Pregnancy and childbirth during incarceration: A qualitative systematic review of lived experiences.

BACKGROUND: Incarcerated individuals who experience pregnancy or childbirth in correctional facilities face unique considerations for obstetric care and consequently are at greater risk of adverse maternal and fetal outcomes. OBJECTIVES: To characterise patient experiences regarding pregnancy and childbirth during incarceration via qualitative synthesis. SEARCH STRATEGY: Medline-OVID, EMBASE, CINAHL, Sociological Abstracts, Social Work Abstracts, Web of Science, Scopus and PsycInfo were systematically searched from inception to 24 December 2020. Supplementary searches were performed using the Scopus database. SELECTION CRITERIA: Only original, peer-reviewed literature was examined. Eligible studies were assessed using the Joanna Briggs Institute Critical Appraisal Checklist for Qualitative Research. RESULTS: After screening 4173 original database citations, 24 studies that met inclusion criteria were included and analysed via thematic analysis. The 24 studies included perspectives from 645 female patients who had experienced incarceration, 69 healthcare providers and 70 prison staff. Key patient-reported concerns for the well-being of pregnant individuals during incarceration included mental health challenges, dehumanisation of prenatal care and delivery, lack of privacy, stigma, psychological trauma, lack of emotional support and shackle usage during pregnancy and/or labour. The studies reported a lack of support for patients to access female correctional officers or guards, privacy during intimate examinations, timely medical care and support for breastfeeding. Above all, the psychological trauma of separation from one's newborn after birth was of utmost devastation. CONCLUSIONS: Our systematic review highlights the dire need for accountability and interventions to improve pregnancy and childbirth care for incarcerated individuals. TWEETABLE ABSTRACT: This systematic review describes lived experiences of pregnancy & childbirth during incarceration, including dehumanisation, psychological trauma, and use of shackles.

Intervention Scalability Assessment Tool: A decision support tool for health policy makers and implementers.

BACKGROUND: Promising health interventions tested in pilot studies will only achieve population-wide impact if they are implemented at scale across communities and health systems. Scaling up effective health interventions is vital as not doing so denies the community the most effective services and programmes. However, there remains a paucity of practical tools to assess the suitability of health interventions for scale-up. The Intervention Scalability Assessment Tool (ISAT) was developed to support policy-makers and practitioners to make systematic assessments of the suitability of health interventions for scale-up. METHODS: The ISAT was developed over three stages; the first stage involved a literature review to identify similar tools and frameworks that could be used to guide scalability assessments, and expert input to develop draft ISAT content. In the second stage, the draft ISAT tool was tested with end users. The third stage involved revising and re-testing the ISAT with end users to further refine the language and structure of the final ISAT. RESULTS: A variety of information and sources of evidence should be used to complete the ISAT. The ISAT consists of three parts. Part A: 'setting the scene' requires consideration of the context in which the intervention is being considered for scale-up and consists of five domains, as follows: (1) the problem; (2) the intervention; (3) strategic/political context; (4) evidence of effectiveness; and (5) intervention costs and benefits. Part B asks users to assess the potential implementation and scale-up requirements within five domains, namely (1) fidelity and adaptation; (2) reach and acceptability; (3) delivery setting and workforce; (4) implementation infrastructure; and (5) sustainability. Part C generates a graphical representation of the strengths and weaknesses of the readiness of the proposed intervention for scale-up. Users are also prompted for a recommendation as to whether the intervention (1) is recommended for scale-up, (2) is promising but needs further information before scaling up, or (3) does not yet merit scale-up. CONCLUSION: The ISAT fills an important gap in applied scalability assessment and can become a critical decision support tool for policy-makers and practitioners when selecting health interventions for scale-up. Although the ISAT is designed to be a health policy and practitioner tool, it can also be used by researchers in the design of research to fill important evidence gaps.

The psychological impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on fertility care: a qualitative systematic review.

The objective of this systematic review was to characterise psychological impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic related to fertility care. We conducted a systematic search following PRISMA guidelines of five databases (EMBASE, Medline-OVID, CINAHL, Web of Science, and PsycINFO) from March 17th 2020 to April 10th 2021. Citing articles were also hand-searched using Scopus. Of the 296 original citations, we included fifteen studies that encompassed 5,851 patients seeking fertility care. Eleven studies only included female participants, while four included both male and female participants. The fifteen studies unanimously concluded that the COVID-19 pandemic caused negative psychological impacts on fertility care. Risk factors included female sex, single marital state, previous ART failure, prior diagnoses of anxiety or depression, and length of time trying to conceive. Specific concerns included the worry and frustration of clinic closure, concerns about pregnancy and COVID-19 infection, and advancing age. There were contrasting beliefs on whether the decision to stop fertility treatments during the COVID-19 pandemic was justified. In addition, we found that many patients preferred to resume fertility treatment, despite anxieties regarding the risk of the COVID-19 virus. We recommend that fertility providers screen patients for risk factors for poor mental health and tailor support for virtual care.

Identifying the impacts of cannabis legalization on youth, and the responses that can be taken by public institutions

With the Canadian government set to introduce legislation in the spring of 2017 to legalize the use of cannabis, there is a need to plan for any health and social challenges associated with this policy change.(1) Though the Task Force on Cannabis Legalization and Regulation has produced a report outlining recommendations for the protection of public health and for minimizing harms, the exact policies and implementation strategies surrounding cannabis legalization remain unknown.(2) Furthermore, these policies may undergo revisions and refinements by provincial and municipal jurisdictions, making the timeframe until cannabis is legally available for public purchase and use unclear. Public institutions, such as colleges and universities, will need to address the health and social consequences of cannabis legalization on students, faculty and staff (e.g., through the creation of new guidelines or programming that targets cannabis users).

Supporting advances in quality in health systems

As noted by the Health Council of Canada in 2013, there are many definitions of quality in healthcare, but a common conception of it is "the degree to which health services for individuals and populations increase the likelihood of desired health outcomes and are consistent with current professional knowledge, as expressed through a set of dimensions of quality."(5) Many organizations focused on advancing quality in health systems (in Canada and internationally) also identify quality according to six aims, which relate to ensuring that care is safe, effective, patient-centred, timely, efficient and equitable.