Despite growing recognition of neglectful, abusive, and disrespectful treatment of women during childbirth in health facilities, there is no consensus at a global level on how these occurrences are defined and measured. This mixed-methods systematic review aims to synthesize qualitative and quantitative evidence on the mistreatment of women during childbirth in health facilities to inform the development of an evidence-based typology of the phenomenon. We searched PubMed, CINAHL, and Embase databases and grey literature using a predetermined search strategy to identify qualitative, quantitative, and mixed-methods studies on the mistreatment of women during childbirth across all geographical and income-level settings. We used a thematic synthesis approach to synthesize the qualitative evidence and assessed the confidence in the qualitative review findings using the CERQual approach. In total, 65 studies were included from 34 countries. Qualitative findings were organized under seven domains: (1) physical abuse, (2) sexual abuse, (3) verbal abuse, (4) stigma and discrimination, (5) failure to meet professional standards of care, (6) poor rapport between women and providers, and (7) health system conditions and constraints. Due to high heterogeneity of the quantitative data, we were unable to conduct a meta-analysis; instead, we present descriptions of study characteristics, outcome measures, and results. Additional themes identified in the quantitative studies are integrated into the typology. This systematic review presents a comprehensive, evidence-based typology of the mistreatment of women during childbirth in health facilities, and demonstrates that mistreatment can occur at the level of interaction between the woman and provider, as well as through systemic failures at the health facility and health system levels. We propose this typology be adopted to describe the phenomenon and be used to develop measurement tools and inform future research, programs, and interventions. In 2000, as Millennium Development Goal (MDG) 5, world leaders set a target of reducing the global maternal mortality ratio—the number of deaths among women caused by pregnancy- or childbirth-related complications (maternal deaths) per 100,000 live births—to a quarter of its 1990 level by 2015. MDG 5, along with seven other MDGs, was designed to alleviate extreme poverty by 2015. Although progress towards MDG 5 (and towards the other MDGs) has been good, in 2013, the global maternal mortality ratio was still 210, well above the target of 95. In that year alone, nearly 300,000 women, 99% them living in low- and middle-income countries, died from pregnancy- or childbirth-related complications. Most of these maternal deaths were caused by hemorrhage (severe bleeding) after childbirth, post-delivery infections, obstructed (difficult) labor, or blood pressure disorders during pregnancy. These conditions are largely preventable if women have access to good-quality reproductive health services and if trained birth attendants are present during childbirth. The rates of skilled birth attendance and of facility-based childbirth have risen in resource-limited countries over the past two decades, but almost a third of women in these countries still deliver without a skilled birth attendant. Among the numerous obstacles likely to prevent further increases in the proportion of women delivering in a health facility is women’s fear of mistreatment during delivery. Women need to be sure that they will receive dignified and respectful care during childbirth. Unfortunately, recent studies have indicated that women are often exposed to neglectful, abusive, and disrespectful care (care that local consensus regards as humiliating or undignified) during childbirth in health facilities. There is currently no consensus about how to define and measure the mistreatment of women during childbirth, so here, the researchers develop an evidence-based typology of the mistreatment of women during childbirth in health facilities worldwide by combining information identified in a mixed-methods systematic review. A typology is a systematic classification of objects or behaviors that have characteristics in common. A mixed-methods systematic review identifies all the qualitative and quantitative research on a given topic using predefined criteria. Qualitative research investigates how people feel about a medical intervention; quantitative research provides numerical data about interventions. The researchers identified 65 (mainly qualitative) studies undertaken in 34 countries that investigated the mistreatment of women during childbirth across all geographical and income-level settings. They analyzed the evidence presented in these studies using thematic analysis, an approach that identifies and organizes patterns (themes) within qualitative data. Based on this analysis, the researchers developed a typology of the mistreatment of women during childbirth consisting of seven domains (categories). These domains were physical abuse (for example, slapping or pinching during delivery); sexual abuse; verbal abuse such as harsh or rude language; stigma and discrimination based on age, ethnicity, socioeconomic status, or medical conditions; failure to meet professional standards of care (for example, neglect during delivery); poor rapport between women and providers, including ineffective communication, lack of supportive care, and loss of autonomy; and health system conditions and constraints such as the lack of the resources needed to provide women with privacy. These findings illustrate how women’s experiences of childbirth worldwide are marred by mistreatment. Moreover, they indicate that, although the mistreatment of women during delivery in health facilities often occurs at the level of the interaction between women and healthcare providers, systemic failures at the levels of the health facility and the health system also...

