[GRADE: from grading the evidence to developing recommendations. A description of the system and a proposal regarding the transferability of the results of clinical research to clinical practice]

Clinical systematic reviews - a brief overview

OBJECTIVE

Systematic reviews answer research questions through a defined methodology. It is a complex task and multiple articles need to be referred to acquire wide range of required knowledge to conduct a systematic review. The aim of this article is to bring the process into a single paper.

METHOD

The statistical concepts and sequence of steps to conduct a systematic review or a meta-analysis are examined by authors.

RESULTS

The process of conducting a clinical systematic review is described in seven manageable steps in this article. Each step is explained with examples to understand the method evidently.

CONCLUSION

A complex process of conducting a systematic review is presented simply in a single article.

The efficacy and safety of anamorelin for patients with cancer-related anorexia/cachexia syndrome: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Cancer-related anorexia/cachexia syndrome (CACS) is characterized by anorexia and loss of body weight. Evidence is insufficient to strongly endorse any pharmacologic agent for the treatment of CACS. In this systematic review, we assessed the efficacy of oral anamorelin treatment for patients with CACS. On July 6, 2022, we systematically searched the following databases for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of adults with CACS comparing oral anamorelin versus placebo: CENTRAL, PubMed, EMBASE, and ICHUSHI. The primary outcomes were total body weight (TBW), patient-reported quality of life (QOL), and adverse events (AEs). Secondary outcomes included lean body mass (LBM), overall survival (OS), non-dominant hand grip strength (HGS), and appetite. We included seven RCTs with a total of 1944 CACS patients. Anamorelin significantly increased TBW (mean difference (MD) 1.73, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.34-2.13, p < 0.00001), LBM (MD 1.06, 95% CI 0.30-1.81, p = 0.006), and QOL (standardized mean difference (SMD) 0.16, 95% CI 0.04-0.27, p = 0.006) compared with placebo without a significant difference in all AEs, severe AEs, OS, HGS or appetite. Anamorelin may be an effective treatment for CACS patients; however, further studies are needed to confirm the efficacy and safety of this drug.

Antenatal Magnesium Sulfate and adverse gastrointestinal outcomes in Preterm infants-a systematic review and meta-analysis

INTRODUCTION

To evaluate the effect of antenatal magnesium sulfate (MgSO4) on mortality and morbidity outcomes related to the gastrointestinal system (GI) in preterm infants.

METHODS

Data sources: A systematic literature search was conducted in November 2022. PubMed, CINAHL Plus with Full Text (EBSCOhost), Embase (Elsevier), and CENTRAL (Ovid) were searched. There were 6695 references. After deduplication, 4332 remained. Ninety-nine full-text articles were assessed and forty four articles were included in the final analysis.

STUDY ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA

Randomized or quasi-randomized clinical trials and observational studies that evaluated at least one of the pre-specified outcomes were included. Preterm infants whose mothers were given antenatal MgSO4 were included and whose mothers did not receive antenatal MgSO4 were the comparators. The main outcomes and measures were: Necrotizing enterocolitis (NEC) (stage ≥ 2), surgical NEC, spontaneous intestinal perforation (SIP), feeding intolerance, time to reach full feeds, and GI-associated mortality.

STUDY APPRAISAL AND SYNTHESIS METHODS

A random-effects model meta-analysis was performed to yield pooled OR and its 95% CI for each outcome due to expected heterogeneity in the studies. The analysis for each predefined outcome was performed separately for adjusted and unadjusted comparisons. All included studies were assessed for methodological quality. The risk of bias was assessed using elements of the Cochrane Collaboration's tool 2.0 and the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and non-randomized studies (NRS), respectively. The study findings were reported as per PRISMA guidelines.

RESULTS

A total of thirty-eight NRS and six RCTs involving 51,466 preterm infants were included in the final analysis. There were no increased odds of stage ≥2 NEC, (NRS : n = 45,524, OR: 0.95; 95% CI: 0.84-1.08, I2- 5% & RCT's: n = 5205 OR: 1.00; 95% CI: 0.89-1.12, I2- 0%), SIP (n = 34,186, OR: 1.22, 95% CI: 0.94-1.58, I2-30%), feeding intolerance (n = 414, OR: 1.06, 95% CI: 0.64-1.76, I2-12%) in infants exposed to antenatal MgSO4. On the contrary, the incidence of surgical NEC was significantly lower in MgSO4 exposure infants (n = 29,506 OR:0.74; 95% CI: 0.62-0.90, ARR: 0.47%). Studies assessing the effect on GI-related mortality were limited to make any conceivable conclusion. The certainty of evidence (CoE) for all outcomes was adjudged as 'very low' as per GRADE.

CONCLUSION

Antenatal magnesium sulfate did not increase the incidence of gastrointestinal-related morbidities or mortality in preterm infants. With the current evidence concerns, regarding the adverse effects of MgSO4 administration leading to NEC/SIP or GI-related mortality in preterm infants should not be a hurdle in its routine use in antenatal mothers.

Impact of community-based interventions on out-of-hospital cardiac arrest outcomes: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Survival following out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA) remains low, typically less than 10%. Bystander cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) and bystander-AED use have been shown to improve survival by up to fourfold in individual studies. Numerous community-based interventions have been implemented worldwide in an effort to enhance rates of bystander-CPR, bystander-AED use, and improve OHCA survival. This systematic review and meta-analysis aims to evaluate the effect of such interventions on OHCA outcomes. Medline and Embase were systematically searched from inception through July 2021 for studies describing the implementation and effect of one or more community-based interventions targeting OHCA outcomes. Two reviewers screened articles, extracted data, and evaluated study quality using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale. For each outcome, data were pooled using random-effects meta-analysis. Of the 2481 studies identified, 16 met inclusion criteria. All included studies were observational. They reported a total of 1,081,040 OHCAs across 11 countries. The most common interventions included community-based CPR training (n = 12), community-based AED training (n = 9), and dispatcher-assisted CPR (n = 8). Health system interventions (hospital or paramedical services) were also described in 11 of the included studies. Evidence certainty among all outcomes was low or very low according to GRADE criteria. On meta-analysis, community-based interventions with and without health system interventions were consistently associated with improved OCHA outcomes: rates of bystander-CPR, bystander-AED use, survival, and survival with a favorable neurological outcome. Bystander CPR-14 studies showed a significant increase in post-intervention bystander-CPR rates (n = 285 752; OR 2.26 [1.74, 2.94]; I2 = 99%, and bystander AED use (n = 37 882; OR 2.08 [1.44, 3.01]; I2 = 54%) and durvival-10 studies, pooling survival to hospital discharge and survival to 30 days (n = 79 206; OR 1.59 [1.20, 2.10]; I2 = 95%. The results provide foundational support for the efficacy of community-based interventions in enhancing OHCA outcomes. These findings inform our recommendation that communities, regions, and countries should implement community-based interventions in their pre-hospital strategy for OHCA. Further research is needed to identify which specific intervention types are most effective.

Dietary and Nutraceutical Interventions as an Adjunct to Non-Surgical Periodontal Therapy-A Systematic Review

The aim of this study was to conduct a systematic literature review on the influence of dietary and nutraceutical interventions as an adjunct to non-surgical periodontal therapy (NSPT). A literature search for randomized, controlled clinical trials (RCTs) was performed in PubMed, the Cochrane Library, and the Web of Science. Trial inclusion criteria included the application of a defined nutritional intervention (food, beverages, or supplements) adjunctive to NSPT compared to NSPT alone with at least one measured periodontal parameter (pocket probing depths (PPD) or clinical attachment level (CAL)). Of 462 search results, 20 clinical trials relating to periodontitis and nutritional interventions were identified, of which, in total, 14 studies could be included. Eleven studies examined supplements containing lycopene, folate, chicory extract, juice powder, micronutrients and plant extracts, omega-3 fatty acids, vitamin E, or vitamin D. Three studies examined food-based interventions (kiwifruit, green or oolong tea). Due to limited information on within-group differences in the studies, results were descriptively analyzed. A significant positive effect on periodontal parameters (PPD, bleeding on probing) was found for vitamin E, chicory extract, juice powder, green tea, and oolong tea. Heterogeneous effects were found for lycopene, folate, omega-3 fatty acids, and vitamin D. No effects on PPD were found for adjunct kiwifruit (in combination with NSPT). Risk of bias via RoB2 revealed a low risk of bias with some concerns. There was a high heterogeneity in the type of nutritional interventions. The adjunctive use of various supplements and green/oolong tea led to positive and significant effects of the nutritional interventions on clinical periodontal outcome parameters. In the context of non-surgical periodontal therapy, an adjunctive intake of micronutrients, omega-3 fatty acids, green/oolong tea, and polyphenols and flavonoids could be beneficial. Long-term clinical studies with full data reports (especially within-group differences) are needed for conducting a meta-analysis.

Clinician- versus caregiver-rated scales as outcome measures of repetitive-restricted behaviors in clinical trials of autism: A systematic review and meta-analysis

The agreement between treatment effects measured by clinician- and caregiver-ratings of repetitive-restricted behaviors (RRBs) is important for clinical practice and research but is still unclear. Therefore, we conducted a post-hoc meta-analysis of placebo-controlled randomized-controlled trials (RCTs) investigating pharmacological and dietary-supplement treatments for autism that reported both clinician- and caregiver-ratings of RRBs. Treatment effects between medications and placebo were quantified with standardized mean differences (SMDs). The agreement between clinician- and caregiver-rated SMDs was investigated with an intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) and random-effects meta-analysis of their difference (Δg). A meta-regression investigated the association between clinician (dependent) and caregiver-rated SMDs (independent variable). Certainty in the evidence was evaluated using the GRADE approach. We identified 15 eligible placebo-controlled RCTs with 1567 participants, from which 13 included children/adolescents and 9 reported data for the pair of the clinician-rated Yale-Brown Obsessive Compulsive Scale (YBOCS) and the caregiver-rated Aberrant Behavior Checklist-Stereotypic Behavior (ABC-S). There was on average a good agreement between clinician- and caregiver-rated SMDs (ICC=0.84, 95% confidence intervals [0.55, 0.95]), no clear difference between them (Δg=0.08, 95%CI[-0.06, 0.21], 95% prediction intervals [-0.16, 0.31]), and the beta of the meta-regression was 0.62, 95%CI[0.27, 0.97]. The certainty of the evidence was low due to concerns in imprecision and inconsistency. Our analysis showed on average a good agreement between clinician- and caregiver-rated treatment effects in RRBs, yet discordance could be expected in future RCTs, given the wide prediction intervals. It is also not certain that these results could be generalizable to other rating scales and intervention modalities. Ethics committee approval: Not applicable as a meta-analysis of previously published studies..

The National COVID-19 Clinical Evidence Taskforce: pregnancy and perinatal guidelines

INTRODUCTION

Pregnant women are at higher risk of severe illness from coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) than non-pregnant women of a similar age. Early in the COVID-19 pandemic, it was clear that evidenced-based guidance was needed, and that it would need to be updated rapidly. The National COVID-19 Clinical Evidence Taskforce provided a resource to guide care for people with COVID-19, including during pregnancy. Care for pregnant and breastfeeding women and their babies was included as a priority when the Taskforce was set up, with a Pregnancy and Perinatal Care Panel convened to guide clinical practice.

MAIN RECOMMENDATIONS

As of May 2022, the Taskforce has made seven specific recommendations on care for pregnant women and those who have recently given birth. This includes supporting usual practices for the mode of birth, umbilical cord clamping, skin-to-skin contact, breastfeeding, rooming-in, and using antenatal corticosteroids and magnesium sulfate as clinically indicated. There are 11 recommendations for COVID-19-specific treatments, including conditional recommendations for using remdesivir, tocilizumab and sotrovimab. Finally, there are recommendations not to use several disease-modifying treatments for the treatment of COVID-19, including hydroxychloroquine and ivermectin. The recommendations are continually updated to reflect new evidence, and the most up-to-date guidance is available online (https://covid19evidence.net.au).

CHANGES IN MANAGEMENT RESULTING FROM THE GUIDELINES

The National COVID-19 Clinical Evidence Taskforce has been a critical component of the infrastructure to support Australian maternity care providers during the COVID-19 pandemic. The Taskforce has shown that a rapid living guidelines approach is feasible and acceptable.

Stem cell transplantation for induction of remission in medically refractory Crohn's disease

BACKGROUND

Crohn's disease (CD) is an inflammatory bowel disease that causes inflammation and stricture, of any part of the mucosa and the gut wall. It forms skip lesions, sparing the areas in between the affected parts of the gastrointestinal tract. Crohn's disease could have one of three complications; fistula, intestinal obstruction due to stricture, or gastrointestinal inflammation presenting as severe diarrhoea. Stem cell therapy (SCT) is an innovative treatment that has been recently used in CD. The exact role of SCT in CD is still unclear. Stem cells modify the immunity of the patients or act as a "reset tool" for the immune system as in the case of systemically-injected stem cells, or regenerate the affected area of necrotic and inflammatory tissue as in the case of local injection into the lesion. Stem cells are a wide variety of cells including pluripotent stem cells or differentiated stem cells. The hazards range from rejection to symptomatic manifestations as fever or increase infection.  OBJECTIVES: The objective of this Cochrane systematic review is to assess the effects of stem cell transplantation compared to standard of care alone or with placebo on efficacy and safety outcomes in patients with refractory CD.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched MEDLINE, Embase, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), and clinical trial registries (Clinicaltrials.gov, World Health Organization-International Clinical Trials Registry Platform WHO ICTRP) from inception to 19 March 2021, without any language, publication year, or publication status restrictions. In addition, we searched references of included studies and review articles for further references. An update of the published studies was done during the writing of the review.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included only randomised controlled trials (RCTs) that assessed the effectiveness and safety of SCT in refractory CD versus standard care alone (control) or with placebo.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors (SEN and SFA) independently screened the studies retrieved from the search results for inclusion, extracted data and assessed the risk of bias. Any disagreement was resolved through a consensus between the authors. We used standard methodological procedures expected by Cochrane.

