Ebola viral disease’s interaction with pregnancy is poorly understood and remains a particular challenge for medical and para-medical personnel responding to an outbreak. This review article is written with the benefit of hindsight and experience from the largest recorded Ebola outbreak in history. We have provided a broad overview of the issues that arise for pregnant women and for the professionals treating them during an Ebola outbreak. The discussion focuses on the specifics of Ebola infection in pregnancy and possible management strategies, including the delivery of an infected woman. We have also discussed the wider challenges posed to pregnant women and their carers during an epidemic, including the identification of suspected Ebola-infected pregnant women and the impact of the disease on pre-existing health services. This paper outlines current practices in the field, as well as highlighting the gaps in our knowledge and the paramount need to protect the health-care workers directly involved in the management of pregnant women.

Background Maternal and perinatal death surveillance and response (MPDSR) is a system of identifying, analysing and learning lessons from such deaths in order to respond and prevent future deaths, and has been recommended by WHO and implemented in many low-and-middle income settings in recent years. However, there is limited documentation of experience with MPDSR in humanitarian settings. A meeting on MPDSR in humanitarian settings was convened by WHO, UNICEF, CDC and Save the Children, UNFPA and UNHCR on 17th–18th October 2019, informed by semi-structured interviews with a range of professionals, including expert attendees. Consultation findings Interviewees revealed significant obstacles to full implementation of the MPDSR process in humanitarian settings. Many obstacles were familiar to low resource settings in general but were amplified in the context of a humanitarian crisis, such as overburdened services, disincentives to reporting, accountability gaps, a blame approach, and politicisation of mortality. Factors more unique to humanitarian contexts included concerns about health worker security and moral distress. There are varying levels of institutionalisation and implementation capacity for MPDSR within humanitarian organisations. It is suggested that if poorly implemented, particularly with a punitive or blame approach, MPDSR may be counterproductive. Nevertheless, successes in MPDSR were described whereby the process led to concrete actions to prevent deaths, and where death reviews have led to improved understanding of complex and rectifiable contextual factors leading to deaths in humanitarian settings. Conclusions Despite the challenges, examples exist where the lessons learnt from MPDSR processes have led to improved access and quality of care in humanitarian contexts, including successful advocacy. An adapted approach is required to ensure feasibility, with varying implementation being possible in different phases of crises. There is a need for guidance on MPDSR in humanitarian contexts, and for greater documentation and learning from experiences.

Sierra Leone has the world’s highest estimated maternal mortality. Following the 2014–16 Ebola outbreak, we described health outcomes and health-seeking behaviour amongst pregnant women to inform health policy. In October 2016–January 2017, we conducted a sequential mixed-methods study in urban and rural areas of Tonkolili District comprising: household survey targeting women who had given birth since onset of the Ebola outbreak; structured interviews at rural sites investigating maternal deaths and reporting; and in-depth interviews (IDIs) targeting mothers, community leaders and health workers. We selected 30 clusters in each area: by random GPS points (urban) and by random village selection stratified by population size (rural). We collected data on health-seeking behaviours, barriers to healthcare, childbirth and outcomes using structured questionnaires. IDIs exploring topics identified through the survey were conducted with a purposive sample and analysed thematically. We surveyed 608 women and conducted 29 structured and 72 IDIs. Barriers, including costs of healthcare and physical inaccessibility of healthcare facilities, delayed or prevented 90% [95% confidence interval (CI): 80–95] (rural) vs 59% (95% CI: 48–68) (urban) pregnant women from receiving healthcare. Despite a general preference for biomedical care, 48% of rural and 31% of urban women gave birth outside of a health facility; of those, just 4% and 34%, respectively received skilled assistance. Women expressed mistrust of healthcare workers (HCWs) primarily due to payment demanded for ‘free’ healthcare. HCWs described lack of pay and poor conditions precluding provision of quality care. Twenty percent of women reported labour complications. Twenty-eight percent of villages had materials to record maternal deaths. Pregnant women faced important barriers to care, particularly in rural areas, leading to high preventable mortality and morbidity. Women wanted to access healthcare, but services available were often costly, unreachable and poor quality. We recommend urgent interventions, including health promotion, free healthcare access and strengthening rural services to address barriers to maternal healthcare.

Case management centres (CMCs) are part of the outbreak control plan for Ebola virus disease (EVD). A CMC in Sierra Leone had 33% (138/419) of primary admissions discharged as EVD negative (not a case). Fifteen of these were readmitted within 21 days, nine of which were EVD positive. All readmissions had contact with an Ebola case in the community in the previous 21 days indicating that the infection was likely acquired outside the CMC.

Reproductive health (RH) outcomes worsen during conflict and displacement, the causes of which are considered multi-factorial. In conflict and displacement settings, there are unique challenges in providing emergency obstetric care. There has been increased recognition of the need to provide adequate RH in emergency responses. Providing appropriate assistance to populations affected by conflict requires continued monitoring and evaluation, and the further development of life-saving interventions. Learning objectivesTo understand the effect of conflict on RH. To discuss the reasons why RH outcomes worsen during conflict and displacement.To consider the ways in which responses can be made during an emergency. Ethical issuesShould RH be considered a priority during an emergency response to conflict and disasters? Does offering RH assistance to conflict-affected populations put other local groups at a disadvantage? Will greater knowledge of how conflict and displacement affect RH help in understanding and treating refugees and asylum seekers in the UK?