High-quality obstetric delivery in a health facility reduces maternal and perinatal morbidity and mortality. This systematic review synthesizes qualitative evidence related to the facilitators and barriers to delivering at health facilities in low- and middle-income countries. We aim to provide a useful framework for better understanding how various factors influence the decision-making process and the ultimate location of delivery at a facility or elsewhere. We conducted a qualitative evidence synthesis using a thematic analysis. Searches were conducted in PubMed, CINAHL and gray literature databases. Study quality was evaluated using the CASP checklist. The confidence in the findings was assessed using the CERQual method. Thirty-four studies from 17 countries were included. Findings were organized under four broad themes: (1) perceptions of pregnancy and childbirth; (2) influence of sociocultural context and care experiences; (3) resource availability and access; (4) perceptions of quality of care. Key barriers to facility-based delivery include traditional and familial influences, distance to the facility, cost of delivery, and low perceived quality of care and fear of discrimination during facility-based delivery. The emphasis placed on increasing facility-based deliveries by public health entities has led women and their families to believe that childbirth has become medicalized and dehumanized. When faced with the prospect of facility birth, women in low- and middle-income countries may fear various undesirable procedures, and may prefer to deliver at home with a traditional birth attendant. Given the abundant reports of disrespectful and abusive obstetric care highlighted by this synthesis, future research should focus on achieving respectful, non-abusive, and high-quality obstetric care for all women. Funding for this project was provided by The United States Agency for International Development (USAID) and the UNDP/UNFPA/UNICEF/WHO/World Bank Special Programme of Research, Development and Research Training in Human Reproduction, Department of Reproductive Health and Research, World Health Organization.

Background: Higher education attainment is linked to improved health and employment outcomes but the impact of university students’ experiences of menstruation on their education is less clear. The objective of this review was to synthesise qualitative and quantitative research on university students’ menstrual experiences and educational impacts.Methods: Eligible studies were identified through systematic searching across eight peer-reviewed databases, websites for menstrual health organisations, grey literature databases, and reference lists of included studies. Eligible studies must have reported on at least one of the antecedents or components of menstrual experience outlined in the integrated model of menstrual experience in relation to university students or reported on the impact of their menstrual experiences on their education. Study characteristics and findings were extracted, analysed and presented as a narrative synthesis. The quality of evidence was assessed with the Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool. This study is registered on PROSPERO, number CRD42020178470.Results: Eighty-three studies were eligible for inclusion. Most studies (n = 74; 89%) were quantitative and the highest proportion of studies were conducted in lower-middle-income countries (n = 31; 37%). Self-reported dysmenorrhea, other physical and emotional menstrual-related symptoms, and menstrual stigma contributed to negative menstrual experiences among female students. Very few studies considered the menstrual experiences of non-binary and transgender menstruating students, and culturally diverse students. Dysmenorrhea contributed to university absenteeism, impaired participation and concentration, and declining academic performance. Inadequate sanitation facilities for menstrual management and challenges containing menstruation also negatively impacted education.Conclusions: Female university students’ experiences of menstruation can negatively impact their education, highlighting the need for program and policy responses at university to improve students’ wellbeing and educational engagement. Further research on the menstrual experiences of gender diverse, migrant and international students is needed as there is insufficient evidence to date.

Objective: Qualitative studies have described girls’ varying levels of confidence in managing their menstruation, with greater confidence hypothesized to positively impact health, education, and social participation outcomes. Yet, measurement of this and other psychosocial components of adolescent girls’ menstrual experiences has been weak in global health research, in part due to a dearth of appropriate psychometric tools. We describe the development and validation of the Self-Efficacy in Addressing Menstrual Needs Scale (SAMNS-26). Methods: We conducted nine focus group discussions with girls in schools in rural and urban Bangladesh to identify tasks involved in menstrual self-care. This informed our creation of an initial pool of 50 items, which were reviewed by menstrual health experts and refined through 21 cognitive interviews with schoolgirls. Using a self-administered survey, we administered 34 refined items plus additional validation measures to a random sample of 381 post-menarcheal girls (ages 9–17) and retested a subsample of 42 girls two weeks later. We examined the measure’s dimensionality using exploratory factor analysis and assessed internal consistency, temporal stability, and construct validity. Results: Exploratory factor analysis suggested a 26-item scale comprising three correlated sub-scales: the 17-item Menstrual Hygiene Preparation and Maintenance (α = 0.86), the 5-item Menstrual Pain Management (α = 0.87), and the 4-item Executing Stigmatized Tasks (α = 0.77). Sub-scales exhibited good temporal stability. SAMNS-26 scores correlated negatively with measures of anxiety, and girls who preferred to stay at home during their periods had lower SAMNS-26 scores than those who did not. Conclusion: The SAMNS-26 provides a reliable measure of a schoolgirl’s confidence in her capabilities to address her menstrual needs. There is initial evidence to support the measure’s construct validity in the Bangladesh context as indicated by its relationships with other factors in its theorized nomological network. The tool enables incorporation of self-efficacy into multivariate models for exploring the relationships among antecedents to menstrual experiences and hypothesized impacts on health, wellbeing, and education attainment. Further testing of the tool is recommended to strengthen evidence of its validity in additional contexts.