limited birthing options and reduced feelings of control; difficulties accessing pain-relief and assistance, and feelings of distress and anxiety. Under half of the respondents reported not knowing whether there could be someone present at the birth (44.8%), with 2.3% of respondents reporting no birthing partner being present due to COVID-related restrictions. Parental experiences of communication and advice provided by the hospital prior to delivery were mixed, with significant stress and anxiety being reported in relation to both the fluctuating guidance and lack of certainty regarding the presence of birthing partners at the birth. The sentiment analysis revealed that participant experiences of giving birth during the pandemic were predominately negative (46.9%) particularly in relation to the first national lockdown, with a smaller proportion of positive (33.2%) and neutral responses (19.9%). Conclusion The proportion of parents reporting birthing interventions (i.e., emergency CS) was higher than previously reported, as were uncertainties related to the birth, and poor communication, leading to increased feelings of anxiety and high levels of negative emotions. The implications of these findings are discussed.

IntroductionWhile the secondary impact of the COVID pandemic on the psychological wellbeing of pregnant women and parents has become apparent over the past year, the impact of these changes on early social interactions, physical growth and cognitive development of their infants is unknown, as is the way in which a range of COVID related changes have mediated this impact. This study (CoCoPIP) will investigate: i) how parent’s experiences of the social, medical, and financial changes during the pandemic have impacted pre and postnatal parental mental health and parent-infant social interaction; and (ii) the extent to which these COVID-related changes in parental pre and postnatal mental health and social interaction are associated with fetal and infant development.Methods and analysisThe CoCoPIP study is a national online survey initiated in July 2020. This ongoing study (n = 1700 families currently enrolled as of 6th May 2021) involves both quantitative and qualitative data being collected across pregnancy and infancy. It is designed to identify the longitudinal impact of the pandemic from pregnancy to two years of age, with the aim of identifying if stress-associated moderators (i.e., loss of income, COVID-19 illness, access to ante/postnatal support) impact parental mental health, and in turn, infant development. In addition, we aim to document individual differences in social and cognitive development in toddlers who were born during restrictions intended to mitigate COVID-19 spread (e.g., social distancing, national lockdowns).Ethics and disseminationEthical approval was given by the University of Cambridge, Psychology Research Ethics Committee (PREC) (PRE.2020.077). Findings will be made available via community engagement, public forums (e.g., social media,) and to national (e.g., NHS England) and local (Cambridge Universities Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust) healthcare partners. Results will be submitted for publication in peer-reviews journals.Strengths and Limitations of this study‐This is a new cohort of families being followed from prenatal to postnatal (up to 18 months) during the COVID-19 pandemic.‐The study involves the collection of quantifiable data to identify the short- and long-term influences of the pandemic on key aspects of infant development.‐The study also has a range of open-ended questions for qualitative analysis aimed at exploring familial experiences in more detail.‐The data is being collected online and is therefore limited to self- and parent-report measures, with no direct assessment of child development and parental mental health.‐Although the sample of families being recruited are diverse in their indices of multiple deprivation (IMD) and geographic location, they may not be fully representative of the wider population.

The genetic diversity and divergence of populations of Galapagos and Hawaiian Petrel (Pterodroma phaeopygia and sandwichensis, respectively) were investigated using allozyme electrophoresis. Within the Galapagos Islands, P. phaeopygia samples were monomorphic at 12 of 13 loci. The Hawaiian population P. sandwichensis was monomorphic at all 13 loci. One fixed allelic difference was found between P. phaeopygia and P. sandwichensis. Eleven loci were fixed for the same allele in both populations. Our results indicate that there has been no recent gene flow between Galapagos and Hawaiian Petrels, but gene flow occurs among Galapagos populations of P. phaeopygia. The existence of a unique genetic variant discriminating Galapagos and Hawaiian Petrels, in addition to previously documented morphological and behavioral differences, supports the recent elevation of these two taxa to species status.

Objective: To determine: a) population-based hepatitis B seroprevalence rates; and b) associated behavioural risk factors. Setting: A remote northern Ontario town with a cluster of hepatitis B cases. Interventions: Anonymous blood testing linked with risk-factor questionnaires. Results: 635 persons aged 14 to 30 years (51% of the eligible age cohort) donated blood in return for free vaccination; four were anti-HBs positive, and none was HBsAg positive. In all, 19% of participants reported two or more sexual partners in the previous year, 6% reported at least one tattooing in the previous year, and 1% reported illicit injection drug use. Of persons with multiple sexual partners 84% did not consistently use condoms. Conclusions: When the serological results of the original cluster (and contacts) were considered, the age cohort’s HBsAg seroprevalence rate was estimated to be between 0.24% and 0.47%. While the serosurvey did not discover additional HBsAg positive cases, there was great potential for heterosexual transmission.