Objectives The study aimed to assess the determinants of modern contraceptive method use among young women in Benin. Design A mixed-methods design. Setting and participants We used the Benin 2017–2018 Demographic and Health Survey datasets for quantitative analysis. Data collection was conducted using multiple-cluster sampling method and through household survey. Qualitative part was conducted in the city of Allada, one of the Fon cultural capitals in Benin. The participants were purposively selected. Outcomes Contraceptive prevalence rate, unmet need for modern method and percentage of demand satisfied by a modern method for currently married and sexually active unmarried women were measured in the quantitative part. Access barriers and utilisation of modern methods were assessed in the qualitative part. Results Overall, 8.5% (95% CI 7.7% to 9.5%) among young women ages 15–24 were using modern contraceptives and 13% (12.1% to 14.0%) among women ages 25 or more. Women 15–24 had a higher unmet need, and a lower demand satisfied by modern contraceptive methods compared with women ages 25 or more. 60.8% (56.9% to 64.7%) of all unmarried young women had unmet need for modern contraceptives. Young women were more likely to use male condoms which they obtain mainly from for-profit outlets, pharmacies and relatives. The factors associated with demand satisfied by a modern method were literacy, being unmarried, knowing a greater number of modern contraceptive methods and experiencing barriers in access to health services. On the other hand, the qualitative study found that barriers to using modern methods include community norms about pre-marital sexual intercourse, perceptions about young women’s fertility, spousal consent and the use of non-modern contraceptives. Conclusion Contraceptive use is low among young women in Benin. The use of modern contraceptives is influenced by sociodemographic factors and social norms. Appropriate interventions might promote comprehensive sexuality education, increase community engagement, provide youth-friendly services and address gender inequalities.

Background: Since the COVID-19 pandemic began, there have been concerns related to the preparedness of healthcare workers (HCWs). This study aimed to describe the level of awareness and preparedness of hospital HCWs at the time of the first wave. Methods: This multinational, multicenter, cross-sectional survey was conducted among hospital HCWs from February to May 2020. We used a hierarchical logistic regression multivariate analysis to adjust the influence of variables based on awareness and preparedness. We then used association rule mining to identify relationships between HCW confidence in handling suspected COVID-19 patients and prior COVID-19 case-management training. Results: We surveyed 24,653 HCWs from 371 hospitals across 57 countries and received 17,302 responses from 70.2% HCWs overall. The median COVID-19 preparedness score was 11.0 (interquartile range [IQR] = 6.0–14.0) and the median awareness score was 29.6 (IQR = 26.6–32.6). HCWs at COVID-19 designated facilities with previous outbreak experience, or HCWs who were trained for dealing with the SARS-CoV-2 outbreak, had significantly higher levels of preparedness and awareness (p<0.001). Association rule mining suggests that nurses and doctors who had a ’great-extent-of-confidence’ in handling suspected COVID-19 patients had participated in COVID-19 training courses. Male participants (mean difference = 0.34; 95% CI = 0.22, 0.46; p<0.001) and nurses (mean difference = 0.67; 95% CI = 0.53, 0.81; p<0.001) had higher preparedness scores compared to women participants and doctors. Interpretation: There was an unsurprising high level of awareness and preparedness among HCWs who participated in COVID-19 training courses. However, disparity existed along the lines of gender and type of HCW. It is unknown whether the difference in COVID-19 preparedness that we detected early in the pandemic may have translated into disproportionate SARS-CoV-2 burden of disease by gender or HCW type.

