Search

BackgroundThere has been substantial progress in developing approaches to measure mistreatment of women during childbirth. However, less is known about the differences in measurement approaches. In this study, we compare measures of mistreatment obtained from the same women using labour observations and community-based surveys in Ghana, Guinea and Nigeria.MethodsExperiences of mistreatment during childbirth are person-centred quality measures. As such, we assessed individual-level and population-level accuracy of labour observation relative to women's self-report for different types of mistreatment. We calculated sensitivity, specificity, percent agreement and population-level inflation factor (IF), assessing prevalence of mistreatment in labour observation divided by 'true' prevalence in women's self-report. We report the IF degree of bias as: low (0.75Results1536 women across Ghana (n=779), Guinea (n=425) and Nigeria (n=332) were included. Most mistreatment items demonstrated better specificity than sensitivity: observation of any physical abuse (44% sensitive, 89% specific), any verbal abuse (61% sensitive, 73% specific) and presence of a labour companion (19% sensitive, 93% specific). Items for stigma (IF 0.16), pain relief requested (IF 0.38), companion present (IF 0.32) and lack of easy access to fluids (IF 0.46) showed high risk of bias, meaning labour observations would substantially underestimate true prevalence. Other items showed low or moderate bias.ConclusionUsing self-report as the reference standard, labour observations demonstrated moderate-to-high specificity (accurately identifying lack of mistreatment) but low-to-moderate sensitivity (accurately identifying presence of mistreatment) among women. For overall prevalence, either women's self-report or observations can be used with low-moderate bias for most mistreatment items. However, given the dynamicity, complexity, and limitations in 'objectivity', some experiences of mistreatment (stigma, pain relief, labour companionship, easy access to fluids) require measurement via women's self-report. More work is needed to understand how subjectivity influences how well a measure represents individual's experiences.

Accountability for mistreatment during facility-based childbirth requires valid tools to measure and compare birth experiences. We analyse the WHO 'How women are treated during facility-based childbirth' community survey to test whether items mapping the typology of mistreatment function as scales and to create brief item sets to capture mistreatment by domain. The cross-sectional community survey was conducted at up to 8 weeks post partum among women giving birth at hospitals in Ghana, Guinea, Myanmar and Nigeria. The survey contained items assessing physical abuse, verbal abuse, stigma, failure to meet professional standards, poor rapport with healthcare workers, and health system conditions and constraints. For all domains except stigma, we applied item-response theory to assess item fit and correlation within domain. We tested shortened sets of survey items for sensitivity in detecting mistreatment by domain. Where items show concordance and scale reliability ≥0.60, we assessed convergent validity with dissatisfaction with care and agreement of scale scores between brief and full versions. 2672 women answered over 70 items on mistreatment during childbirth. Reliability exceeded 0.60 in all countries for items on poor rapport with healthcare workers and in three countries for items on failure to meet professional standards; brief scales generally showed high agreement with longer versions and correlation with dissatisfaction. Brief item sets were ≥85% sensitive in detecting mistreatment in each country, over 90% for domains of physical abuse and health system conditions and constraints. Brief scales to measure two domains of mistreatment are largely comparable with longer versions and can be informative for these four distinct settings. Brief item sets efficiently captured prevalence of mistreatment in the five domains analysed; stigma items can be used and adapted in full. Item sets are suitable for confirmation by context and implementation to increase accountability and inform efforts to eliminate mistreatment during childbirth.

Mistreatment of women during childbirth is increasingly recognised as a significant issue globally. Research and programmatic efforts targeting this phenomenon have been limited by a lack of validated measurement tools. This study aimed to develop a set of concise, valid and reliable multidimensional measures for mistreatment using labour observations applicable across multiple settings. Data from continuous labour observations of 1974 women in Nigeria (n=407), Ghana (n=912) and Guinea (n=655) were used from the cross-sectional WHO's multicountry study 'How women are treated during facility-based childbirth' (2016-2018). Exploratory factor analysis was conducted to develop a scale measuring interpersonal abuse. Two indexes were developed through a modified Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development approach for generating composite indexes. Measures were evaluated for performance, validity and internal reliability. Three mistreatment measures were developed: a 7-item Interpersonal Abuse Scale, a 3-item Exams & Procedures Index and a 12-item Unsupportive Birth Environment Index. Factor analysis results showed a consistent unidimensional factor structure for the Interpersonal Abuse Scale in all three countries based on factor loadings and interitem correlations, indicating good structural construct validity. The scale had a reliability coefficient of 0.71 in Nigeria and approached 0.60 in Ghana and Guinea. Low correlations (Spearman correlation range: -0.06-0.19; p≥0.05) between mistreatment measures supported our decision to develop three separate measures. Predictive criterion validation yielded mixed results across countries. Both items within measures and measure scores were internally consistent across countries; each item co-occurred with other items in a measure, and scores consistently distinguished between 'high' and 'low' mistreatment levels. The set of concise, comprehensive multidimensional measures of mistreatment can be used in future research and quality improvement initiatives targeting mistreatment to quantify burden, identify risk factors and determine its impact on health and well-being outcomes. Further validation and reliability testing of the measures in other contexts is needed.

