ArticleMidwifery2023
Personal protective equipment: Analysis of supply among midwives during the COVID-19 pandemic in Peru.
Article in Midwifery, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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.
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.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 6 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo report the details of provision of personal protective equipment to midwives during the COVID-19 pandemic in Peru
methodsThis is a non-experimental, descriptive, cross-sectional study. An online survey of 679 midwives working at public healthcare centres was conducted via questionnaires. The following aspects were outlined: method of supply and frequency of delivery of personal protective equipment, type of personal protective equipment provided by the institution, and self-purchase. Furthermore, features of the midwives' workplace were described. For statistical analysis, absolute frequencies and relative proportions were used for categorical variables, and mean and standard deviation were used for numerical variables. MEASUREMENTS AND
findingsThe most important finding of this study is that a large proportion of midwives (66.6%) did not receive new personal protective equipment for each shift; 41.9% of midwives who received personal protective equipment during each shift exclusively provided services in the COVID-19 ward, whereas 27.6% did not. The least received supplies were of N95 respirator masks (41.7%) and disposable isolation suit gown (50.5%). Only a certain proportion of midwives (38.6%) were trained by their own institutions on the use of personal protective equipment. KEY
conclusionsThe provision of personal protective equipment to midwives and training on personal protective equipment were insufficient at all workplaces. Therefore, measures must be taken to increase the supply of this material to midwives who are essential workers in reproductive health.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.