MAIN RESULTS

We conducted our search on 19 March 2021 and identified 639 records. We added two records by a manual search of the published reviews on the topic to a total of 641 records. The Covidence program removed 125 duplicates making a total of 516 reports. Two review authors (SEN and SFA) screened titles and abstracts and excluded 451 records with the remaining 65 for full-text records screened independently by the two authors; only 18 studies were considered for inclusion.  We included seven RCTs with a total of 442 participants for the meta-analysis. The intervention group included 234 patients, and the control group included 208 patients. Nine trials are ongoing and, two abstracts are awaiting classification. All patients in the control and intervention groups received the standard therapy for CD. Only three studies used blinding methods for the control group in the form of a placebo, with one study of the three stated that the blinding method was inefficient. The patients and personnel were aware of the intervention in the rest of the four studies as they were open-label trials. However, the effect of unblinding was balanced by the low risk of detection bias in five of the included studies. The evidence is uncertain about the effect of SCT on achieving clinical remission as compared to control/placebo (risk ratio (RR) 1.88, 95% Confidence Interval (CI) 0.80 to 4.41; 3 studies; low-certainty evidence). The evidence is very uncertain about the effect of SCT on achieving Crohn's Disease Activity Index (CDAI) <150 at 24 weeks compared to control (RR1.02 95% CI 0.67 to 1.56; 4 studies; very-low certainty evidence). SCT is likely to achieve fistula closure as compared to the control/placebo both in the short term (RR 1.48, 95% CI 1.12 to 1.96); low-certainty evidence) and in the long term (RR 1.42, 95% CI 1.09 to 1.87; 4 studies; low-certainty evidence) follow-up. The evidence is very uncertain about the effect of SCT to cause no difference in the number of total adverse events as compared to the control/placebo (RR 0.99, 95% CI [0.88 to  1.13); 4 studies; very-low-certainty evidence). However, SCT is likely to increase the number of serious adverse events as compared to the control/placebo (RR 1.22, 95% CI 0.88 to 1.67; 7 studies; low-certainty evidence). The evidence is very uncertain about the effect of SCT to decrease the withdrawal due to adverse events as compared to the control/placebo (RR 0.78, 95% CI 0.32 to 1.89; 3 studies; very-low certainty evidence). Funding by pharmaceutical companies was found in three studies, with one including more than 50% of our studied population.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

SCT shows an uncertain effect on clinical remission with low certainty of evidence. SCT shows an uncertain effect on CDAI score to reach <150 after 24 weeks of treatment, with very low certainty evidence. SCT shows beneficial effects on fistula-closure during short and long-term follow-up with low-certainty evidence in both outcomes. There was no change in the total number of adverse events with SCT as compared to control, with very low certainty evidence. While there was a moderate effect on increasing the number of serious adverse events in the SCT group, as compared to the control with low-certainty evidence. Withdrawal due to adverse events was slightly higher in the control group with very low certainty evidence. All the participants were refractory to standard medical treatment, but the number of participants was small, this may limit the generalizability of the results. Further research is needed for validation. More objective outcomes are needed in the assessment of stem cell effectiveness in the treatment of Crohn's disease, especially the intestinal CD subtype; with standardization of the dose, methods of stem cell preparation, route of administration, and inclusion criteria to the studies to achieve clear results.

Clinical care of children and adolescents with COVID-19: recommendations from the National COVID-19 Clinical Evidence Taskforce

INTRODUCTION

The epidemiology and clinical manifestations of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection are different in children and adolescents compared with adults. Although coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) appears to be less common in children, with milder disease overall, severe complications may occur, including paediatric inflammatory multisystem syndrome (PIMS-TS). Recognising the distinct needs of this population, the National COVID-19 Clinical Evidence Taskforce formed a Paediatric and Adolescent Care Panel to provide living guidelines for Australian clinicians to manage children and adolescents with COVID-19 and COVID-19 complications. Living guidelines mean that these evidence-based recommendations are updated in near real time to give reliable, contemporaneous advice to Australian clinicians providing paediatric care.

MAIN RECOMMENDATIONS

To date, the Taskforce has made 20 specific recommendations for children and adolescents, including definitions of disease severity, recommendations for therapy, respiratory support, and venous thromboembolism prophylaxis for COVID-19 and for the management of PIMS-TS.

CHANGES IN MANAGEMENT AS A RESULT OF THE GUIDELINES

The Taskforce currently recommends corticosteroids as first line treatment for acute COVID-19 in children and adolescents who require oxygen. Tocilizumab could be considered, and remdesivir should not be administered routinely in this population. Non-invasive ventilation or high flow nasal cannulae should be considered in children and adolescents with hypoxaemia or respiratory distress unresponsive to low flow oxygen if appropriate infection control measures can be used. Children and adolescents with PIMS-TS should be managed by a multidisciplinary team. Intravenous immunoglobulin and corticosteroids, with concomitant aspirin and thromboprophylaxis, should be considered for the treatment of PIMS-TS. The latest updates and full recommendations are available at www.covid19evidence.net.au.

Zinc supplementation for improving pregnancy and infant outcome

BACKGROUND

It has been suggested that low serum zinc levels may be associated with suboptimal outcomes of pregnancy, such as prolonged labour, atonic postpartum haemorrhage, pregnancy-induced hypertension, preterm labour and post-term pregnancies, although these associations have not yet been established. This is an update of a review first published in 1997 and subsequently updated in 2007, 2012 and 2015.

OBJECTIVES

1. To compare the effects on maternal, fetal, neonatal and infant outcomes in healthy pregnant women receiving zinc supplementation versus no zinc supplementation, or placebo. 2. To assess the above outcomes in a subgroup analysis reviewing studies performed in women who are, or are likely to be, zinc-deficient.

SEARCH METHODS

For this update, we searched Cochrane Pregnancy and Childbirth's Trials Register, ClinicalTrials.gov, the WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP) (3 July 2020), and reference lists of retrieved studies.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised trials of zinc supplementation versus no zinc supplementation or placebo administration during pregnancy, earlier than 27 weeks' gestation. We excluded quasi-randomised controlled trials. We intended to include studies presented only as abstracts, if they provided enough information or, if necessary, by contacting authors to analyse them against our criteria; we did not find any such studies.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Three review authors applied the study selection criteria, assessed trial quality and extracted data. When necessary, we contacted study authors for additional information. We assessed the certainty of the evidence using GRADE.

MAIN RESULTS

For this update, we included 25 randomised controlled trials (RCTs) involving over 18,000 women and their babies. The overall risk of bias was low in half of the studies. The evidence suggests that zinc supplementation may result in little or no difference in reducing preterm births (risk ratio (RR) 0.87, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.74 to 1.03; 21 studies, 9851 participants; low-certainty evidence). Further, zinc supplementation may make little or no difference in reducing the risk of stillbirth (RR 1.22, 95% CI 0.80 to 1.88; 7 studies, 3295 participants; low-certainty evidence), or perinatal deaths (RR 1.10, 95% CI 0.81 to 1.51; 2 studies, 2489 participants; low-certainty evidence). It is unclear whether zinc supplementation reduces neonatal death, because the certainty of the evidence is very low. Finally, for other birth outcomes, zinc supplementation may make little or no difference to mean birthweight (MD 13.83, 95% CI -15.81 to 43.46; 22 studies, 7977 participants; low-certainty evidence), and probably makes little or no difference in reducing the risk of low birthweight (RR 0.94, 95% CI 0.79 to 1.13; 17 studies, 7399 participants; moderate-certainty evidence) and small-for-gestational age babies when compared to placebo or no zinc supplementation (RR 1.02, 95% CI 0.92 to 1.12; 9 studies, 5330 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). We did not conduct subgroup analyses, as very few studies used normal zinc populations.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

There is not enough evidence that zinc supplementation during pregnancy results in improvements in maternal or neonatal outcomes. Future research to address ways of improving the overall nutritional status of pregnant women, particularly in low-income regions, and not looking at zinc in isolation, should be an urgent priority.

Coronavirus-associated kidney outcomes in COVID-19, SARS, and MERS: a meta-analysis and systematic review

OBJECTIVES

A meta-analysis and systematic review was conducted on kidney-related outcomes of three recent pandemics: SARS, MERS, and COVID-19, which were associated with potentially fatal acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS).

METHODS

A search of all published studies until 16 June 2020 was performed. The incidence/prevalence and mortality risk of acute and chronic renal events were evaluated, virus prevalence, and mortality in preexisting hemodialysis patients was investigated.

RESULTS

A total of 58 eligible studies involving 13452 hospitalized patients with three types of coronavirus infection were included. The reported incidence of new-onset acute kidney injury (AKI) was 12.5% (95% CI: 7.6%-18.3%). AKI significantly increased the mortality risk (OR = 5.75, 95% CI 3.75-8.77, p < 0.00001) in patients with coronavirus infection. The overall rate of urgent-start kidney replacement therapy (urgent-start KRT) use was 8.9% (95% CI: 5.0%-13.8%) and those who received urgent-start KRT had a higher risk of mortality (OR = 3.43, 95% CI 2.02-5.85, p < 0.00001). Patients with known chronic kidney disease (CKD) had a higher mortality than those without CKD (OR = 1.97, 95% CI 1.56-2.49, p < 0.00001). The incidence of coronavirus infection was 7.7% (95% CI: 4.9%-11.1%) in prevalent hemodialysis patients with an overall mortality rate of 26.2% (95% CI: 20.6%-32.6%).

CONCLUSIONS

Primary kidney involvement is common with coronavirus infection and is associated with significantly increased mortality. The recognition of AKI, CKD, and urgent-start KRT as major risk factors for mortality in coronavirus-infected patients are important steps in reducing future mortality and long-term morbidity in hospitalized patients with coronavirus infection.

Erythropoietin plus iron versus control treatment including placebo or iron for preoperative anaemic adults undergoing non-cardiac surgery

BACKGROUND

Approximately 30% of adults undergoing non-cardiac surgery suffer from preoperative anaemia. Preoperative anaemia is a risk factor for mortality and adverse outcomes in different surgical specialties and is frequently the reason for blood transfusion. The most common causes are renal, chronic diseases, and iron deficiency. International guidelines recommend that the cause of anaemia guide preoperative anaemia treatment. Recombinant human erythropoietin (rHuEPO) with iron supplementation has frequently been used to increase preoperative haemoglobin concentrations in patients in order to avoid the need for perioperative allogeneic red blood cell (RBC) transfusion.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the efficacy of preoperative rHuEPO therapy (subcutaneous or parenteral) with iron (enteral or parenteral) in reducing the need for allogeneic RBC transfusions in preoperatively anaemic adults undergoing non-cardiac surgery.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched CENTRAL, Ovid MEDLINE(R), Ovid Embase, ISI Web of Science: SCI-EXPANDED and CPCI-S, and clinical trial registries WHO ICTRP and ClinicalTrials.gov on 29 August 2019.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included all randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that compared preoperative rHuEPO + iron therapy to control treatment (placebo, no treatment, or standard of care with or without iron) for preoperatively anaemic adults undergoing non-cardiac surgery. We used the World Health Organization (WHO) definition of anaemia: haemoglobin concentration (g/dL) less than 13 g/dL for males, and 12 g/dL for non-pregnant females (decision of inclusion based on mean haemoglobin concentration). We defined two subgroups of rHuEPO dosage: 'low' for 150 to 300 international units (IU)/kg body weight, and 'high' for 500 to 600 IU/kg body weight.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors collected data from the included studies. Our primary outcome was the need for RBC transfusion (no autologous transfusion, fresh frozen plasma or platelets), measured in transfused participants during surgery (intraoperative) and up to five days after surgery. Secondary outcomes of interest were: haemoglobin concentration (directly before surgery), number of RBC units (where one unit contains 250 to 450 mL) transfused per participant (intraoperative and up to five days after surgery), mortality (within 30 days after surgery), length of hospital stay, and adverse events (e.g. renal dysfunction, thromboembolism, hypertension, allergic reaction, headache, fever, constipation).

MAIN RESULTS

Most of the included trials were in orthopaedic, gastrointestinal, and gynaecological surgery and included participants with mild and moderate preoperative anaemia (haemoglobin from 10 to 12 g/dL). The duration of preoperative rHuEPO treatment varied across the trials, ranging from once a week to daily or a 5-to-10-day period, and in one trial preoperative rHuEPO was given on the morning of surgery and for five days postoperatively. We included 12 trials (participants = 1880) in the quantitative analysis of the need for RBC transfusion following preoperative treatment with rHuEPO + iron to correct preoperative anaemia in non-cardiac surgery; two studies were multiarmed trials with two different dose regimens. Preoperative rHuEPO + iron given to anaemic adults reduced the need RBC transfusion (risk ratio (RR) 0.55, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.38 to 0.80; participants = 1880; studies = 12; I² = 84%; moderate-quality evidence due to inconsistency). This analysis suggests that on average, the combined administration of rHuEPO + iron will mean 231 fewer individuals will need transfusion for every 1000 individuals compared to the control group. Preoperative high-dose rHuEPO + iron given to anaemic adults increased the haemoglobin concentration (mean difference (MD) 1.87 g/dL, 95% CI 1.26 to 2.49; participants = 852; studies = 3; I² = 89%; low-quality evidence due to inconsistency and risk of bias) but not low-dose rHuEPO + iron (MD 0.11 g/dL, 95% CI -0.46 to 0.69; participants = 334; studies = 4; I² = 69%; low-quality evidence due to inconsistency and risk of bias). There was probably little or no difference in the number of RBC units when rHuEPO + iron was given preoperatively (MD -0.09, 95% CI -0.23 to 0.05; participants = 1420; studies = 6; I² = 2%; moderate-quality evidence due to imprecision).  There was probably little or no difference in the risk of mortality within 30 days of surgery (RR 1.19, 95% CI 0.39 to 3.63; participants = 230; studies = 2; I² = 0%; moderate-quality evidence due to imprecision) or of adverse events including local rash, fever, constipation, or transient hypertension (RR 0.93, 95% CI 0.68 to 1.28; participants = 1722; studies = 10; I² = 0%; moderate-quality evidence due to imprecision). The administration of rHuEPO + iron before non-cardiac surgery did not clearly reduce the length of hospital stay of preoperative anaemic adults (MD -1.07, 95% CI -4.12 to 1.98; participants = 293; studies = 3; I² = 87%; low-quality evidence due to inconsistency and imprecision).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Moderate-quality evidence suggests that preoperative rHuEPO + iron therapy for anaemic adults prior to non-cardiac surgery reduces the need for RBC transfusion and, when given at higher doses, increases the haemoglobin concentration preoperatively. The administration of rHuEPO + iron treatment did not decrease the mean number of units of RBC transfused per patient. There were no important differences in the risk of adverse events or mortality within 30 days, nor in length of hospital stay. Further, well-designed, adequately powered RCTs are required to estimate the impact of this combined treatment more precisely.

Skin preparation for preventing infection following caesarean section

BACKGROUND

The risk of maternal mortality and morbidity is higher after caesarean section than for vaginal birth. With increasing rates of caesarean section, it is important to minimise risks to the mother as much as possible. This review focused on different skin preparations to prevent infection. This is an update of a review last published in 2018.

OBJECTIVES

To compare the effects of different antiseptic agents, different methods of application, or different forms of antiseptic used for preoperative skin preparation for preventing postcaesarean infection.

