METHODS: Scopus, Web of Science, SAGE, and Ovid were systematically searched using the keywords "maternal", "COVID-19 pandemic", "maternal health service", and "maternal perception". Articles were eligible for inclusion if they were original articles, written in English, and published between January 1, 2020, and December 12, 2022. This review was performed based on the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines. Eligible articles were assessed using the Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool. Thematic analysis was used for data synthesis.
RESULTS: Of 2683 articles identified, 13 fulfilled the inclusion criteria and were included in the narrative synthesis. Five themes emerged regarding the determinants of maternal perception of antenatal healthcare services during the COVID-19 pandemic critical phase: lack of psychosocial support, poor maternal healthcare quality, poor opinion of virtual consultation, health structure adaptation failure to meet women's needs, and satisfaction with maternal health services.
CONCLUSION: Maternal perception, specifically pregnant women's psychosocial and maternal health needs, should be focused on the continuation of maternal care during the COVID-19 pandemic. It is critical to identify the maternal perception of maternal health services during the pandemic to ensure health service equity in the "new normal" future.
OBJECTIVE: This review aimed to identify self-care approaches, domains, and their effectiveness for a proper self-care educational guide package for women with GDM.
DESIGN: A systematic review using electronic literature databases published between January 2016 and December 2022 was conducted.
DATA SOURCES: Web of Science, Scopus, and Ovid databases were used.
REVIEW METHODS: This review utilized the PICO (Population, Intervention, Comparison, and Outcomes) framework to screen the retrieved articles for eligibility in which mothers with GDM, educational materials, standard practice or intervention, and effectiveness were considered the PICO, respectively. The CIPP (Context, Input, Process, Product) model served as a framework for adopting the education development model. Mixed methods appraisal tool was used for quality assessment. Data extraction and synthesis without meta-analysis were presented as evidence tables.
RESULTS: A total of 19 articles on GDM were included in the final analysis (16 Intervention studies, two qualitative studies, and one mixed-methods study). Four broad domains emerged from the analysis: 1) information or knowledge of GDM, 2) monitoring of blood glucose levels, 3) practice of healthy lifestyles, and 4) other non-specific activities. The majority of the articles employed a face-to-face approach in executing the educational group sessions, and most studies disclosed their positive effects on GDM management. Other methods of evaluating intervention effectiveness were described as improved self-care behavior, increased satisfaction score, enhanced self-efficacy, good glucose control, and better pregnancy outcome.
CONCLUSION: Knowledge or information about GDM, healthy diet, and exercise or physical activity was found to be the most applied domains of intervention. Framework domains based on the present review can be used in the future development of any interventional program for GDM women in enhancing health information reaching the targeted group in promoting self-efficacy.
PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42021229610.
OBJECTIVE: To determine the prevalence of vaccine hesitancy towards childhood immunisation amongst urban pregnant mothers and the associated socio-demographic factors.
METHODS: A cross-sectional study was conducted among 1081 women who received antenatal care at a teaching hospital in Kuala Lumpur. Vaccine hesitancy was assessed using the Parent Attitudes about Childhood Vaccines (PACV) Survey in both English and validated Malay versions. The sociodemographic data of the mothers and their partners, source of vaccine information and reasons for hesitancy were analysed.
RESULTS: Eighty-six (8.0%) pregnant mothers were vaccine hesitant. Ethnicity, religion, number of children, educational level and employment status were significantly associated with vaccine hesitancy. Multivariable analysis showed that a low level of education was the most significant risk factor (p
METHODS: A cross-sectional study was conducted over 6 months in the two main tertiary centres for CAH patients in Malaysia. Participants including 59 female-raised CAH patients (mean age ± SD = 16.3 ± 4.2 years, range 10-28 years) compared to 57 age-matched female diabetic patients (mean age ± SD = 16.5 ± 3.4 years, range 10-26 years). Socio-demographic and medical profiles was obtained through semi-structured interviews. HRQOL of participants were evaluated utilising validated, Malay translated questionnaires which were age appropriate: Pediatric Quality of Life Inventory (PedsQL v4.0) scales for Child (8-12) and Adolescent (13-18) and Medical Outcome Survey 36-item Short Form version. These were then compared to the diabetic controls.
RESULTS: The CAH participants consisted of children (ages 10-12 years, n = 12), adolescents (ages 13-17 years, n = 29) and adults (≥ 18 years, n = 18). The majority were Malays (64.4%) and had salt-wasting CAH (67.8%). There were no significant differences between the total mean score of the HRQOL of the combined children and adolescents CAH group (total mean score ± SD = 81.6 ± 17.9, 95% CI = 75.6-87.6) when compared to age-matched diabetic patients (total mean score ± SD = 80.8 ± 11.0, 95% CI = 77.0-84.5, P = 0.81, effect size = 0.05); no significant difference between the adult CAH and diabetic controls in the physical [median score (IQR) CAH vs diabetics; 49.3 (11.4) vs. 50.2 (6.1), P = 0.60, effect size = 0.09] and the mental composite scores [median score (IQR) CAH vs. diabetics; 47.8 (14.1) vs. 50.0 (10.8), P = 0.93, effect size = 0.01].
CONCLUSIONS: The HRQOL of the Malaysian CAH cohort were comparable to the diabetic controls.