Prevalence of antenatal depression and associated factors among pregnant women during COVID-19 pandemic in North Shewa zone, Amhara region, Ethiopia.

Background: Antenatal depression is a form of depression that occurs during pregnancy. This problem may worsen during the COVID-19 epidemic and may result in serious consequences for pregnant women, including depression and other multiple psychosocial problems. However, the prevalence of depression during the COVID-19 pandemic in pregnant women and its associated factors has not been studied in the study area, even in Ethiopia. Methods: An institution-based cross-sectional study was conducted among 422 pregnant women who were attending antenatal care in public health institutions in the North Shewa Zone, Ethiopia. The data were collected from May 1- June 30, 2021. A logistic regression model with adjusted odds ratio (AOR) and P-value < 0.05 at the 95% confidence interval was used to determine significantly associated factors. Results: The prevalence of antenatal depression among pregnant women during the COVID-19 pandemic was 34.1% (95% CI: 29.6-38.9). Divorced marital status (AOR = 7.52, CI: 2.707-20.911), husband's educational status "cannot read and write" (AOR = 4.05, CI: 1.834-8.962) and "can read and write without formal education" (AOR = 2.39, CI: 1.107-5.154) are statistically significant variables associated with depression among pregnant women during the COVID-19 pandemic. Conclusions: In this study, the prevalence of antenatal depression in pregnant women during the novel coronavirus pandemic was high. To reduce the level of depression in pregnant women, strategies have to be designed for the early detection of divorced pregnant women with inadequate social support and address enough information for pregnant women and their husbands about depression and COVID-19 during the pandemic.

Effect of decision to delivery interval on perinatal outcomes during emergency cesarean deliveries in Ethiopia: A prospective cohort study.

BACKGROUND: The National guidelines of most developed countries suggest a target of 30 minutes of the decision to delivery interval for emergency cesarean section. Such guidelines may not be feasible in poorly resourced countries and busy obstetric settings. It is generally accepted that the decision to delivery interval should be kept to the minimum time achievable to prevent adverse outcomes. Therefore, this study aimed to determine the average decision to delivery interval and its effect on perinatal outcomes in emergency cesarean section. METHODS: A prospective cohort study was conducted from May to July 2020 at Bahir Dar City Public Hospitals. A total of 182 participants were enrolled, and data were collected using a structured and pre-tested questionnaire. A systematic sampling technique was applied to select the study subjects. Data were cleaned and entered into Epi-Data version 4.6 and exported to SPSS version 25 software for analysis. Logistic regression analysis was performed to identify predictors of outcome variables, and variables with a p-value of <0.05 were considered statistically significant. RESULTS: The average decision to delivery interval was 43.73 ±10.55 minutes. Anesthesia time [AOR = 2.1, 95%CI = (1.3-8.4)], and category of emergency cesarean section [AOR = 3, 95% CI = (2.1-11.5)] were predictors of decision to delivery interval. The prolonged decision to delivery interval had a statistically significant association with composite adverse perinatal outcomes (odds ratio [OR] = 1.8, 95% confidence interval [CI] = (1.2-6.5). CONCLUSION: The average decision to delivery interval was longer than the recommended time. It should always be considered an important factor contributing to perinatal outcomes. Therefore, to prevent neonatal morbidity and mortality, a time-dependent action is needed.

Adverse Perinatal Outcomes Among Grand Multiparous and Low Multiparous Women and Its Associated Factors in North Shewa Zone Public Hospitals: The Role of Parity.

BACKGROUND: Adverse perinatal outcomes are the major cause of neonatal morbidity, mortality, and long-term physical and psychological consequences. Contradicting evidence across studies was reported about the impact of grand multiparity on adverse perinatal outcomes. Older literature reported increased incidence of perinatal complications in grand multiparas, but, recent reports failed to support this finding. In addition, there is a paucity of comparative studies on perinatal outcomes. Thus, the study aimed to compare the perinatal outcomes in grand multiparous (GM) and low multiparous (LM) women who give birth in North Shewa Zone Public Hospitals, Ethiopia, 2021. METHODS: A comparative cross-sectional study was done among 540 (180 GM and 360 LM) women from January 1 to March 30, 2021. The data were collected using a structured and pre-tested questionnaire through interviews and reviewing patient charts. SPSS version 25 was used for data analysis. The data were entered using Epi-Data version 4.6. The Hosmer-Lemeshow goodness-of-fit was applied to test for model fitness. The statistical significance level was declared at a p-value of ≤0.05. RESULTS: In this study, the prevalence of adverse perinatal outcomes was 14.1% (95% CI: 10.9-17.2). Stillbirth/IUFD (33.3%) and low APGAR score (60%) were frequently occurred complications in grand multiparas. Nevertheless, meconium aspiration (26%), admission to NICU (65.2%), macrosomia (61%), and prematurity (52.2%) were higher in low multiparous women. Age above 35 years (AOR (CI) = 2.61 (1.23-5.53)), rural residence (AOR (CI) = 8.31 (3.05-22.6)), being a government employee (AOR (CI) = 0.19 (0.05-0.69)), lack of antenatal care (AOR (CI) = 9.76 (3.03-31.5)), and previous pregnancy complications (AOR (CI) = 3.10 (1.63-5.90)) were significant predictors of adverse perinatal outcomes. However, parity did not show a statistically significant association with perinatal outcomes. CONCLUSION: Maternal age, residence, occupation, lack of antenatal care, and previous pregnancy complications were significant associates of perinatal outcome. There was no statistically significant difference in perinatal outcome between GM and LM women. Socio-economic development, good antenatal care, and early identification and treatment of complications are needed regardless of parity.