Conectar
To consolidate healthcare professionals' insights about waterbirths and water immersion during labour.
Mixed studies review.
Seven electronic databases were searched from their inception dates till June 2023: PubMed, Embase, CINAHL, PsycINFO, Web of Science, Scopus, ProQuest Dissertations and Theses Global.
The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA) guidelines and Pluye and Hong's mixed studies review framework guided this review. The quality of included studies was evaluated using the Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool. Findings were synthesized using the convergent qualitative synthesis method, and results were thematically analysed using Braun and Clarke's framework.
Three main themes were identified from the 22 included studies: (1) believing in waterbirths, (2) opposing forces and (3) plotting the course ahead.
Healthcare professionals reported different views about waterbirths and water immersion practices; midwives were most likely to support these practices, followed by nurses and lastly, few physicians supported them. Reasons for opposing waterbirths include insufficient training and support from colleagues as well as concerns about work efficiency, waterbirth safety and litigation issues.
The available evidence suggests the need to provide waterbirth training for healthcare professionals, equip healthcare facilities with necessary waterbirth-related infrastructure and develop appropriate waterbirth policies/guidelines. Healthcare professionals could also consider providing antenatal waterbirth education to women and obtain women's feedback to improve current policies/guidelines. Future research should explore the views of different types of healthcare professionals from more diverse cultures.
The PRISMA guidelines.
Systematic review.
Globally, around one-third of the population has at least one long-term health condition that could be affected by the COVID-19 pandemic. Despite the fact that studies have revealed the direct impact of COVID-19 on healthcare provision and utilisation, the impact of the pandemic on the cost of chronic disease treatment and care from a patient perspective was scanty. So, the study aimed to determine the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on cost of chronic diseases treatment and care at public hospitals in Wallaga zones, Oromia Regional State, Ethiopia, from 1 August to 31 August 2020.
An institutional-based cross-sectional study design was used, and the sample size for the study (n=642) was determined using a single population mean formula. Data were collected using interviews and analysed using SPSS V.25. Descriptive statistics were performed, and the cost of follow-up care before and after the pandemic was compared using a related-samples Wilcoxon signed-rank test, declaring the level of significance of the median cost difference at p
A total of 642 patients were included in the study, of whom 605 (94.2%) responded to the interviews. There was a significant median cost difference (n=593, Z=5.05, p=0.001) between the cost of chronic diseases among follow-up patients during the pandemic and the costs incurred by these patients before the pandemic.
The cost of follow-up care among chronic disease patients during the COVID-19 pandemic was significantly higher compared with before the pandemic era. Therefore, healthcare providers should arrange special fee waiver mechanisms for chronic disease healthcare costs during such types of pandemics and provide the services at proximal health facilities.
FreshRSS 