Background: To assess the association between socioeconomic inequality and the prevalence of tobacco smoking among Iranian adults in 2010. Methods: Data from the fifth national STEPS survey (WHO STEPwise approach to NCD Surveillance) were analyzed. A Blinder-Oaxaca decomposition method was applied to assess the association between socioeconomic inequality and the prevalence of daily cigarette and water pipe (WP) smoking among Iranian men and women. Results: From 10,615 participants in the survey, 4,203 (39.5%) participants appeared to be in the first and fifth quintiles of socioeconomic status (SES). For men, the prevalence of daily cigarette smoking was higher among those with low SES (23.1%) than those with high SES (11.1%) (P<0.001). The observed difference was mainly attributed to the educational level (8.6%). We found no significant difference in high compared to low SES women for cigarette smoking (P value= 0.881). Although there was no difference between high and low SES men for daily WP smoking, low SES women had a higher prevalence of WP smoking (4.4%) than high SES women (1.3%) (P value=0.027). Education level was the major factor (3.3%) to explain the corresponding difference. The difference in WP smoking in high and low SES men was not statistically significant (P value= 0.199). Conclusion: Cigarette smoking in men and WP smoking in women are associated with SES in Iran. Education was the main factor explaining the differences in the prevalence of cigarette and WP smoking in Iranian men and women. Results from this study must be considered as a pivotal basis for designing a tobacco control program at national and sub-national levels. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: To evaluate the capability of high-volume comprehensive emergency obstetric care (CEmOC) health facilities on the provision of comprehensive postabortion care (PAC) in Sub-Saharan Africa and to determine the frequency of women with severe abortion-related complications in high capability facilities., Methods: A cross-sectional analysis conducted across 11 countries in Sub-Saharan Africa, using facility-level information from the World Health Organization (WHO) Multi-Country Survey on Abortion-related morbidity (MCS-A) between 2017 and 2018. PAC signal functions were adapted to assess facilities' capability to deliver comprehensive PAC through infrastructure, standard comprehensive capability, and extended comprehensive capability to provide PAC. The percentage of facilities with each signal function and distribution of facilities by number of signal functions were calculated for the three capability categories. Distribution of severe abortion complications by facility capability score was assessed., Results: Of 210 high-volume CEmOC facilities included, 47.9% (n = 100) had capability to provide all facility infrastructure signal functions, 54.4% (n = 105) for standard comprehensive PAC, reducing to 17.7% (n = 34) for extended comprehensive PAC capability. Overall, there were gaps in extended capabilities including availability of a functioning ICU (available in 37.3% of facilities) and providers 24/7 (65.5% of facilities reported an obstetrician available 24/7 dropping to 41.3% for anesthesiologists). Facilities' PAC capability varied across regions. Overall, 34.6% (n = 614) of women with severe abortion-related complications were treated in facilities with the maximum capability score for extended comprehensive PAC., Conclusion: Although high levels of capability to provide abortion-related care for most signal functions were evident, significant gaps that impact on the management of severe abortion-related complications remain, particularly related to extended facility capabilities including specialized human resources and ICU., (© 2022 World Health Organization; licensed by International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics. International Journal of Gynecology & Obstetrics published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics.)

Objective: To estimate the prevalence of women who were admitted to health facilities with abortion-related complications who reported feeling anxious/stressed during their stay, and to identify sociodemographic, facility, and abortion-related characteristics associated with self-reported experience of anxiety/stress., Methods: We used data from four countries in Eastern and Southern Africa (Kenya, Malawi, Mozambique, and Uganda) collected from 2017-2018 as part of the World Health Organization (WHO) Multi-Country Survey on Abortion-related morbidity (MCS-A). Information was extracted from women's medical records and their participation in audio computer-assisted self-interviews (ACASI). Based on a question in the ACASI, "Did you encounter any anxiety or stress during your hospital stay?", the percentage of women who self-reported feeling anxious/stressed during their facility stay was calculated. Generalized estimating equations were used to identify the determinants of anxiety/stress following a hierarchical approach whereby potential determinants were grouped from most distal to most proximal and analyzed accordingly., Results: There were 1254 women with abortion-related complications included in the analysis, of which 56.5% self-reported that they felt anxious/stressed during their facility stay. We found evidence that lower socioeconomic status, lower levels of education, no previous childbirth, no previous abortion, higher gestational age at abortion, and use of unsafe methods of abortion were independent determinants of self-reporting anxiety/stress., Conclusions: Action should be taken to reduce experience of anxiety/stress among women attending facilities for postabortion complications, including reducing the number of women experiencing abortion-related complications by improving access to safe abortion. This issue warrants further study using more comprehensive and validated tools to understand the levels and drivers of anxiety/stress self-reported by women attending facilities with abortion-related complications., (© 2022 World Health Organization; licensed by International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics. International Journal of Gynecology & Obstetrics published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics.)