Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34961510›Full record

ArticleBMC health services research2021

Effects of the Covid-19 pandemic on maternity staff in 2020 - a scoping review.

Nadine Schmitt, Elke Mattern, Eva Cignacco, Gregor Seliger, Martina König-Bachmann, Sabine Striebich, Gertrud M Ayerle

Open access · goldAbstract readScoping Review
In one paragraph

Article in BMC health services research, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 36 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
36citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
11.0field-weighted citation impact, top 1% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

36 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 82 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors at 4 institutions in 3 countries.

Nadine Schmitt *Institute of Health and Nursing Science, Center for Health Sciences, Medical Faculty of Martin Luther University Halle-Wittenberg, Magdeburger Straße 8, 06112, Halle, Saale, Germany. nadine.schmitt@uk-halle.de.
Elke Mattern *Department of Applied Health Sciences, University of Applied Sciences Bochum, Bochum, Germany.
Eva CignaccoDepartment of Health Professions, Bern University of Applied Sciences, Bern, Switzerland.
Gregor SeligerDepartment of Obstetrics and Prenatal Medicine, Center of Fetal Surgery, University Hospital Halle (Saale) and Center for Reproductive Medicine and Andrology, Martin Luther University Halle-Wittenberg, Saale, Halle, Germany.
Martina König-BachmannHealth University of Applied Sciences Tyrol, Innsbruck, Austria.
Sabine StriebichInstitute of Health and Nursing Science, Center for Health Sciences, Medical Faculty of Martin Luther University Halle-Wittenberg, Magdeburger Straße 8, 06112, Halle, Saale, Germany.
Gertrud M AyerleInstitute of Health and Nursing Science, Center for Health Sciences, Medical Faculty of Martin Luther University Halle-Wittenberg, Magdeburger Straße 8, 06112, Halle, Saale, Germany.
Martin Luther University Halle-Wittenberg · DEBern University of Applied Sciences · CHBochum University of Applied Sciences · DEUniversity of Applied Sciences Tyrol · AT

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

In the spring of 2020, the SARS-CoV-2 virus caused the Covid-19 pandemic, bringing with it drastic changes and challenges for health systems and medical staff. Among the affected were obstetricians and midwives, whose close physical contact with pregnant women, women who recently gave birth, and their children was indispensable. In the obstetric setting, births cannot be postponed, and maternity staff had to adapt to assure obstetric safety while balancing evidence-based standards with the new challenges posed by the pandemic. This scoping review gives a comprehensive overview of the effecs the Covid-19 pandemic had on maternity staff. We followed the evidence-based approach described by Arksey & O'Malley: we searched several databases for English and German articles published between January 2020 and January 2021 that discussed or touched upon the effects the pandemic had on maternity staff in OECD countries and China. We found that structural challenges caused by the crisis and its subjective effects on maternity staff fell into two main topic areas. Structural challenges (the first main topic) were divided into five subtopics: staff shortages and restructuring; personal protective equipment and tests; switching to virtual communication; handling women with a positive SARS-CoV-2 infection; and excluding accompanying persons. The pandemic also strongly affected the staff's mental health (the second main topic.) Attempting to meet challenges posed by the pandemic while afraid of contamination, suffering overwork and exhaustion, and struggling to resolve ethical-moral dilemmas had severe negative subjective effects. Several studies indicated increased depression, anxiety, stress levels, and risk of post-traumatic stress symptoms, although the crisis also generated strong occupational solidarity. Care for pregnant, birthing, and breast-feeding women cannot be interrupted, even during a pandemic crisis that requires social distancing. Maternity staff sometimes had to abandon normal standards of obstetric care and were confronted with enormous challenges and structural adjustments that did not leave them unscathed: their mental health suffered considerably. Researchers should study maternity staff's experiences during the pandemic to prepare recommendations that will protect staff during future epidemics.

Indexed as

COVID-19MidwiferyChildFemaleHumansPandemicsParturitionPregnancySARS-CoV-2Covid-19 pandemicmaternity staffmidwifeobstetricianScoping review

Identifiers

PMID34961510
PMCPMC8710925
OpenAlexW4225782430

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.