Introduction: Zambia is among the countries with the highest HIV burden and where youth remain disproportionally affected. Access to HIV testing and counselling (HTC) is a crucial step to ensure the reduction of HIV transmission. This study examines the changes that occurred between 2007 and 2018 in access to HTC, inequities in testing uptake, and determinants of HTC uptake among youth.Methods: We carried out repeated cross-sectional analyses using three Zambian Demographic and Health Surveys (2007, 2013–14, and 2018). We calculated the percentage of women and men ages 15–24 years old who were tested for HIV in the last 12 months. We analysed inequity in HTC coverage using indicators of absolute inequality. We performed bivariate and multivariate logistic regression analyses to identify predictors of HTC uptake in the last 12 months.Results: HIV testing uptake increased between 2007 and 2018, from 45 to 92% among pregnant women, 10 to 58% among non-pregnant women, and from 10 to 49% among men. By 2018 roughly 60% of youth tested in the past 12 months used a government health centre. Mobile clinics were the second most common source reaching up to 32% among adolescent boys by 2018. Multivariate analysis conducted among men and non-pregnant women showed higher odds of testing among 20–24 year-olds than adolescents (aOR = 1.55 [95%CI:1.30–1.84], among men; and aOR = 1.74 [1.40–2.15] among women). Among men, being circumcised (aOR = 1.57 [1.32–1.88]) and in a union (aOR = 2.44 [1.83–3.25]) were associated with increased odds of testing. For women greater odds of testing were associated with higher levels of education (aOR = 6.97 [2.82–17.19]). Education-based inequity was considerably widened among women than men by 2018.Conclusion: HTC uptake among Zambian youth improved considerably by 2018 and reached 65 and 49% tested in the last 12 months for women and men, respectively. However, achieving the goal of 95% envisioned by 2020 will require sustaining the success gained through government health centres, and scaling up the community-led approaches that have proven acceptable and effective in reaching young men and adolescent girls who are less easy to reach through the government facilities.

Background: While patients’ satisfaction is a barometer for healthcare quality, Myanmar did not do enough to assess the antenatal care (ANC) satisfaction. Objective: In this study, we aim to assess the satisfaction level of pregnant women with ANC services provided by a public hospital in Myanmar. Methods: A cross-sectional study was conducted with 125 women in the quantitative and 27 in the qualitative study at South Okkalapa Women and Children Hospital in Myanmar. Satisfaction was measured by using a five-point Likert scale with 25-item services. Statistical software SPSS version 16 was used for quantitative data analysis. Qualitative data were manually analyzed by thematic analysis. Results: The proportion of pregnant women who were satisfied with healthcare services ranged from 18% to 35%. Provider’s service yielded satisfaction ranging between 25% and 35%; meanwhile, facilities in the waiting area had the lowest mean score (2.78) for satisfaction. Laboratory service and waiting time at the antenatal clinic were major sources of dissatisfaction. Overall, 48% of the pregnant women were in high satisfaction with ANC services. Out of 25 items, cleanliness of ANC clinic, the process of ANC procedure, drug supply by the hospital, ventilation, and lighting in the waiting area, waiting time to see doctors, and working hours (availability of services) showed significant association with overall satisfaction. Conclusion: Nearly half of the pregnant women in the study were very satisfied with the total healthcare services they received. Facilities in the waiting area, laboratory service, and waiting time to see doctors were dissatisfied services and need to be upgraded.

Background: Evidenced-based practice is a key component of quality care. However, studies in the Philippines have identified gaps between evidence and actual maternity practices. This study aims to describe the practice of evidence-based intrapartum care and its associated factors, as well as exploring the perceptions of healthcare providers in a tertiary hospital in the Philippines. Methods: A mixed-methods study was conducted, which consisted of direct observation of intrapartum practices during the second and third stages, as well as semi-structured interviews and focus group discussions with care providers to determine their perceptions and reasoning behind decisions to perform episiotomy or fundal pressure. Univariate and multivariate logistic regression were used to analyse the relationship between observed practices and maternal, neonatal, and environmental factors. Qualitative data were parsed and categorised to identify themes related to the decision-making process. Results: A total of 170 deliveries were included. Recommended care, such as prophylactic use of oxytocin and controlled cord traction in the third stage, were applied in almost all the cases. However, harmful practices were also observed, such as intramuscular or intravenous oxytocin use in the second stage (14%) and lack of foetal heart rate monitoring (57%). Of primiparae, 92% received episiotomy and 31% of all deliveries received fundal pressure. Factors associated with the implementation of episiotomy included primipara (adjusted Odds Ratio [aOR] 62.3), duration of the second stage of more than 30 min (aOR 4.6), and assisted vaginal delivery (aOR 15.0). Factors associated with fundal pressure were primipara (aOR 3.0), augmentation with oxytocin (aOR 3.3), and assisted delivery (aOR 4.8). Healthcare providers believe that these practices can prevent laceration. The rate of obstetric anal sphincter injuries (OASIS) was 17%. Associated with OASIS were assisted delivery (aOR 6.0), baby weights of more than 3.5 kg (aOR 7.8), episiotomy (aOR 26.4), and fundal pressure (aOR 6.2). Conclusions: Our study found that potentially harmful practices are still conducted that contribute to the occurrence of OASIS. The perception of these practices is divergent with current evidence, and empirical knowledge has more influence. To improve practices the scientific evidence and its underlying basis should be understood among providers.