SEARCH METHODS

For this update, we searched Cochrane Pregnancy and Childbirth's Trials Register, ClinicalTrials.gov, the WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP) (9 July 2019), and reference lists of retrieved studies.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised and quasi-randomised trials, evaluating any type of preoperative skin preparation (agents, methods or forms). We included studies presented only as abstracts, if there was enough information to assess risk of bias. Comparisons of interest in this review were between: different antiseptic agents (e.g. alcohol, povidone iodine), different methods of antiseptic application (e.g. scrub, paint, drape), different forms of antiseptic (e.g. powder, liquid), and also between different packages of skin preparation including a mix of agents and methods, such as a plastic incisional drape, which may or may not be impregnated with antiseptic agents. We mainly focused on the comparison between different agents, with and without the use of drapes. Only studies involving the preparation of the incision area were included. This review did not cover studies of preoperative handwashing by the surgical team or preoperative bathing.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Three review authors independently assessed all potential studies for inclusion, assessed risk of bias, extracted the data and checked data for accuracy. We assessed the certainty of the evidence using the GRADE approach.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 13 individually-randomised controlled trials (RCTs), with a total of 6938 women who were undergoing caesarean section. Twelve trials (6916 women) contributed data to this review. The trial dates ranged from 1983 to 2016. Six trials were conducted in the USA, and the remainder in India, Egypt, Nigeria, South Africa, France, Denmark, and Indonesia. The included studies were broadly at low risk of bias for most domains, although high risk of detection bias raised some specific concerns in a number of studies. Length of stay was only reported in one comparison. Antiseptic agents Parachlorometaxylenol with iodine versus iodine alone We are uncertain whether parachlorometaxylenol with iodine made any difference to the incidence of surgical site infection (risk ratio (RR) 0.33, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.04 to 2.99; 1 trial, 50 women), or endometritis (RR 0.88, 95% CI 0.56 to 1.38; 1 trial, 50 women) when compared with iodine alone, because the certainty of the evidence was very low. Adverse events (maternal or neonatal) were not reported. Chlorhexidine gluconate versus povidone iodine Moderate-certainty evidence suggested that chlorhexidine gluconate, when compared with povidone iodine, probably slightly reduces the incidence of surgical site infection (RR 0.72, 95% CI 0.58 to 0.91; 8 trials, 4323 women). This effect was still present in a sensitivity analysis after removing four trials at high risk of bias for outcome assessment (RR 0.87, 95% CI 0.62 to 1.23; 4 trials, 2037 women). Low-certainty evidence indicated that chlorhexidine gluconate, when compared with povidone iodine, may make little or no difference to the incidence of endometritis (RR 0.95, 95% CI 0.49 to 1.86; 3 trials, 2484 women). It is uncertain whether chlorhexidine gluconate reduces maternal skin irritation or allergic skin reaction (RR 0.64, 95% CI 0.28 to 1.46; 3 trials, 1926 women; very low certainty evidence). One small study (60 women) reported reduced bacterial growth at 18 hours after caesarean section for women who had chlorhexidine gluconate preparation compared with women who had povidone iodine preparation (RR 0.23, 95% CI 0.07 to 0.70). Methods Drape versus no drape This comparison investigated the use of drape versus no drape, following preparation of the skin with antiseptics. Low-certainty evidence suggested that using a drape before surgery compared with no drape, may make little or no difference to the incidence of surgical site infection (RR 1.29, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.97 to 1.71; 3 trials, 1373 women), and probably makes little or no difference to the length of stay in the hospital (mean difference (MD) 0.10 days, 95% CI -0.27 to 0.46; 1 trial, 603 women; moderate-certainty evidence). One trial compared an alcohol scrub and iodophor drape with a five-minute iodophor scrub only, and reported no surgical site infection in either group (79 women, very-low certainty evidence). We were uncertain whether the combination of a one-minute alcohol scrub and a drape reduced the incidence of metritis when compared with a five-minute scrub, because the certainty of the evidence was very low (RR 1.62, 95% CI 0.29 to 9.16; 1 trial, 79 women). The studies did not report on adverse events (maternal or neonatal).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Moderate-certainty evidence suggests that preparing the skin with chlorhexidine gluconate before caesarean section is probably slightly more effective at reducing the incidence of surgical site infection in comparison to povidone iodine. For other outcomes examined there was insufficient evidence available from the included RCTs. Most of the evidence in this review was deemed to be very low or low certainty. This means that for most findings, our confidence in any evidence of an intervention effect is limited, and indicates the need for more high-quality research. Therefore, it is not yet clear what sort of skin preparation may be most effective for preventing postcaesarean surgical site infection, or for reducing other undesirable outcomes for mother and baby. Well-designed RCTs, with larger sample sizes are needed. High-priority questions include comparing types of antiseptic (especially iodine versus chlorhexidine), and application methods (scrubbing, swabbing, or draping). We found two studies that are ongoing; we will incorporate the results of these studies in future updates of this review.

What is the impact of the adjunctive use of omega-3 fatty acids in the treatment of periodontitis? A systematic review and meta-analysis

Background

Host modulation therapy has gained increasing interest in periodontal therapy. This systematic review aimed to evaluate the effects of adjunctive administration of omega-3 fatty acids in periodontal therapy.

Methods

The search strategy was determined using the “patient, intervention, comparison, outcome” model. A resulting search term was generated using keywords, and the databases were fed. The databases PubMed, Cochrane Library, and LIVIVO were used. Studies were selected for the literature review based on previously specified inclusion and exclusion criteria. Randomized, controlled, blinded studies, longitudinal studies, comparative studies, and clinical studies were included in the review. Additionally, they used omega-3 fatty acids in the treatment of periodontitis. The following parameters were observed: clinical attachment level (CAL), probing depth (PD), gingival index (GI), bleeding on probing (BOP) and plaque index (PI). A meta-analysis was performed for PD and CAL after 3 months. By analyzing the risk of bias, the validity of the results of each study was demonstrated, and its credibility and quality were assessed.

Results

Of 14 studies found, six were included. The results showed a significant reduction in PD and CAL compared to that in the placebo groups in four out of six involved studies, which was confirmed by the meta-analysis. In one study, a significant reduction in BOP was found. GI was significantly reduced in three included studies. PI also showed a significant reduction in three studies.

Conclusions

Within the study limitations, omega-3 fatty acids appear to have a positive effect on periodontal wound healing with regard to reduction in CAL and PD. Based on the results, patients receiving periodontal treatment might benefit from nutritional counseling.

[Evidence of compression therapy with special consideration of medical adaptive compression systems]

For several decades, compression therapy, which is associated with few side effects, has been a basis for the conservative treatment of patients with phlebological and lymphological diseases. For the practical implementation of compression therapy, many different materials are available, some with system-specific advantages and disadvantages. Medical adaptive compression systems (MAK) are still a relatively new treatment option in Germany. Apart from the very good practical experience in clinical everyday life, the compilation of the scientific evidence of compression therapy also shows that the scientific data situation is significantly better than for many other medical areas, especially for the treatment of patients with venous diseases. It is important to note that compression therapy must reliably guarantee adequate compression pressure. If these conditions are met, it can be assumed on the basis of the currently available data that the clinical effectiveness of the different compression systems is comparably good. These aspects have now also been well tested for MAK, so that these analogies can be drawn. Therapists today can therefore choose between different, very effective therapy options and take individual factors, patient wishes and economic aspects into account when making their selection.

Treatment of newly diagnosed glioblastoma in the elderly: a network meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

A glioblastoma is a fatal type of brain tumour for which the standard of care is maximum surgical resection followed by chemoradiotherapy, when possible. Age is an important consideration in this disease, as older age is associated with shorter survival and a higher risk of treatment-related toxicity.

OBJECTIVES

To determine the most effective and best-tolerated approaches for the treatment of elderly people with newly diagnosed glioblastoma. To summarise current evidence for the incremental resource use, utilities, costs and cost-effectiveness associated with these approaches.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched electronic databases including the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE and Embase to 3 April 2019, and the NHS Economic Evaluation Database (EED) up to database closure. We handsearched clinical trial registries and selected neuro-oncology society conference proceedings from the past five years.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised trials (RCTs) of treatments for glioblastoma in elderly people. We defined 'elderly' as 70+ years but included studies defining 'elderly' as over 65+ years if so reported.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We used standard Cochrane methods for study selection and data extraction. Where sufficient data were available, treatment options were compared in a network meta-analysis (NMA) using Stata software (version 15.1). For outcomes with insufficient data for NMA, pairwise meta-analysis were conducted in RevMan. The GRADE approach was used to grade the evidence.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 12 RCTs involving approximately 1818 participants. Six were conducted exclusively among elderly people (either defined as 65 years or older or 70 years or older) with newly diagnosed glioblastoma, the other six reported data for an elderly subgroup among a broader age range of participants. Most participants were capable of self-care. Study quality was commonly undermined by lack of outcome assessor blinding and attrition. NMA was only possible for overall survival; other analyses were pair-wise meta-analyses or narrative syntheses. Seven trials contributed to the NMA for overall survival, with interventions including supportive care only (one trial arm); hypofractionated radiotherapy (RT40; four trial arms); standard radiotherapy (RT60; five trial arms); temozolomide (TMZ; three trial arms); chemoradiotherapy (CRT; three trial arms); bevacizumab with chemoradiotherapy (BEV_CRT; one trial arm); and bevacizumab with radiotherapy (BEV_RT). Compared with supportive care only, NMA evidence suggested that all treatments apart from BEV_RT prolonged survival to some extent. Overall survival High-certainty evidence shows that CRT prolongs overall survival (OS) compared with RT40 (hazard ratio (HR) 0.67, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.56 to 0.80) and low-certainty evidence suggests that CRT may prolong overall survival compared with TMZ (TMZ versus CRT: HR 1.42, 95% CI 1.01 to 1.98). Low-certainty evidence also suggests that adding BEV to CRT may make little or no difference (BEV_CRT versus CRT: HR 0.83, 95% CrI 0.48 to 1.44). We could not compare the survival effects of CRT with different radiotherapy fractionation schedules (60 Gy/30 fractions and 40 Gy/15 fractions) due to a lack of data. When treatments were ranked according to their effects on OS, CRT ranked higher than TMZ, RT and supportive care only, with the latter ranked last. BEV plus RT was the only treatment for which there was no clear benefit in OS over supportive care only.   One trial comparing tumour treating fields (TTF) plus adjuvant chemotherapy (TTF_AC) with adjuvant chemotherapy alone could not be included in the NMA as participants were randomised after receiving concomitant chemoradiotherapy, not before. Findings from the trial suggest that the intervention probably improves overall survival in this selected patient population. We were unable to perform NMA for other outcomes due to insufficient data. Pairwise analyses were conducted for the following. Quality of life Moderate-certainty narrative evidence suggests that overall, there may be little difference in QoL between TMZ and RT, except for discomfort from communication deficits, which are probably more common with RT (1 study, 306 participants, P = 0.002). Data on QoL for other comparisons were sparse, partly due to high dropout rates, and the certainty of the evidence tended to be low or very low. Progression-free survival High-certainty evidence shows that CRT increases time to disease progression compared with RT40 (HR 0.50, 95% CI 0.41 to 0.61); moderate-certainty evidence suggests that RT60 probably increases time to disease progression compared with supportive care only (HR 0.28, 95% CI 0.17 to 0.46), and that BEV_RT probably increases time to disease progression compared with RT40 alone (HR 0.46, 95% CI 0.27 to 0.78). Evidence for other treatment comparisons was of low- or very low-certainty. Severe adverse events Moderate-certainty evidence suggests that TMZ probably increases the risk of grade 3+ thromboembolic events compared with RT60 (risk ratio (RR) 2.74, 95% CI 1.26 to 5.94; participants = 373; studies = 1) and also the risk of grade 3+ neutropenia, lymphopenia, and thrombocytopenia. Moderate-certainty evidence also suggests that CRT probably increases the risk of grade 3+ neutropenia, leucopenia and thrombocytopenia compared with hypofractionated RT alone. Adding BEV to CRT probably increases the risk of thromboembolism (RR 16.63, 95% CI 1.00 to 275.42; moderate-certainty evidence). Economic evidence There is a paucity of economic evidence regarding the management of newly diagnosed glioblastoma in the elderly. Only one economic evaluation on two short course radiotherapy regimen (25 Gy versus 40 Gy) was identified and its findings were considered unreliable.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

For elderly people with glioblastoma who are self-caring, evidence suggests that CRT prolongs survival compared with RT and may prolong overall survival compared with TMZ alone. For those undergoing RT or TMZ therapy, there is probably little difference in QoL overall. Systemic anti-cancer treatments TMZ and BEV carry a higher risk of severe haematological and thromboembolic events and CRT is probably associated with a higher risk of these events. Current evidence provides little justification for using BEV in elderly patients outside a clinical trial setting. Whilst the novel TTF device appears promising, evidence on QoL and tolerability is needed in an elderly population. QoL and economic assessments of CRT versus TMZ and RT are needed. More high-quality economic evaluations are needed, in which a broader scope of costs (both direct and indirect) and outcomes should be included.

Antibiotics for asymptomatic bacteriuria in pregnancy

BACKGROUND

Asymptomatic bacteriuria is a bacterial infection of the urine without any of the typical symptoms that are associated with a urinary infection, and occurs in 2% to 15% of pregnancies. If left untreated, up to 30% of mothers will develop acute pyelonephritis. Asymptomatic bacteriuria has been associated with low birthweight and preterm birth. This is an update of a review last published in 2015.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effect of antibiotic treatment for asymptomatic bacteriuria on the development of pyelonephritis and the risk of low birthweight and preterm birth.

SEARCH METHODS

For this update, we searched the Cochrane Pregnancy and Childbirth's Trials Register, ClinicalTrials.gov, the WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP) on 4 November 2018, and reference lists of retrieved studies.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials (RCT) comparing antibiotic treatment with placebo or no treatment in pregnant women with asymptomatic bacteriuria found on antenatal screening. Trials using a cluster-RCT design and quasi-RCTs were eligible for inclusion, as were trials published in abstract or letter form, but cross-over studies were not.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently assessed trials for inclusion and risk of bias, extracted data, and checked for accuracy. We assessed the quality of the evidence using the GRADE approach.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 15 studies, involving over 2000 women. Antibiotic treatment compared with placebo or no treatment may reduce the incidence of pyelonephritis (average risk ratio (RR) 0.24, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.13 to 0.41; 12 studies, 2017 women; low-certainty evidence). Antibiotic treatment may be associated with a reduction in the incidence of preterm birth (RR 0.34, 95% CI 0.13 to 0.88; 3 studies, 327 women; low-certainty evidence), and low birthweight babies (average RR 0.64, 95% CI 0.45 to 0.93; 6 studies, 1437 babies; low-certainty evidence). There may be a reduction in persistent bacteriuria at the time of delivery (average RR 0.30, 95% CI 0.18 to 0.53; 4 studies; 596 women), but the results were inconclusive for serious adverse neonatal outcomes (average RR 0.64, 95% CI 0.23 to 1.79, 3 studies; 549 babies). There were very limited data on which to estimate the effect of antibiotics on other infant outcomes, and maternal adverse effects were rarely described. Overall, we judged only one trial at low risk of bias across all domains; the other 14 studies were assessed as high or unclear risk of bias. Many studies lacked an adequate description of methods, and we could only judge the risk of bias as unclear, but in most studies, we assessed at least one domain at high risk of bias. We assessed the quality of the evidence for the three primary outcomes with GRADE software, and found low-certainty evidence for pyelonephritis, preterm birth, and birthweight less than 2500 g.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Antibiotic treatment may be effective in reducing the risk of pyelonephritis in pregnancy, but our confidence in the effect estimate is limited given the low certainty of the evidence. There may be a reduction in preterm birth and low birthweight with antibiotic treatment, consistent with theories about the role of infection in adverse pregnancy outcomes, but again, the confidence in the effect is limited given the low certainty of the evidence. Research implications identified in this review include the need for an up-to-date cost-effectiveness evaluation of diagnostic algorithms, and more evidence to learn whether there is a low-risk group of women who are unlikely to benefit from treatment of asymptomatic bacteriuria.

TNF-α blockers for the treatment of Kawasaki disease in children

BACKGROUND

Kawasaki disease (KD) is an acute inflammatory vasculitis (inflammation of the blood vessels) that mainly affects children between six months and five years of age. The vasculitis primarily impacts medium-sized blood vessels, especially in the coronary arteries. In most children, intravenous immunoglobulin (IVIG) and aspirin therapy rapidly reduce inflammatory markers, fever, and other clinical symptoms. However, approximately 15% to 20% of children receiving the initial IVIG infusion show persistent or recurrent fever and are classified as IVIG-resistant. Tumor necrosis factor-alpha (TNF-α) is an inflammatory cytokine that plays an important role in host defence against infections and in immune responses. Several studies have established that blocking TNF-α is critical for obtaining anti-inflammatory effects in children with KD, thus, there is a need to identify benefits and risks of TNF-α blockers for the treatment of KD.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the efficacy and safety of using TNF-α blockers (i.e. infliximab and etanercept) to treat children with Kawasaki disease.

