Cunostinte, atitudini si comportamente ale femeilor insarcinate si ale femeilor avand copii sub 9 luni privind fumatul si renuntarea la fumat : studiu cantitativ realizat in Regiunea Bucuresti

Text in Romania

From evidence to tailored decision-making: a qualitative research of barriers and facilitating factors for the implementation of non-clinical interventions to reduce unnecessary caesarean section in Romania

Objective To improve understanding of the drivers of the increased caesarean section (CS) rate in Romania and to identify interventions to reverse this trend, as well as barriers and facilitators.Design A formative research study was conducted in Romania between November 2019 and February 2020 by means of in-depth interviews and focus-group discussions. Romanian decision-makers and high-level obstetricians preselected seven non-clinical interventions for consideration. Thematic content analysis was carried out.Participants 88 women and 26 healthcare providers and administrators.Settings Counties with higher and lower CS rates were selected for this research—namely Argeș, Bistrița-Năsăud, Brașov, Ialomița, Iași, Ilfov, Dolj and the capital city of București (Bucharest).Results Women wanted information, education and support. Obstetricians feared malpractice lawsuits; this was identified as a key reason for performing CSs. Most obstetrics and gynaecology physicians would oppose policies of mandatory second opinions, financial measures to equalise payments for vaginal and CS births and goal setting for CS rates. In-service training was identified as a need by obstetricians, midwives and nurses. In addition, relevant structural constraints were identified: perceived lower quality of care for vaginal birth, a lack of obstetricians with expertise in managing complicated vaginal births, a lack of anaesthesiologists and midwives, and family doctors not providing antenatal care. Finally, women expressed the need to ensure their rights to dignified and respectful healthcare through pregnancy and childbirth.Conclusion Consideration of the views, values and preferences of all stakeholders in a multifaceted action tailored to Romanian determinants is critical to address relevant determinants to reduce unnecessary CSs. Further studies should assess the effect of multifaceted interventions

Human Rights in Patient Care: A Practitioner Guide - Romania

Health systems can too often be places of punishment, coercion, and violations of basic rights—rather than places of treatment and care. In many cases, existing laws and tools that provide remedies are not adequately used to protect rights.This Practitioner Guide series presents practical how-to manuals for lawyers interested in taking cases around human rights in patient care. The manuals examine patient and provider rights and responsibilities, as well as procedures for protection through both the formal court system and alternative mechanisms in 10 countries.Each Practitioner Guide is country-specific, supplementing coverage of the international and regional framework with national standards and procedures in the following:ArmeniaGeorgiaKazakhstanKyrgyzstanMacedoniaMoldova (forthcoming)RomaniaRussia (forthcoming)SerbiaUkraineThis series is the first to systematically examine the application of constitutional, civil, and criminal laws; categorize them by right; and provide examples and practical tips. As such, the guides are useful for medical professionals, public health mangers, Ministries of Health and Justice personnel, patient advocacy groups, and patients themselves.Advancing Human Rights in Patient Care: The Law in Seven Transitional Countries is a compendium that supplements the practitioner guides. It provides the first comparative overview of legal norms, practice cannons, and procedures for addressing rights in health care in Armenia, Georgia, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Macedonia, Russia, and Ukraine.A Legal Fellow in Human Rights in each country is undertaking the updating of each guide and building the field of human rights in patient care through trainings and the development of materials, networks, and jurisprudence. Fellows are recent law graduates based at a local organization with expertise and an interest in expanding work in law, human rights, and patient care. To learn more about the fellowships, please visit health-rights.org

A comparison of health system responses to COVID-19 in Bulgaria, Croatia and Romania in 2020

This article compares the health system responses to COVID-19 in Bulgaria, Croatia and Romania from February 2020 until the end of 2020. It explores similarities and differences between the three countries, building primarily on the methodology and content compiled in the COVID-19 Health System Response Monitor (HSRM). We find that all three countries entered the COVID-19 crisis with common problems, including workforce shortages and underdeveloped and underutilized preventive and primary care. The countries reacted swiftly to the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic, declaring a state of emergency in March 2020 and setting up new governance mechanisms. The initial response benefited from a centralized approach and high levels of public trust but proved to be only a short-term solution. Over time, governance became dominated by political and economic considerations, communication to the public became contradictory, and levels of public trust declined dramatically. The three countries created additional bed capacity for the treatment of COVID-19 patients in the first wave, but a greater challenge was to ensure a sufficient supply of qualified health workers. New digital and remote tools for the provision of non-COVID-19 health services were introduced or used more widely, with an increase in telephone or online consultations and a simplification of administrative procedures. However, the provision and uptake of non-COVID-19 health services was still affected negatively by the pandemic. Overall, the COVID-19 pandemic has exposed pre-existing health system and governance challenges in the three countries, leading to a large number of preventable deaths