SEARCH METHODS

The Cochrane Vascular Information Specialist searched the Cochrane Vascular Specialised Register, CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase and CINAHL databases, the World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform and ClinicalTrials.gov trials register to 19 September 2018. We also undertook reference checking of grey literature.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) that compared TNF-α blockers (i.e. infliximab and etanercept) to placebo or other drugs (including retreatment with IVIG) in children with KD, reported in abstract or full-text.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently applied the study selection criteria, assessed risk of bias and extracted data. When necessary, we contacted study authors for additional information. We used GRADE to assess the certainty of the evidence.

MAIN RESULTS

We included five trials from 14 reports, with a total of 494 participants. All included trials were individual RCTs that examined the effect of TNF-α blockers for KD.Five trials (with 494 participants) reported the incidence of treatment resistance. TNF-α blockers reduced the incidence of treatment resistance (TNF-α blocker intervention group 30/237, control group 58/257; risk ratio (RR) 0.57, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.38 to 0.86; low-certainty evidence).Four trials reported the incidence of coronary artery abnormalities (CAAs). Three trials (with 270 participants) contributed data to the meta-analysis, since we could not get the data needed for the analysis from the fourth trial. There was no clear difference between groups in the incidence of CAAs (TNF-α blocker intervention group 8/125, control group 9/145; RR 1.18, 95% CI 0.45 to 3.12; low-certainty evidence).Three trials with 250 participants reported the adverse effect 'infusion reactions' after treatment initiation. The TNF-α blocker intervention decreased infusion reactions (TNF-α blocker intervention group 0/126, control group 15/124; RR 0.06, 95% CI 0.01 to 0.45; low-certainty evidence).Two trials with 227 participants reported the adverse effect 'infections' after treatment initiation. There was no clear difference between groups (TNF-α blocker intervention group 7/114, control group 10/113; RR 0.68, 95% CI 0.33 to 1.37; low-certainty evidence).One trial (with 31 participants) reported the adverse effect 'cutaneous reactions' (rash and contact dermatitis). There was no clear difference between the groups for incidence of rash (TNF-α blocker intervention group 2/16, control group 0/15; RR 4.71, 95% CI 0.24 to 90.69; very low-certainty evidence) or for incidence of contact dermatitis (TNF-α blocker intervention group 1/16, control group 3/15; RR 0.31, 95% CI 0.04 to 2.68; very low-certainty evidence).No trials reported other adverse effects such as injection site reactions, neutropenia, infections, demyelinating disease, heart failure, malignancy, and induction of autoimmunity.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

We found a limited number of RCTs examining the effect of TNF-α blockers for KD. In summary, low-certainty evidence indicates that TNF-α blockers have beneficial effects on treatment resistance and the adverse effect 'infusion reaction' after treatment initiation for KD when compared with no treatment or additional treatment with IVIG. Further research will add to the evidence base. Due to the small number of underpowered trials contributing to the analyses, the results presented should be treated with caution. Further large high quality trials with timing and type of TNF-α blockers used are needed to determine the effects of TNF-α blockers for KD.

Outcomes for Pressure Ulcer Trials (OUTPUTs): protocol for the development of a core domain set for trials evaluating the clinical efficacy or effectiveness of pressure ulcer prevention interventions

Background

Core outcome sets (COS) are being developed in many clinical areas to increase the quality and comparability of clinical trial results as well as to ensure their relevance for patients. A COS represents an agreed standardized set of outcomes that describes the minimum that should be consistently reported in all clinical trials of a defined area. It comprises a core domain set (defining what core outcomes should be measured) and a core measurement set (defining measurement/assessment instruments for each core domain). For pressure ulcer prevention trials a COS is lacking. The great heterogeneity of reported outcomes in this field indicates the need for a COS.

Methods/design

The first part of this project aims to develop a core domain set by following established methods, which incorporates four steps: (1) definition of the scope, (2) conducting a scoping review, (3) organizing facilitated workshops with service users, (4) performing Delphi surveys and establishing consensus in a face-to-face meeting with different stakeholders.

Discussion

After achieving consensus on the core domain set, further work will be undertaken to determine a corresponding core measurement set. This will lead to better pressure ulcer prevention research in the future. There are a number of methodological challenges in the field of COS development. To meet these challenges and to ensure a high-quality COS, the OUTPUTS project affiliates to current standards and works in close collaboration with international experts and with existing international service user groups.

Trial registration

The OUTPUTs project is registered in the COMET database: (http://www.comet-initiative.org/studies/details/283). Registered on 2015.

RE-CODE DCM (REsearch Objectives and Common Data Elements for Degenerative Cervical Myelopathy): A Consensus Process to Improve Research Efficiency in DCM, Through Establishment of a Standardized Dataset for Clinical Research and the Definition of the Research Priorities

STUDY DESIGN

Mixed-method consensus process.

OBJECTIVES

Degenerative cervical myelopathy (DCM) is a common and disabling condition that arises when mechanical stress damages the spinal cord as a result of degenerative changes in the surrounding spinal structures. RECODE-DCM (REsearch Objectives and Common Data Elements for Degenerative Cervical Myelopathy) aims to improve efficient use of health care resources within the field of DCM by using a multi-stakeholder partnership to define the DCM research priorities, to develop a minimum dataset for DCM clinical studies, and confirm a definition of DCM.

METHODS

This requires a multi-stakeholder partnership and multiple parallel consensus development processes. It will be conducted via 4 phases, adhering to the guidance set out by the COMET (Core Outcomes in Effectiveness Trials) and JLA (James Lind Alliance) initiatives. Phase 1 will consist of preliminary work to inform online Delphi processes (Phase 2) and a consensus meeting (Phase 3). Following the findings of the consensus meeting, a synthesis of relevant measurement instruments will be compiled and assessed as per the COSMIN (Consensus-based Standards for the Selection of Health Measurement Instruments) criteria, to allow recommendations to be made on how to measure agreed data points. Phase 4 will monitor and promote the use of eventual recommendations.

CONCLUSIONS

RECODE-DCM sets out to establish for the first time an index term, minimum dataset, and research priorities together. Our aim is to reduce waste of health care resources in the future by using patient priorities to inform the scope of future DCM research activities. The consistent use of a standard dataset in DCM clinical studies, audit, and clinical surveillance will facilitate pooled analysis of future data and, ultimately, a deeper understanding of DCM.

Guided imagery for treating hypertension in pregnancy

BACKGROUND

Hypertension (high blood pressure) in pregnancy carries a high risk of maternal morbidity and mortality. Although antihypertensive drugs are commonly used, they have adverse effects on mothers and fetuses. Guided imagery is a non-pharmacological technique that has the potential to lower blood pressure among pregnant women with hypertension. Guided imagery is a mind-body therapy that involves the visualisation of various mental images to facilitate relaxation and reduction in blood pressure.

OBJECTIVES

To determine the effect of guided imagery as a non-pharmacological treatment of hypertension in pregnancy and its influence on perinatal outcomes.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Pregnancy and Childbirth Group's Trials Register, and two trials registers (October 2018). We also searched relevant conference proceedings and journals, and scanned the reference lists of retrieved studies.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs). We would have included RCTs using a cluster-randomised design, but none were identified. We excluded quasi-RCTs and cross-over trials.We sought intervention studies of various guided imagery techniques performed during pregnancy in comparison with no intervention or other non-pharmacological treatments for hypertension (e.g. quiet rest, music therapy, aromatherapy, relaxation therapy, acupuncture, acupressure, massage, device-guided slow breathing, hypnosis, physical exercise, and yoga).

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Three review authors independently assessed the trials for inclusion, extracted data, and assessed risk of bias for the included studies. We checked extracted data for accuracy, and resolved differences in assessments by discussion. We assessed the certainty of the evidence using the GRADE approach.

MAIN RESULTS

We included two small trials (involving a total of 99 pregnant women) that compared guided imagery with quiet rest. The trials were conducted in Canada and the USA. We assessed both trials as at high risk of performance bias, and low risk of attrition bias; one trial was at low risk for selection, detection, and reporting bias, while the other was at unclear risk for the same domains.We could not perform a meta-analysis because the two included studies reported different outcomes, and the frequency of the intervention was slightly different between the two studies. One study performed guided imagery for 15 minutes at least twice daily for four weeks, or until the baby was born (whichever came first). In the other study, the intervention included guided imagery, self-monitoring of blood pressure, and thermal biofeedback-assisted relaxation training for four total hours; the participants were instructed to practice the procedures twice daily and complete at least three relief relaxation breaks each day. The control groups were similar - one was quiet rest, and the other was quiet rest as bed rest.None of our primary outcomes were reported in the included trials: severe hypertension (either systolic blood pressure of 160 mmHg or higher, or diastolic blood pressure of 110 mmHg or higher); severe pre-eclampsia, or perinatal death (stillbirths plus deaths in the first week of life). Only one of the secondary outcomes was measured.Low-certainty evidence from one trial (69 women) suggests that guided imagery may make little or no difference in the use of antihypertensive drugs (risk ratio 1.27, 95% confidence interval 0.72 to 2.22).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

There is insufficient evidence to inform practice about the use of guided imagery for hypertension in pregnancy.The available evidence for this review topic is sparse, and the effect of guided imagery for treating hypertension during pregnancy (compared with quiet rest) remains unclear. There was low-certainty evidence that guided imagery made little or no difference to the use of antihypertensive drugs, downgraded because of imprecision.The two included trials did not report on any of the primary outcomes of this review. We did not identify any trials comparing guided imagery with no intervention, or with another non-pharmacological method for hypertension.Large and well-designed RCTs are needed to identify the effects of guided imagery on hypertension during pregnancy and on other relevant outcomes associated with short-term and long-term maternal and neonatal health. Trials could also consider utilisation and costs of health service.

["Transferability": Is GRADE the solution?]

Biological and social factors, such as age, comorbidities and the care system, may - as well-established effect-modifiers - limit the transferability of study results to populations with dissimilar characteristics. In order to enable transparent and evidence-based decisions in systematic reviews and guidelines targeting subpopulations that are little or not represented in the study landscape, the GRADE approach is a valid tool to assess the certainty of the evidence. GRADE provides a structured methodology that covers all steps, from developing a precise question, prioritizing patient-relevant outcomes and assessing the available evidence to derive recommendations for practice, among other things. Evaluating confidence in a body of evidence comprises judgments on risk of bias, study heterogeneity, directness, including comparability between study population and target population, precision of effect estimates and publication bias. Because GRADE demands transparent decisions about the applicability of study results from the study population to the target population, gaps in the evidence landscape can be uncovered. Overall, the approach cannot solve the problem of the transferability of study results. It does, however, support the explicit handling of applicability and can give impetus to targeted research gaps.

Routine scale and polish for periodontal health in adults

BACKGROUND

Many dentists or hygienists provide scaling and polishing for patients at regular intervals, even for those at low risk of developing periodontal disease. There is debate over the clinical and cost effectiveness of 'routine scaling and polishing' and the optimal frequency at which it should be provided for healthy adults.A 'routine scale and polish' treatment is defined as scaling or polishing, or both, of the crown and root surfaces of teeth to remove local irritational factors (plaque, calculus, debris and staining), which does not involve periodontal surgery or any form of adjunctive periodontal therapy such as the use of chemotherapeutic agents or root planing. Routine scale and polish treatments are typically provided in general dental practice settings. The technique may also be referred to as prophylaxis, professional mechanical plaque removal or periodontal instrumentation.This review updates a version published in 2013.

OBJECTIVES

1. To determine the beneficial and harmful effects of routine scaling and polishing for periodontal health.2. To determine the beneficial and harmful effects of routine scaling and polishing at different recall intervals for periodontal health.3. To determine the beneficial and harmful effects of routine scaling and polishing for periodontal health when the treatment is provided by dentists compared with dental care professionals (dental therapists or dental hygienists).

SEARCH METHODS

Cochrane Oral Health's Information Specialist searched the following databases: Cochrane Oral Health's Trials Register (to 10 January 2018), the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (the Cochrane Library, 2017, Issue 12), MEDLINE Ovid (1946 to 10 January 2018), and Embase Ovid (1980 to 10 January 2018). The US National Institutes of Health Trials Registry (ClinicalTrials.gov) and the World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform were searched for ongoing trials. No restrictions were placed on the language or date of publication when searching the electronic databases.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials of routine scale and polish treatments, with or without oral hygiene instruction, in healthy dentate adults without severe periodontitis. We excluded split-mouth trials.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors screened the results of the searches against inclusion criteria, extracted data and assessed risk of bias independently and in duplicate. We calculated mean differences (MDs) (or standardised mean differences (SMDs) when different scales were reported) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for continuous data. We calculated risk ratios (RR) and 95% CIs for dichotomous data. We used a fixed-effect model for meta-analyses. We contacted study authors when necessary to obtain missing information. We rated the certainty of the evidence using the GRADE approach.

MAIN RESULTS

We included two studies with 1711 participants in the analyses. Both studies were conducted in UK general dental practices and involved adults without severe periodontitis who were regular attenders at dental appointments. One study measured outcomes at 24 months and the other at 36 months. Neither study measured adverse effects, changes in attachment level, tooth loss or halitosis.Comparison 1: routine scaling and polishing versus no scheduled scaling and polishingTwo studies compared planned, regular interval (six- and 12-monthly) scale and polish treatments versus no scheduled treatment. We found little or no difference between groups over a two- to three-year period for gingivitis, probing depths, oral health-related quality of life (all high-certainty evidence) and plaque (low-certainty evidence). The SMD for gingivitis when comparing six-monthly scale and polish treatment versus no scheduled treatment was -0.01 (95% CI -0.13 to 0.11; two trials, 1087 participants), and for 12-monthly scale and polish versus no scheduled treatment was -0.04 (95% CI -0.16 to 0.08; two trials, 1091 participants).Regular planned scale and polish treatments produced a small reduction in calculus levels over two to three years when compared with no scheduled scale and polish treatments (high-certainty evidence). The SMD for six-monthly scale and polish versus no scheduled treatment was -0.32 (95% CI -0.44 to -0.20; two trials, 1088 participants) and for 12-monthly scale and polish versus no scheduled treatment was -0.19 (95% CI -0.31 to -0.07; two trials, 1088 participants). The clinical importance of these small reductions is unclear.Participants' self-reported levels of oral cleanliness were higher when receiving six- and 12-monthly scale and polish treatments compared to no scheduled treatment, but the certainty of the evidence is low.Comparison 2: routine scaling and polishing at different recall intervalsTwo studies compared routine six-monthly scale and polish treatments versus 12-monthly treatments. We found little or no difference between groups over two to three years for the outcomes of gingivitis, probing depths, oral health-related quality of life (all high-certainty evidence) and plaque (low-certainty evidence). The SMD for gingivitis was 0.03 (95% CI -0.09 to 0.15; two trials, 1090 participants; I² = 0%). Six- monthly scale and polish treatments produced a small reduction in calculus levels over a two- to three-year period when compared with 12-monthly treatments (SMD -0.13 (95% CI -0.25 to -0.01; 2 trials, 1086 participants; high-certainty evidence). The clinical importance of this small reduction is unclear.The comparative effects of six- and 12-monthly scale and polish treatments on patients' self-reported levels of oral cleanliness were uncertain (very low-certainty evidence).Comparison 3: routine scaling and polishing provided by dentists compared with dental care professionals (dental therapists or hygienists)No studies evaluated this comparison.The review findings in relation to costs were uncertain (very low-certainty evidence).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

For adults without severe periodontitis who regularly access routine dental care, routine scale and polish treatment makes little or no difference to gingivitis, probing depths and oral health-related quality of life over two to three years follow-up when compared with no scheduled scale and polish treatments (high-certainty evidence). There may also be little or no difference in plaque levels over two years (low-certainty evidence). Routine scaling and polishing reduces calculus levels compared with no routine scaling and polishing, with six-monthly treatments reducing calculus more than 12-monthly treatments over two to three years follow-up (high-certainty evidence), although the clinical importance of these small reductions is uncertain. Available evidence on the costs of the treatments is uncertain. The studies did not assess adverse effects.

Skin preparation for preventing infection following caesarean section

BACKGROUND

The risk of maternal mortality and morbidity (particularly postoperative infection) is higher for caesarean section (CS) than for vaginal birth. With the increasing rate of CS, it is important to minimise the risks to the mother as much as possible. This review focused on different forms and methods of preoperative skin preparation to prevent infection. This review is an update of a review that was first published in 2012, and updated in 2014.

OBJECTIVES

To compare the effects of different antiseptic agents, different methods of application, or different forms of antiseptic used for preoperative skin preparation for preventing postcaesarean infection.

SEARCH METHODS

For this update, we searched Cochrane Pregnancy and Childbirth's Trials Register, ClinicalTrials.gov, the WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP) (27 November 2017), and reference lists of retrieved studies.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised and quasi-randomised trials, evaluating any type of preoperative skin preparation agents, forms, and methods of application for caesarean section.Comparisons of interest in this review were between different antiseptic agents used for CS skin preparation (e.g. alcohol, povidone iodine), different methods of antiseptic application (e.g. scrub, paint, drape), different forms of antiseptic (e.g. powder, liquid), and also between different skin preparations, such as a plastic incisional drape, which may or may not be impregnated with antiseptic agents.Only studies involving the preparation of the incision area were included. This review did not cover studies of preoperative handwashing by the surgical team or preoperative bathing.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Three review authors independently assessed all potential studies for inclusion, assessed risk of bias, and extracted the data using a predesigned form. We checked data for accuracy. We assessed the quality of the evidence using the GRADE approach.

MAIN RESULTS

For this update, we included 11 randomised controlled trials (RCTs), with a total of 6237 women who were undergoing CS. Ten trials (6215 women) contributed data to this review. All included studies were individual RCTs. We did not identify any quasi- or cluster-RCTs. The trial dates ranged from 1983 to 2016. Six trials were conducted in the USA, and the remainder in Nigeria, South Africa, France, Denmark, and Indonesia.The included studies were broadly methodologically sound, but raised some specific concerns regarding risk of bias in a number of cases.Drape versus no drapeThis comparison investigated the use of a non-impregnated drape versus no drape, following preparation of the skin with antiseptics. For women undergoing CS, low-quality evidence suggested that using a drape before surgery compared with no drape, may make little or no difference to the incidence of surgical site infection (risk ratio (RR) 1.29, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.97 to 1.71; 2 trials, 1294 women), or length of stay in the hospital (mean difference (MD) 0.10 day, 95% CI -0.27 to 0.46 1 trial, 603 women).One-minute alcohol scrub with iodophor drape versus five-minute iodophor scrub without drapeOne trial compared an alcohol scrub and iodophor drape with a five-minute iodophor scrub only, and reported no surgical site infection in either group (79 women, very-low quality evidence). We were uncertain whether the combination of a one-minute alcohol scrub and a drape reduced the incidence of endomyometritis when compared with a five-minute scrub, because the quality of the evidence was very low (RR 1.62, 95% CI 0.29 to 9.16; 1 trial, 79 women).Parachlorometaxylenol with iodine versus iodine aloneWe were uncertain whether parachlorometaxylenol with iodine before CS made any difference to the incidence of surgical site infection (RR 0.33, 95% CI 0.04 to 2.99; 1 trial, 50 women), or endometritis (RR 0.88, 95% CI 0.56 to 1.38; 1 trial, 50 women) when compared with iodine alone, because the quality of the evidence was very low.Chlorhexidine gluconate versus povidone iodineLow-quality evidence suggested that chlorhexidine gluconate before CS, when compared with povidone iodine, may make little or no difference to the incidence of surgical site infection (RR 0.80, 95% CI 0.62 to 1.02; 6 trials, 3607 women). However, surgical site infection appeared to be slightly reduced for women for whom chlorhexidine gluconate was used compared with povidone iodine after we removed four trials at high risk of bias for outcome assessment, in a sensitivity analysis (RR 0.59, 95% CI 0.37 to 0.95; 2 trials, 1321 women).Low-quality evidence indicated that chlorhexidine gluconate before CS, when compared with povidone iodine, may make little or no difference to the incidence of endometritis (RR 1.01, 95% CI 0.51 to 2.01; 2 trials, 2079 women), or to reducing maternal skin irritation or allergic skin reaction (RR 0.60, 95% CI 0.22 to 1.63; 2 trials, 1521 women).One small study (60 women) reported reduced bacterial growth at 18 hours after CS for women who had chlorhexidine gluconate preparation compared with women who had povidone iodine preparation (RR 0.23, 95% CI 0.07 to 0.70).None of the included trials reported on maternal mortality or repeat surgery.Chlorhexidine 0.5% versus 70% alcohol plus drapeOne trial, which was only available as an abstract, investigated the effect of skin preparation on neonatal adverse events, and found cord blood iodine concentration to be higher in the iodine group.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

There was insufficient evidence available from the included RCTs to fully evaluate different agents and methods of skin preparation for preventing infection following caesarean section. Therefore, it is not yet clear what sort of skin preparation may be most effective for preventing postcaesarean surgical site infection, or for reducing other undesirable outcomes for mother and baby.Most of the evidence in this review was deemed to be very low or low quality. This means that for most findings, our confidence in any evidence of an intervention effect is limited, and indicates the need for more high-quality research.This field needs high quality, well designed RCTs, with larger sample sizes. High priority questions include comparing types of antiseptic (especially iodine versus chlorhexidine), and application methods (scrubbing, swabbing, or draping). We found four studies that were ongoing; we will incorporate the results of these studies in future updates of this review.

Transradial versus transfemoral approach for diagnostic coronary angiography and percutaneous coronary intervention in people with coronary artery disease

BACKGROUND

Cardiovascular disease (CVD) is the major cause of mortality worldwide. Coronary artery disease (CAD) contributes to half of mortalities caused by CVD. The mainstay of management of CAD is medical therapy and revascularisation. Revascularisation can be achieved via coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) or percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). Peripheral arteries, such as the femoral or radial artery, provide the access to the coronary arteries to perform diagnostic or therapeutic (or both) procedures.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the benefits and harms of the transradial compared to the transfemoral approach in people with CAD undergoing diagnostic coronary angiography (CA) or PCI (or both).

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the following databases for randomised controlled trials on 10 October 2017: Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, Embase, and Web of Science Core Collection. We also searched ClinicalTrials.gov and the World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform in August 2017. There were no language restrictions. Reference lists were also checked and we contacted authors of included studies for further information.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised controlled trials that compared transradial and transfemoral approaches in adults (18 years of age or older) undergoing diagnostic CA or PCI (or both) for CAD.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We used the standard methodological procedures expected by Cochrane. At least two authors independently screened trials, extracted data, and assessed the risk of bias in the included studies. We contacted trial authors for missing information. We used risk ratio (RR) for dichotomous outcomes and mean difference (MD) or standardised mean difference (SMD) for continuous data, with their 95% confidence intervals (CIs). All analyses were checked by another author.

MAIN RESULTS

We identified 31 studies (44 reports) including 27,071 participants and two ongoing studies. The risk of bias in the studies was low or unclear for several domains. Compared to the transfemoral approach, the transradial approach reduced short-term net adverse clinical events (NACE) (i.e. assessed during hospitalisation and up to 30 days of follow-up) (RR 0.76, 95% CI 0.61 to 0.94; 17,133 participants; 4 studies; moderate quality evidence), cardiac death (RR 0.69, 95% CI 0.54 to 0.88; 11,170 participants; 11 studies; moderate quality evidence). However, short-term myocardial infarction was similar between both groups (RR 0.91, 95% CI 0.81 to 1.02; 19,430 participants; 11 studies; high quality evidence). The transradial approach had a lower procedural success rate (RR 0.97, 95% CI 0.96 to 0.98; 25,920 participants; 28 studies; moderate quality evidence), but was associated with a lower risk of all-cause mortality (RR 0.77, 95% CI 0.62 to 0.95; 18,955 participants; 10 studies; high quality evidence), bleeding (RR 0.54, 95% CI 0.40 to 0.74; 23,043 participants; 20 studies; low quality evidence), and access site complications (RR 0.36, 95% CI 0.22 to 0.59; 16,112 participants; 24 studies; low quality evidence).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Transradial approach for diagnostic CA or PCI (or both) in CAD may reduce short-term NACE, cardiac death, all-cause mortality, bleeding, and access site complications. There is insufficient evidence regarding the long-term clinical outcomes (i.e. beyond 30 days of follow-up).

Fluoride supplementation (with tablets, drops, lozenges or chewing gum) in pregnant women for preventing dental caries in the primary teeth of their children

BACKGROUND

Dental caries (tooth decay) is one of the most common chronic childhood diseases. Caries prevalence in most industrialised countries has declined among children over the past few decades. The probable reasons for the decline are the widespread use of fluoride toothpaste, followed by artificial water fluoridation, oral health education and a slight decrease in sugar consumption overall. However, in regions without water fluoridation, fluoride supplementation for pregnant women may be an effective way to increase fluoride intake during pregnancy. If fluoride supplements taken by pregnant women improve neonatal outcomes, pregnant women with no access to a fluoridated drinking water supply can obtain the benefits of systemic fluoridation.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the effects of women taking fluoride supplements (tablets, drops, lozenges or chewing gum) compared with no fluoride supplementation during pregnancy to prevent caries in the primary teeth of their children.

SEARCH METHODS

Cochrane Oral Health's Information Specialist searched the following databases: Cochrane Oral Health's Trials Register (to 25 January 2017); the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL; 2016, Issue 11) in the Cochrane Library (searched 25 January 2017); MEDLINE Ovid (1946 to 25 January 2017); Embase Ovid (1980 to 25 January 2017); LILACS BIREME Virtual Health Library (Latin American and Caribbean Health Science Information database; 1982 to 25 January 2017); and CINAHL EBSCO (Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature; 1937 to 25 January 2017). We searched the US National Institutes of Health Ongoing Trials Register (ClinicalTrials.gov) and the World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform for ongoing trials to 25 January 2017. No restrictions were placed on the language or date of publication when searching the electronic databases.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of fluoride supplements (tablets, drops, lozenges or chewing gum) administered to women during pregnancy with the aim of preventing caries in the primary teeth of their children.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently screened the titles and abstracts (when available) of all reports identified through electronic searches. Two review authors independently extracted data and assessed risk of bias, as well as evaluating overall quality of the evidence utilising the GRADE approach. We could not conduct data synthesis as only one study was included in the analysis.

MAIN RESULTS

Only one RCT met the inclusion criteria for this review. This RCT showed no statistical difference on decayed or filled primary tooth surfaces (dfs) and the percentage of children with caries at 3 years (risk ratio (RR) 1.46, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.75 to 2.85; participants = 938, very low quality of evidence) and 5 years old (RR 0.84, 95% CI 0.53 to 1.33; participants = 798, very low quality of evidence). The incidence of fluorosis at 5 years was similar between the group taking fluoride supplements (tablets) during the last 6 months of pregnancy and the placebo group.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

There is no evidence that fluoride supplements taken by women during pregnancy are effective in preventing dental caries in their offspring.

Perioperative Amino Acid Infusion for Preventing Hypothermia and Improving Clinical Outcomes During Surgery Under General Anesthesia: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

Amino acid (AA) infusion is sometimes selected to avoid hypothermia during general anesthesia. However, the widespread clinical use of AA infusion therapy has not been established. This study aimed to clarify the evidence that AA infusion can increase patient body temperature and improve clinical outcomes using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation system. We searched MEDLINE (PubMed), Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and Igaku Chuo Zasshi (Japana Centra Revuo Medicina) in November 2015. Studies were reviewed by 2 independent assessors to identify randomized controlled trials (RCTs) involving AA infusion compared with placebos during surgery under general or combined general/epidural anesthesia. Study quality was assessed using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation system and the Cochrane methodology. The primary outcome was difference in body temperature before and after perioperative AA infusion. Shivering frequency, blood loss volume, postoperative intubation time, and hospitalization period were also assessed as clinical outcomes. We analyzed the outcome data using a random effect model. From 298 screened titles, 14 RCTs met our inclusion criteria, including 626 patients (327 in AA and 299 in placebo groups). In 626 participants from 14 RCTs, AA infusion increased body temperature by a mean difference (MD) of 0.46°C (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.31-0.62, low-quality evidence). Regarding other outcomes, AA infusion decreased shivering frequency by a risk ratio of 0.34 (95% CI, 0.12-0.94; 7 RCTs, 248 participants, very low-quality evidence), shortened postoperative intubation time by MD of -125 minutes (95% CI, -210 to -38.8; 2 RCTs, 158 participants, moderate-quality evidence), and shortened the hospitalization period by MD of -1.81 days (95% CI, -2.07 to -1.55; 3 RCTs, 230 participants, low-quality evidence) compared with placebo. There was no significant difference in the volume of blood loss between the 2 groups (standardized MD, -0.20, 95% CI, -0.44 to 0.04; low-quality evidence). There was no publication bias. AA infusion in the perioperative period increased patient body temperature and improved clinical outcomes compared with placebo. However, the evidence to support the use of AA infusion is limited, and further large-scale RCTs are required.

Interventions for preventing mother-to-child HIV transmission: protocol of an overview of systematic reviews

INTRODUCTION

Various interventions to prevent mother-to-child-transmission (MTCT) of HIV have been investigated and implemented. A number of systematic reviews assessing the efficacy of interventions for the prevention of MTCT of HIV reported antiretroviral prophylaxis, caesarean section before labour and before ruptured membranes, and complete avoidance of breastfeeding were efficacious for preventing MTCT of HIV. Recent WHO guidelines recommend lifelong antiretroviral therapy for all pregnant women for treatment of the woman's own HIV infection and for prevention of MTCT of HIV. Therefore, the objective of this overview is to evaluate the currently available systematic reviews of interventions for preventing MTCT of HIV, and to identify the current best evidence-based interventions for reducing the risk of MTCT of HIV.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

We will include only peer-reviewed systematic reviews of randomised or quasi-randomised controlled trials assessing the effects of interventions for preventing MTCT of HIV that target both HIV-infected women and children aged 2 years and younger born to HIV-infected women. We will search the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, the Database of Abstracts of Reviews of Effectiveness, Ovid MEDLINE and EMBASE. We will assess review eligibility, the methodological quality of included systematic reviews using A Measurement Tool to Assess The Systematic Reviews and will extract data, comparing our results and resolving discrepancies by consensus. Finally, we will independently assess the certainty of the evidence using Grades of Recommendation, Assessment, Development and Evaluation.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

Ethics approval is not required. We will publish the results in a peer-reviewed journal and present at conferences, which will inform future research and will be useful for healthcare managers, administrators and policymakers to guide resource allocation decisions and optimisation of interventions to prevent the MTCT of HIV.

Remote ischaemic preconditioning for coronary artery bypass grafting (with or without valve surgery)

BACKGROUND

Despite substantial improvements in myocardial preservation strategies, coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) is still associated with severe complications. It has been reported that remote ischaemic preconditioning (RIPC) reduces reperfusion injury in people undergoing cardiac surgery and improves clinical outcome. However, there is a lack of synthesised information and a need to review the current evidence from randomised controlled trials (RCTs).

OBJECTIVES

To assess the benefits and harms of remote ischaemic preconditioning in people undergoing coronary artery bypass grafting, with or without valve surgery.

SEARCH METHODS

In May 2016 we searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase and Web of Science. We also conducted a search of ClinicalTrials.gov and the International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP). We also checked reference lists of included studies. We did not apply any language restrictions.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included RCTs in which people scheduled for CABG (with or without valve surgery) were randomly assigned to receive RIPC or sham intervention before surgery.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently assessed trials for inclusion, extracted data and checked them for accuracy. We calculated mean differences (MDs), standardised mean differences (SMDs) and risk ratios (RR) using a random-effects model. We assessed quality of the trial evidence for all primary outcomes using the GRADE methodology. We completed a 'Risk of bias' assessment for all studies and performed sensitivity analysis by excluding studies judged at high or unclear risk of bias for sequence generation, allocation concealment and incomplete outcome data. We contacted authors for missing data. Our primary endpoints were 1) composite endpoint (including all-cause mortality, non-fatal myocardial infarction or any new stroke, or both) assessed at 30 days after surgery, 2) cardiac troponin T (cTnT, ng/L) at 48 hours and 72 hours, and as area under the curve (AUC) 72 hours (µg/L) after surgery, and 3) cardiac troponin I (cTnI, ng/L) at 48 hours, 72 hours, and as area under the curve (AUC) 72 hours (µg/L) after surgery.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 29 studies involving 5392 participants (mean age = 64 years, age range 23 to 86 years, 82% male). However, few studies contributed data to meta-analyses due to inconsistency in outcome definition and reporting. In general, risk of bias varied from low to high risk of bias across included studies, and insufficient detail was provided to inform judgement in several cases. The quality of the evidence of key outcomes ranged from moderate to low quality due to the presence of moderate or high statistical heterogeneity, imprecision of results or due to limitations in the design of individual studies.Compared with no RIPC, we found that RIPC has no treatment effect on the rate of the composite endpoint with RR 0.99 (95% confidence interval (CI) 0.78 to 1.25); 2 studies; 2463 participants; moderate-quality evidence. Participants randomised to RIPC showed an equivalent or better effect regarding the amount of cTnT release measured at 72 hours after surgery with SMD -0.32 (95% CI -0.65 to 0.00); 3 studies; 1120 participants; moderate-quality evidence; and expressed as AUC 72 hours with SMD -0.49 (95% CI -0.96 to -0.02); 3 studies; 830 participants; moderate-quality evidence. We found the same result in favour of RIPC for the cTnI release measured at 48 hours with SMD -0.21 (95% CI -0.40 to -0.02); 5 studies; 745 participants; moderate-quality evidence; and measured at 72 hours after surgery with SMD -0.37 (95% CI -0.59 to -0.15); 2 studies; 459 participants; moderate-quality evidence. All other primary outcomes showed no differences between groups (cTnT release measured at 48 hours with SMD -0.14, 95% CI -0.33 to 0.06; 4 studies; 1792 participants; low-quality evidence and cTnI release measured as AUC 72 hours with SMD -0.17, 95% CI -0.48 to 0.14; 2 studies; 159 participants; moderate-quality evidence).We also found no differences between groups for all-cause mortality after 30 days, non-fatal myocardial infarction after 30 days, any new stroke after 30 days, acute renal failure after 30 days, length of stay on the intensive care unit (days), any complications and adverse effects related to ischaemic preconditioning. We did not assess many patient-centred/salutogenic-focused outcomes.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

We found no evidence that RIPC has a treatment effect on clinical outcomes (measured as a composite endpoint including all-cause mortality, non-fatal myocardial infarction or any new stroke, or both, assessed at 30 days after surgery). There is moderate-quality evidence that RIPC has no treatment effect on the rate of the composite endpoint including all-cause mortality, non-fatal myocardial infarction or any new stroke assessed at 30 days after surgery, or both. We found moderate-quality evidence that RIPC reduces the cTnT release measured at 72 hours after surgery and expressed as AUC (72 hours). There is moderate-quality evidence that RIPC reduces the amount of cTnI release measured at 48 hours, and measured 72 hours after surgery. Adequately-designed studies, especially focusing on influencing factors, e.g. with regard to anaesthetic management, are encouraged and should systematically analyse the commonly used medications of people with cardiovascular diseases.

The reporting of study and population characteristics in degenerative cervical myelopathy: A systematic review

OBJECT

Degenerative cervical myelopathy [DCM] is a disabling and increasingly prevalent condition. Variable reporting in interventional trials of study design and sample characteristics limits the interpretation of pooled outcomes. This is pertinent in DCM where baseline characteristics are known to influence outcome. The present study aims to assess the reporting of the study design and baseline characteristics in DCM as the premise for the development of a standardised reporting set.

METHODS

A systematic review of MEDLINE and EMBASE databases, registered with PROSPERO (CRD42015025497) was conducted in accordance with PRISMA guidelines. Full text articles in English, with >50 patients (prospective) or >200 patients (retrospective), reporting outcomes of DCM were deemed to be eligible.

RESULTS

A total of 108 studies involving 23,876 patients, conducted world-wide, were identified. 33 (31%) specified a clear primary objective. Study populations often included radiculopathy (51, 47%) but excluded patients who had undergone previous surgery (42, 39%). Diagnositic criteria for myelopathy were often uncertain; MRI assessment was specified in only 67 (62%) of studies. Patient comorbidities were referenced by 37 (34%) studies. Symptom duration was reported by 46 (43%) studies. Multivariate analysis was used to control for baseline characteristics in 33 (31%) of studies.

CONCLUSIONS

The reporting of study design and sample characteristics is variable. The development of a consensus minimum dataset for (CODE-DCM) will facilitate future research synthesis in the future.

Implementation of study results in guidelines and adherence to guidelines in clinical practice

Guidelines were introduced in hospital- and practice-based otorhinolaryngology in the 1990ies, and have been undergoing further development ever since. There are currently 20 guidelines on file at the German Society of Oto-Rhino-Laryngology, Head & Neck Surgery. The society has cooperated in further 34 guidelines. The quality of the guidelines has been continuously improved by concrete specifications put forward by the Association of the Scientific Medical Societies in Germany (Arbeitsgemeinschaft der Wissenschaftlichen Medizinischen Fachgesellschaften e.V., AWMF). Since increasing digitalization has made access to scientific publications quicker and simpler, relevant study results can be incorporated in guidelines more easily today than in the analog world. S2e and S3 guidelines must be based on a formal literature search with subsequent evaluation of the evidence. The consensus procedure for S2k guidelines is also regulated. However, the implementation of guidelines in routine medical practice must still be considered inadequate, and there is still a considerable need for improvement in adherence to these guidelines.

Vitamin D supplementation for preventing infections in children under five years of age

BACKGROUND

Vitamin D is a micronutrient important for bone growth and immune function. Deficiency can lead to rickets and has been linked to various infections, including respiratory infections. The evidence on the effects of supplementation on infections in children has not been assessed systematically.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the role of vitamin D supplementation in preventing pneumonia, tuberculosis (TB), diarrhoea, and malaria in children under five years of age. This includes high-, middle-, and low-income countries.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Infectious Diseases Group Specialized Register, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), the Cochrane Library, MEDLINE, EMBASE, LILACS, the WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP; http://www.who.int/ictrp/en/) , ClinicalTrials.gov and the ISRCTN registry (http://www.isrctn.com/) up to 16 June 2016.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that evaluated preventive supplementation of vitamin D (versus placebo or no intervention) in children under five years of age.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently screened the titles and abstracts, extracted the data, and assessed the risk of bias of included trials.

MAIN RESULTS

Four trials met the inclusion criteria, with a total of 3198 children under five years of age, and were conducted in Afghanistan, Spain, and the USA. Prevalence of vitamin D deficiency varied widely in these populations (range: 73.1% in Afghanistan, 10 to 12% in USA, and 6.2% in Spain). The included trials evaluated mortality (two trials), pneumonia incidence (two trials), diarrhoea incidence (two trials), hospitalization (two trials), and mean serum vitamin D concentrations (four trials).We do not know whether vitamin D supplementation impacts on all-cause mortality because this outcome was underpowered due to few events (risk ratio (RR) 1.43, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.54 to 3.74; one trial, 3046 participants, low quality evidence).For pneumonia, episodes of 'radiologically confirmed' first or only episode of pneumonia were little different in the supplemented and unsupplemented group (Rate Ratio: 1.06, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.89 to 1.26; two trials, 3134 participants, moderate quality evidence), and similarly for children with confirmed or unconfirmed pneumonia (RR 0.95, 95% CI 0.87 to 1.04; one trial, 3046 participants). In these two trials there were no obvious differences between supplemented and unsupplemented children regarding episodes of diarrhoea.In the single large trial from Afghanistan, the trial authors reported that vitamin D supplementation was associated with an increase in repeat episodes of pneumonia confirmed by chest radiograph (RR 1.69, 95% CI 1.28 to 2.21; one trial, 3046 participants), but not reflected in the outcome of confirmed or unconfirmed pneumonia (RR 1.06, 95% CI 1.00 to 1.13; one trial, 3046 participants).For hospital admission measured in one small trial, there was no difference detected (RR 0.86, 95% CI 0.20 to 3.62; one trial, 88 participants; very low quality evidence).The mean serum vitamin D concentrations were higher in supplemented compared to unsupplemented children at the end of supplementation (MD 7.72 ng/mL, 95% CI 0.50 to 14.93; four trials, 266 participants, low quality evidence). These results were driven primarily by two smaller trials with large magnitudes of effect. In the other two bigger trials, serum vitamin D concentrations were elevated in the intervention group for most of the trial duration but not at the end of supplementation. This may be due to time elapsed at measurement from the last dose, incomplete compliance, or increased need of vitamin D with infant age.We did not find any trial that reported on the incidence of TB, malaria or febrile illness, duration of pneumonia, duration of diarrhoea, severity of infection, and cause-specific mortality (due to TB, diarrhoea, or malaria).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Evidence from one large trial did not demonstrate benefit of vitamin D supplementation on the incidence of pneumonia or diarrhoea in children under five years. To our knowledge, trials that evaluated supplementation for preventing other infections, including TB and malaria, have not been performed.

Sucrose for analgesia in newborn infants undergoing painful procedures

BACKGROUND

Administration of oral sucrose with and without non-nutritive sucking is the most frequently studied non-pharmacological intervention for procedural pain relief in neonates.

OBJECTIVES

To determine the efficacy, effect of dose, method of administration and safety of sucrose for relieving procedural pain in neonates as assessed by validated composite pain scores, physiological pain indicators (heart rate, respiratory rate, saturation of peripheral oxygen in the blood, transcutaneous oxygen and carbon dioxide (gas exchange measured across the skin - TcpO2, TcpCO2), near infrared spectroscopy (NIRS), electroencephalogram (EEG), or behavioural pain indicators (cry duration, proportion of time crying, proportion of time facial actions (e.g. grimace) are present), or a combination of these and long-term neurodevelopmental outcomes.

SEARCH METHODS

We used the standard methods of the Cochrane Neonatal. We performed electronic and manual literature searches in February 2016 for published randomised controlled trials (RCTs) in the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL; The Cochrane Library, Issue 1, 2016), MEDLINE (1950 to 2016), EMBASE (1980 to 2016), and CINAHL (1982 to 2016). We did not impose language restrictions.

SELECTION CRITERIA

RCTs in which term or preterm neonates (postnatal age maximum of 28 days after reaching 40 weeks' postmenstrual age), or both, received sucrose for procedural pain. Control interventions included no treatment, water, glucose, breast milk, breastfeeding, local anaesthetic, pacifier, positioning/containing or acupuncture.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Our main outcome measures were composite pain scores (including a combination of behavioural, physiological and contextual indicators). Secondary outcomes included separate physiological and behavioural pain indicators. We reported a mean difference (MD) or weighted MD (WMD) with 95% confidence intervals (CI) using the fixed-effect model for continuous outcome measures. For categorical data we used risk ratio (RR) and risk difference. We assessed heterogeneity by the I(2) test. We assessed the risk of bias of included trials using the Cochrane 'Risk of bias' tool, and assessed the quality of the evidence using the GRADE system.

MAIN RESULTS

Seventy-four studies enrolling 7049 infants were included. Results from only a few studies could be combined in meta-analyses and for most analyses the GRADE assessments indicated low- or moderate-quality evidence. There was high-quality evidence for the beneficial effect of sucrose (24%) with non-nutritive sucking (pacifier dipped in sucrose) or 0.5 mL of sucrose orally in preterm and term infants: Premature Infant Pain Profile (PIPP) 30 s after heel lance WMD -1.70 (95% CI -2.13 to -1.26; I(2) = 0% (no heterogeneity); 3 studies, n = 278); PIPP 60 s after heel lance WMD -2.14 (95% CI -3.34 to -0.94; I(2) = 0% (no heterogeneity; 2 studies, n = 164). There was high-quality evidence for the use of 2 mL 24% sucrose prior to venipuncture: PIPP during venipuncture WMD -2.79 (95% CI -3.76 to -1.83; I(2) = 0% (no heterogeneity; 2 groups in 1 study, n = 213); and intramuscular injections: PIPP during intramuscular injection WMD -1.05 (95% CI -1.98 to -0.12; I(2) = 0% (2 groups in 1 study, n = 232). Evidence from studies that could not be included in RevMan-analyses supported these findings. Reported adverse effects were minor and similar in the sucrose and control groups. Sucrose is not effective in reducing pain from circumcision. The effectiveness of sucrose for reducing pain/stress from other interventions such as arterial puncture, subcutaneous injection, insertion of nasogastric or orogastric tubes, bladder catherization, eye examinations and echocardiography examinations are inconclusive. Most trials indicated some benefit of sucrose use but that the evidence for other painful procedures is of lower quality as it is based on few studies of small sample sizes. The effects of sucrose on long-term neurodevelopmental outcomes are unknown.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Sucrose is effective for reducing procedural pain from single events such as heel lance, venipuncture and intramuscular injection in both preterm and term infants. No serious side effects or harms have been documented with this intervention. We could not identify an optimal dose due to inconsistency in effective sucrose dosage among studies. Further investigation of repeated administration of sucrose in neonates is needed. There is some moderate-quality evidence that sucrose in combination with other non-pharmacological interventions such as non-nutritive sucking is more effective than sucrose alone, but more research of this and sucrose in combination with pharmacological interventions is needed. Sucrose use in extremely preterm, unstable, ventilated (or a combination of these) neonates needs to be addressed. Additional research is needed to determine the minimally effective dose of sucrose during a single painful procedure and the effect of repeated sucrose administration on immediate (pain intensity) and long-term (neurodevelopmental) outcomes.

Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Preoperative Antisepsis with Combination Chlorhexidine and Povidone-Iodine

Importance  Effective preoperative antisepsis is recognized to prevent surgical site infection (SSI), although the definitive method is unclear. Many have compared chlorhexidine (CHG) with povidone-iodine (PVI), but there is emerging evidence for combination usage. Objective  To conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis to evaluate if combination skin preparation (1) reduces colonization at the operative site and (2) prevents SSI compared with single-agent use. Data Sources  A literature search of MEDLINE, Embase, and Cochrane Database of Clinical Trials was performed. Study Selection  Comparative, human trials considering the combination use of CHG and PVI, as preoperative antisepsis, to single-agent CHG or PVI use were included. Studies were excluded from meta-analysis if the use or absence of alcohol was inconsistent between study arms. Data Extraction and Synthesis  The study was performed using PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) guidelines. Main Outcomes and Measures  The primary outcome for meta-analysis was surgical site infection. The secondary outcome was colonization at the operative site. Results  Eighteen publications with a combination of CHG and PVI use were identified. Of these, 12/14 inferred promise for combination usage, including four trials eligible for meta-analysis. Only one trial reported SSI as its outcome. The remaining three considered bacterial colonization. Combination preparation had a pooled odds ratio for complete decolonization of 5.62 (95% confidence interval 3.2 to 9.7, p  < 0.00001). There was no evidence of heterogeneity (Cochran's Q 2.1, 2 df , p  = 0.35). Conclusions and Relevance  There is emerging, albeit low-quality, evidence in favor of combination CHG and PVI preoperative antisepsis. Further rigorous investigation is indicated.

[New guidelines on resuscitation in adults: What has changed?]

In October 2015, new guidelines for cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) were published, which represent a revision of the guidelines 2010. The new recommendations are based on an update of knowledge on resuscitation, which was evaluated for the first time by GRADE (Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation). The key messages of the guidelines 2010 were retained in 2015. Adult basic life support consists of a sequence of 30 chest compressions at a rate of 100-120/min with a depth of 5 to maximally 6 cm and 2 ventilations. As soon as possible, an automated external defibrillator (AED) should be applied. Interruptions of chest compressions should be minimized. To improve bystander CPR emergency medical dispatchers should diagnose cardiac arrest when informed about unconscious persons not breathing normally. In this case, emergency medical staff should inform bystanders to resuscitate with compression only CPR until the arrival of an emergency team. In postresuscitation care, mild hypothermia (body temperature 32-34 °C) has been replaced by targeted temperature management in unconscious patients. Now, the guidelines recommend a constant body temperature between 32-36 °C for at least 24 h. Fever should be prevented or treated.

Antenatal cardiotocography for fetal assessment

BACKGROUND

Cardiotocography (CTG) is a continuous recording of the fetal heart rate obtained via an ultrasound transducer placed on the mother's abdomen. CTG is widely used in pregnancy as a method of assessing fetal well-being, predominantly in pregnancies with increased risk of complications.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effectiveness of antenatal CTG (both traditional and computerised assessments) in improving outcomes for mothers and babies during and after pregnancy.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Pregnancy and Childbirth Group's Trials Register (26 June 2015) and reference lists of retrieved studies.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised and quasi-randomised trials that compared traditional antenatal CTG with no CTG or CTG results concealed; computerised CTG with no CTG or CTG results concealed; and computerised CTG with traditional CTG.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently assessed trials for inclusion and risk of bias, extracted data and checked them for accuracy.

MAIN RESULTS

Six studies (involving 2105 women) are included. Overall, the included studies were not of high quality, and only two had both adequate randomisation sequence generation and allocation concealment. All studies that were able to be included enrolled only women at increased risk of complications.Comparison of traditional CTG versus no CTG showed no significant difference identified in perinatal mortality (risk ratio (RR) 2.05, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.95 to 4.42, 2.3% versus 1.1%, four studies, N = 1627, low quality evidence) or potentially preventable deaths (RR 2.46, 95% CI 0.96 to 6.30, four studies, N = 1627), though the meta-analysis was underpowered to assess this outcome. Similarly, there was no significant difference identified in caesarean sections (RR 1.06, 95% CI 0.88 to 1.28, 19.7% versus 18.5%, three trials, N = 1279, low quality evidence). There was also no significant difference identified for secondary outcomes related to Apgar scores less than seven at five minutes (RR 0.83, 95% CI 0.37 to 1.88, one trial, N = 396, very low quality evidence); or admission to neonatal special care units or neonatal intensive care units (RR 1.08, 95% CI 0.84 to 1.39, two trials, N = 883, low quality evidence), nor in the other secondary outcomes that were assessed.There were no eligible studies that compared computerised CTG with no CTG.Comparison of computerised CTG versus traditional CTG showed a significant reduction in perinatal mortality with computerised CTG (RR 0.20, 95% CI 0.04 to 0.88, two studies, 0.9% versus 4.2%, 469 women, moderate quality evidence). However, there was no significant difference identified in potentially preventable deaths (RR 0.23, 95% CI 0.04 to 1.29, two studies, N = 469), though the meta-analysis was underpowered to assess this outcome. There was no significant difference identified in caesarean sections (RR 0.87, 95% CI 0.61 to 1.24, 63% versus 72%, one study, N = 59, low quality evidence), Apgar scores less than seven at five minutes (RR 1.31, 95% CI 0.30 to 5.74, two studies, N = 469, very low quality evidence) or in secondary outcomes.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

There is no clear evidence that antenatal CTG improves perinatal outcome, but further studies focusing on the use of computerised CTG in specific populations of women with increased risk of complications are warranted.

Symphysial fundal height (SFH) measurement in pregnancy for detecting abnormal fetal growth

BACKGROUND

Symphysis fundal height (SFH) measurement is commonly practiced primarily to detect fetal intrauterine growth restriction (IUGR). Undiagnosed IUGR may lead to fetal death as well as increase perinatal mortality and morbidity.

OBJECTIVES

The objective of this review is to compare SFH measurement with serial ultrasound measurement of fetal parameters or clinical palpation to detect abnormal fetal growth (IUGR and large-for-gestational age), and improving perinatal outcome.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Pregnancy and Childbirth Group's Trials Register (14 July 2015) and reference lists of retrieved articles.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials including quasi-randomised and cluster-randomised trials involving pregnant women with singleton fetuses at 20 weeks' gestation and above comparing tape measurement of SFH with serial ultrasound measurement of fetal parameters or clinical palpation using anatomical landmarks.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently assessed trials for inclusion and risk of bias, extracted data and checked them for accuracy.

MAIN RESULTS

One trial involving 1639 women was included. It compared SFH measurement with clinical abdominal palpation.There was no difference in the two reported primary outcomes of incidence of small-for-gestational age (risk ratio (RR) 1.32; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.92 to 1.90, low quality evidence) or perinatal death.(RR 1.25, 95% CI 0.38 to 4.07; participants = 1639, low quality evidence). There were no data on the neonatal detection of large-for-gestational age (variously defined by authors). There was no difference in the reported secondary outcomes of neonatal hypoglycaemia, admission to neonatal nursery, admission to the neonatal nursery for IUGR (low quality evidence), induction of labour and caesarean section (very low quality evidence). The trial did not address the other outcomes specified in the 'Summary of findings' table (intrauterine death; neurodevelopmental outcome in childhood). GRADEpro software was used to assess the quality of evidence, downgrading of evidence was based on including a small single study with unclear risk of bias and a wide confidence interval crossing the line of no effect.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

There is insufficient evidence to determine whether SFH measurement is effective in detecting IUGR. We cannot therefore recommended any change of current practice. Further trials are needed.

Interventions for nausea and vomiting in early pregnancy

BACKGROUND

Nausea, retching and vomiting are very commonly experienced by women in early pregnancy. There are considerable physical, social and psychological effects on women who experience these symptoms. This is an update of a review of interventions for nausea and vomiting in early pregnancy last published in 2014.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effectiveness and safety of all interventions for nausea, vomiting and retching in early pregnancy, up to 20 weeks' gestation.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Pregnancy and Childbirth Group's Trials Register, the Cochrane Complementary Medicine Field's Trials Register (19 January 2015) and reference lists of retrieved studies.

SELECTION CRITERIA

All randomised controlled trials of any intervention for nausea, vomiting and retching in early pregnancy. We excluded trials of interventions for hyperemesis gravidarum, which are covered by another Cochrane review. We also excluded quasi-randomised trials and trials using a cross-over design.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Four review authors, in pairs, reviewed the eligibility of trials and independently evaluated the risk of bias and extracted the data for included trials.

MAIN RESULTS

Forty-one trials involving 5449 women, met the inclusion criteria. These trials covered many interventions, including acupressure, acustimulation, acupuncture, ginger, chamomile, lemon oil, mint oil, vitamin B6 and several antiemetic drugs. There were no included studies of dietary and other lifestyle interventions. Evidence regarding the effectiveness of P6 acupressure, auricular (ear) acupressure and acustimulation of the P6 point was limited. Acupuncture (P6 or traditional) showed no significant benefit to women in pregnancy. The use of ginger products may be helpful to women, but the evidence of effectiveness was limited and not consistent, though three recent studies support ginger over placebo. There was only limited evidence from trials to support the use of pharmacological agents including vitamin B6, Doxylamine-pyridoxoine and other anti-emetic drugs to relieve mild or moderate nausea and vomiting. There was little information on maternal and fetal adverse outcomes and on psychological, social or economic outcomes.We were unable to pool findings from studies for most outcomes due to heterogeneity in study participants, interventions, comparison groups, and outcomes measured or reported. The methodological quality of the included studies was mixed. Risk of bias was low related to performance bias, detection bias and attrition bias for most studies. Selection bias risk was unclear for many studies and almost half of the studies did not fully or clearly report all pre-specified outcomes.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Given the high prevalence of nausea and vomiting in early pregnancy, women and health professionals need clear guidance about effective and safe interventions, based on systematically reviewed evidence. There is a lack of high-quality evidence to support any particular intervention. This is not the same as saying that the interventions studied are ineffective, but that there is insufficient strong evidence for any one intervention. The difficulties in interpreting and pooling the results of the studies included in this review highlight the need for specific, consistent and clearly justified outcomes and approaches to measurement in research studies.

Interventions for nausea and vomiting in early pregnancy

BACKGROUND

Nausea, retching and vomiting are very commonly experienced by women in early pregnancy. There are considerable physical, social and psychological effects on women who experience these symptoms. This is an update of a review of interventions for nausea and vomiting in early pregnancy last published in 2014.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effectiveness and safety of all interventions for nausea, vomiting and retching in early pregnancy, up to 20 weeks' gestation.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Pregnancy and Childbirth Group's Trials Register, the Cochrane Complementary Medicine Field's Trials Register (19 January 2015) and reference lists of retrieved studies.

SELECTION CRITERIA

All randomised controlled trials of any intervention for nausea, vomiting and retching in early pregnancy. We excluded trials of interventions for hyperemesis gravidarum, which are covered by another Cochrane review. We also excluded quasi-randomised trials and trials using a cross-over design.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Four review authors, in pairs, reviewed the eligibility of trials and independently evaluated the risk of bias and extracted the data for included trials.

MAIN RESULTS

Forty-one trials involving 5449 women, met the inclusion criteria. These trials covered many interventions, including acupressure, acustimulation, acupuncture, ginger, chamomile, lemon oil, mint oil, vitamin B6 and several antiemetic drugs. There were no included studies of dietary and other lifestyle interventions. Evidence regarding the effectiveness of P6 acupressure, auricular (ear) acupressure and acustimulation of the P6 point was limited. Acupuncture (P6 or traditional) showed no significant benefit to women in pregnancy. The use of ginger products may be helpful to women, but the evidence of effectiveness was limited and not consistent, though three recent studies support ginger over placebo. There was only limited evidence from trials to support the use of pharmacological agents including vitamin B6, Doxylamine-pyridoxoine and other anti-emetic drugs to relieve mild or moderate nausea and vomiting. There was little information on maternal and fetal adverse outcomes and on psychological, social or economic outcomes.We were unable to pool findings from studies for most outcomes due to heterogeneity in study participants, interventions, comparison groups, and outcomes measured or reported. The methodological quality of the included studies was mixed. Risk of bias was low related to performance bias, detection bias and attrition bias for most studies. Selection bias risk was unclear for many studies and almost half of the studies did not fully or clearly report all pre-specified outcomes.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Given the high prevalence of nausea and vomiting in early pregnancy, women and health professionals need clear guidance about effective and safe interventions, based on systematically reviewed evidence. There is a lack of high-quality evidence to support any particular intervention. This is not the same as saying that the interventions studied are ineffective, but that there is insufficient strong evidence for any one intervention. The difficulties in interpreting and pooling the results of the studies included in this review highlight the need for specific, consistent and clearly justified outcomes and approaches to measurement in research studies.

Vitamin E supplementation in pregnancy

BACKGROUND

Vitamin E supplementation may help reduce the risk of pregnancy complications involving oxidative stress, such as pre-eclampsia. There is a need to evaluate the efficacy and safety of vitamin E supplementation in pregnancy.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effects of vitamin E supplementation, alone or in combination with other separate supplements, on pregnancy outcomes, adverse events, side effects and use of health services.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Pregnancy and Childbirth Group's Trials Register (31 March 2015) and reference lists of retrieved studies.

SELECTION CRITERIA

All randomised or quasi-randomised controlled trials evaluating vitamin E supplementation in pregnant women. We excluded interventions using a multivitamin supplement that contained vitamin E.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently assessed trials for inclusion and risk of bias, extracted data and checked them for accuracy.

MAIN RESULTS

Twenty-one trials, involving 22,129 women were eligible for this review. Four trials did not contribute data. All of the remaining 17 trials assessed vitamin E in combination with vitamin C and/or other agents. Overall the risk of bias ranged from low to unclear to high; 10 trials were judged to be at low risk of bias, six trials to be at unclear risk of bias and five trials to be at high risk of bias. No clear difference was found between women supplemented with vitamin E in combination with other supplements during pregnancy compared with placebo for the risk of stillbirth (risk ratio (RR) 1.17, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.88 to 1.56, nine studies, 19,023 participants, I² = 0%; moderate quality evidence), neonatal death (RR 0.81, 95% CI 0.58 to 1.13, nine trials, 18,617 participants, I² = 0%), pre-eclampsia (average RR 0.91, 95% CI 0.79 to 1.06; 14 trials, 20,878 participants; I² = 48%; moderate quality evidence), preterm birth (average RR 0.98, 95% CI 0.88 to 1.09, 11 trials, 20,565 participants, I² = 52%; high quality evidence) or intrauterine growth restriction (RR 0.98, 95% CI 0.91 to 1.06, 11 trials, 20,202 participants, I² = 17%; high quality evidence). Women supplemented with vitamin E in combination with other supplements compared with placebo were at decreased risk of having a placental abruption (RR 0.64, 95% CI 0.44 to 0.93, seven trials, 14,922 participants, I² = 0%; high quality evidence). Conversely, supplementation with vitamin E was associated with an increased risk of self-reported abdominal pain (RR 1.66, 95% CI 1.16 to 2.37, one trial, 1877 participants) and term prelabour rupture of membranes (PROM) (average RR 1.77, 95% CI 1.37 to 2.28, two trials, 2504 participants, I² = 0%); however, there was no corresponding increased risk for preterm PROM (average RR 1.27, 95% CI 0.93 to 1.75, five trials, 1999 participants, I² = 66%; low quality evidence). There were no clear differences between the vitamin E and placebo or control groups for any other maternal or infant outcomes. There were no clear differing patterns in subgroups of women based on the timing of commencement of supplementation or baseline risk of adverse pregnancy outcomes. The GRADE quality of the evidence was high for preterm birth, intrauterine growth restriction and placental abruption, moderate for stillbirth and clinical pre-eclampsia, and low for preterm PROM.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

The data do not support routine vitamin E supplementation in combination with other supplements for the prevention of stillbirth, neonatal death, preterm birth, pre-eclampsia, preterm or term PROM or poor fetal growth. Further research is required to elucidate the possible role of vitamin E in the prevention of placental abruption. There was no convincing evidence that vitamin E supplementation in combination with other supplements results in other important benefits or harms.

Anti-D administration in pregnancy for preventing Rhesus alloimmunisation

BACKGROUND

During pregnancy, a Rhesus negative (Rh-negative) woman may develop antibodies when her fetus is Rhesus positive (Rh-positive). These antibodies may harm Rh-positive babies.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effects of antenatal anti-D immunoglobulin on the incidence of Rhesus D alloimmunisation when given to Rh-negative women without anti-D antibodies.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Pregnancy and Childbirth Group's Trials Register (31 May 2015) and reference lists of retrieved studies.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised trials in Rh-negative women without anti-D antibodies given anti-D after 28 weeks of pregnancy, compared with no treatment, placebo or a different regimen of anti-D.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently assessed trials for inclusion and risk of bias, extracted data and checked them for accuracy.

MAIN RESULTS

We included two trials involving over 4500 women, comparing anti-D prophylaxis with no anti-D during pregnancy in this review. Overall, the trials were judged to be at moderate to high risk of bias. The quality of the evidence for pre-specified outcomes was also assessed using the GRADE (Grades of Recommendation, Assessment, Development and Evaluation) approach.In regards to primary review outcomes, there did not appear to be a clear difference in the risks of immunisation when women who received anti-D at 28 and 34 weeks' gestation were compared with women who were not given antenatal anti-D: risk ratio (RR) for incidence of Rhesus D alloimmunisation during pregnancy was 0.42 (95% confidence interval (CI) 0.15 to 1.17, two trials, 3902 women; GRADE: low quality evidence); at birth of a Rh-positive infant the RR was 0.42 (95% CI 0.15 to 1.17, two trials, 2297 women); and within 12 months after birth of a Rh-positive infant the average RR was 0.39 (95% CI 0.10 to 1.62, two trials, 2048 women; Tau²: 0.47; I²: 39%; GRADE: low quality evidence). Neither of the trials reported on incidence of Rhesus D alloimmunisation in subsequent pregnancies.Considering secondary outcomes, in one trial, women receiving anti-D during pregnancy were shown to be less likely to register a positive Kleihauer test (which detects fetal cells in maternal blood) in pregnancy (at 32 to 25 weeks) (RR 0.60, 95% CI 0.41 to 0.88; 1884 women; GRADE: low quality evidence) and at the birth of a Rh-positive infant (RR 0.60, 95% CI 0.46 to 0.79; 1189 women; GRADE: low quality evidence). No clear differences were seen for neonatal jaundice (RR 0.26, 95% CI 0.03 to 2.30; 1882 infants; GRADE: very low quality evidence). Neither of the trials reported on adverse effects associated with anti-D treatment.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Existing studies do not provide conclusive evidence that the use of anti-D during pregnancy benefits either mother or baby in terms of incidence of Rhesus D alloimmunisation during the pregnancy or postpartum, or the incidence of neonatal morbidity (jaundice) (low to very low quality evidence). However women receiving anti-D may be less likely to register a positive Kleihauer test in pregnancy and at the birth of a Rh-positive infant (low quality evidence). Fewer women who receive anti-D during pregnancy may have Rhesus D antibodies in a subsequent pregnancy, with benefits for the baby, however this needs to be tested in studies of robust design.

High feedback versus low feedback of prenatal ultrasound for reducing maternal anxiety and improving maternal health behaviour in pregnancy

BACKGROUND

Prenatal ultrasound is one of many techniques used in screening and diagnosis. It gives parents instant access to the images of the fetus. Receiving information promotes knowledge and understanding, but it may also increase maternal anxiety.

OBJECTIVES

To compare high feedback versus low feedback during prenatal ultrasound for reducing maternal anxiety and improving maternal health behaviour.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Pregnancy and Childbirth Group's Trials Register (12 May 2015), the Central Register of Controlled Trials (The Cochrane Library 2015, Issue 5), MEDLINE (January 1966 to 12 May 2015), and the ISRCTN Registry (12 May 2015). We handsearched citation lists of relevant publications. We did not apply any language or date restrictions.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of high feedback (women can see the monitor screen and receive detailed visual and verbal explanations) versus low feedback (women can not see the monitor screen and women are given only a summary statement of the scan) during prenatal ultrasound. The primary outcome measure was maternal state anxiety.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently assessed trials for inclusion and risk of bias, extracted data and checked for accuracy. We have expressed results as risk ratio (RR) or mean differences (MD), together with their 95% confidence intervals (CI).

MAIN RESULTS

We included four studies (365 women). Three RCTs (346 participants) reported the effect of high versus low feedback during ultrasound on state anxiety scores (mean difference (MD) 0.92, 95% confidence interval (CI) -0.58 to 2.43; participants = 346; three studies, low quality evidence). Two trials (148 participants) reported women's views of the level of feedback. They do not show that women in the high feedback groups are more likely to choose very positive adjectives to describe their feelings after the scan (risk ratio (RR) 3.30; 95% CI 0.73 to 14.85). Women who had a high feedback during ultrasound were more likely to stop smoking during pregnancy (RR 2.93, 95% CI 1.25 to 6.86; participants = 129; one study; low quality evidence) and to avoid alcohol during pregnancy (RR 2.96, 95% CI 1.15 to 7.60; participants = 129; one study; low quality evidence). Downgrading of evidence was based on the unclear risk of bias of included studies, wide CI crossing the line of no effect or presence of heterogeneity.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

There is insufficient evidence to support either high or low feedback during a prenatal ultrasound to reduce maternal anxiety and promote health behaviour.

Interventions for preventing recurrent urinary tract infection during pregnancy

BACKGROUND

Recurrent urinary tract infections (RUTI) are common in women who are pregnant and may cause serious adverse pregnancy outcomes for both mother and child including preterm birth and small-for-gestational-age babies. Interventions used to prevent RUTI in women who are pregnant can be pharmacological (antibiotics) or non-pharmacological (cranberry products, acupuncture, probiotics and behavioural modifications). So far little is known about the best way to prevent RUTI in pregnant women.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effects of interventions for preventing RUTI in pregnant women.The primary maternal outcomes were RUTI before birth (variously defined) and preterm birth (before 37 weeks). The primary infant outcomes were small-for-gestational age and total mortality.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Pregnancy and Childbirth Group's Trials Register (20 May 2015) and reference lists of retrieved articles.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Published, unpublished and ongoing randomised controlled trials (RCTs), quasi-RCTs, clustered-randomised trials and abstracts of any intervention (pharmacological and non-pharmacological) for preventing RUTI during pregnancy (compared with another intervention, placebo or with usual care).

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently assessed trials for inclusion and risk of bias, extracted data and checked them for accuracy.

MAIN RESULTS

The review included one trial involving 200 women and was at moderate to high risk of bias.The trial compared a daily dose of nitrofurantoin and close surveillance (regular clinic visit, urine cultures and antibiotics when a positive culture was found) with close surveillance only. No significant differences were found for the primary outcomes: recurrent pyelonephritis (risk ratio (RR) 0.89, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.31 to 2.53; one study, 167 women), RUTI before birth (RR 0.30, 95% CI 0.06 to 1.38; one study, 167 women), and preterm birth (before 37 weeks) (RR 1.18, 95% CI 0.42 to 3.35; one study, 147 women). The overall quality of evidence for these outcomes as assessed using GRADE was very low. There were no significant differences between the two comparison groups for any of the following secondary outcomes, birthweight less than 2500 (g) (RR 2.03, 95% CI 0.53 to 7.80; one study, 147 infants), birthweight (mean difference (MD) -113.00, 95% CI -327.20 to 101.20; one study, 147 infants), five-minute Apgar score less than seven (RR 2.03, 95% CI 0.19 to 21.87; one study, 147 infants) and miscarriages (RR 3.11, 95% CI 0.33 to 29.29; one study, 167 women). The evidence for these secondary outcomes was also of very low quality. The incidence of asymptomatic bacteriuria (ASB) (at least 10(3) colonies per mL) (secondary outcome), only reported in women with a clinic attendance rate of more than 90% (RR 0.55, 95% CI 0.34 to 0.89; one study, 102 women), was significantly reduced in women who received nitrofurantoin and close surveillance. Data on total mortality and small-for-gestational-age babies were not reported.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

A daily dose of nitrofurantoin and close surveillance has not been shown to prevent RUTI compared with close surveillance alone. A significant reduction of ASB was found in women with a high clinic attendance rate and who received nitrofurantoin and close surveillance. There was limited reporting of both primary and secondary outcomes for both women and infants. No conclusions can be drawn regarding the optimal intervention to prevent RUTI in women who are pregnant. Randomised controlled trials comparing different pharmacological and non-pharmacological interventions are necessary to investigate potentially effective interventions to prevent RUTI in women who are pregnant.

[Guideline development: Going from evidence to recommendations. Challenges and opportunities--a methodologist's view]

The development of evidence-based guidelines is an interdisciplinary process in which methodologists play an important role. In addition to creating new or assessing existing systematic reviews as a basis for evidence-based decision making, methodologists can support the entire development process. Due to the increasing complexity of methods and the information overload of available publications, cooperation between the involved experts (especially clinicians and methodologists, but also patient representatives) is essential in order to develop reliable, acceptable and practical guidelines. This article looks at eight key points of the guideline development process (transparency, conflicts of interest, composition of guideline development group, establishing evidence foundation, development and formulation of recommendations, external review and updating) from the perspective of methodologists, and highlights problems, challenges and solution approaches. The earliest possible involvement of methodologists, a clear and a--for non-methodologists--understandable presentation of the best available evidence, the integration of methodologists in the creation and formulation of recommendations (systematic, evidence-based decision-making process) and cooperation between the participating experts are essential to improve the development process of evidence-based guidelines.

Expedited versus conservative approaches for vaginal delivery in breech presentation

BACKGROUND

In a vaginal breech birth there may be benefit from rapid delivery of the baby to prevent progressive acidosis. However, this needs to be weighed against the potential trauma of a quick delivery.

OBJECTIVES

The objective of this review was to assess the effects of expedited vaginal delivery (breech delivery from umbilicus to delivery of the head within one contraction) on perinatal outcomes.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Pregnancy and Childbirth Group's Trials Register (31 May 2015) and reference lists of retrieved studies.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised trials of expedited vaginal breech delivery compared with delivery not routinely expedited in women undergoing vaginal breech delivery.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently assessed the one identified trial for inclusion.If studies are included in future updates, two review authors will assess risk of bias, extract data and check data for accuracy.

MAIN RESULTS

No studies were included.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

There is not enough evidence to evaluate the effects of expedited vaginal breech delivery.

Planned caesarean section for term breech delivery

BACKGROUND

Poor outcomes after breech birth might be the result of underlying conditions causing breech presentation or due to factors associated with the delivery.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effects of planned caesarean section for singleton breech presentation at term on measures of pregnancy outcome.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Pregnancy and Childbirth Group's Trials Register (31 March 2015).

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised trials comparing planned caesarean section for singleton breech presentation at term with planned vaginal birth.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently assessed trials for inclusion and risk of bias, extracted data and checked them for accuracy.

MAIN RESULTS

Three trials (2396 participants) were included in the review. Caesarean delivery occurred in 550/1227 (45%) of those women allocated to a vaginal delivery protocol and 1060/1169 (91%) of those women allocated to planned caesarean section (average risk ratio (RR) random-effects, 1.88, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.60 to 2.20; three studies, 2396 women, evidence graded low quality). Perinatal or neonatal death (excluding fatal anomalies) or severe neonatal morbidity was reduced with a policy of planned caesarean section in settings with a low national perinatal mortality rate (RR 0.07, 95% CI 0.02 to 0.29, one study, 1025 women, evidence graded moderate quality), but not in settings with a high national perinatal mortality rate (RR 0.66, 95% CI 0.35 to 1.24, one study, 1053 women, evidence graded low quality). The difference between subgroups was significant (Test for subgroup differences: Chi² = 8.01, df = 1 (P = 0.005), I² = 87.5%). Due to this significant heterogeneity, a random-effects analysis was performed. The average overall effect was not statistically significant (RR 0.23, 95% CI 0.02 to 2.44, one study, 2078 infants). Perinatal or neonatal death (excluding fatal anomalies) was reduced with planned caesarean section (RR 0.29, 95% CI 0.10 to 0.86, three studies, 2388 women). The proportional reductions were similar for countries with low and high national perinatal mortality rates.The numbers studied were too small to satisfactorily address reductions in birth trauma and brachial plexus injury with planned caesarean section. Neither of these outcomes reached statistical significance (birth trauma: RR 0.42, 95% CI 0.16 to 1.10, one study, 2062 infants (20 events),evidence graded low quality; brachial plexus injury: RR 0.35, 95% CI 0.08 to 1.47, three studies, 2375 infants (nine events)).Planned caesarean section was associated with modestly increased short-term maternal morbidity (RR 1.29, 95% CI 1.03 to 1.61, three studies, 2396 women,low quality evidence). At three months after delivery, women allocated to the planned caesarean section group reported less urinary incontinence (RR 0.62, 95% CI 0.41 to 0.93, one study, 1595 women); no difference in 'any pain' (RR 1.09, 95% CI 0.93 to 1.29, one study, 1593 women,low quality evidence); more abdominal pain (RR 1.89, 95% CI 1.29 to 2.79, one study, 1593 women); and less perineal pain (RR 0.32, 95% CI 0.18 to 0.58, one study, 1593 women).At two years, there were no differences in the combined outcome 'death or neurodevelopmental delay' (RR 1.09, 95% CI 0.52 to 2.30, one study, 920 children,evidence graded low quality); more infants who had been allocated to planned caesarean delivery had medical problems at two years (RR 1.41, 95% CI 1.05 to 1.89, one study, 843 children). Maternal outcomes at two years were also similar. In countries with low perinatal mortality rates, the protocol of planned caesarean section was associated with lower healthcare costs, expressed in 2002 Canadian dollars (mean difference -$877.00, 95% CI -894.89 to -859.11, one study, 1027 women).All of the trials included in this review had design limitations, and the GRADE level of evidence was mostly low. No studies attempted to blind the intervention, and the process of random allocation was suboptimal in two studies. Two of the three trials had serious design limitations, however these studies contributed to fewer outcomes than the large multi-centre trial with lower risk of bias.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Planned caesarean section compared with planned vaginal birth reduced perinatal or neonatal death as well as the composite outcome death or serious neonatal morbidity, at the expense of somewhat increased maternal morbidity. In a subset with 2-year follow up, infant medical problems were increased following planned caesarean section and no difference in long-term neurodevelopmental delay or the outcome "death or neurodevelopmental delay" was found, though the numbers were too small to exclude the possibility of an important difference in either direction.The benefits need to be weighed against factors such as the mother's preference for vaginal birth and risks such as future pregnancy complications in the woman's specific healthcare setting. The option of external cephalic version is dealt with in separate reviews. The data from this review cannot be generalised to settings where caesarean section is not readily available, or to methods of breech delivery that differ materially from the clinical delivery protocols used in the trials reviewed. The review will help to inform individualised decision-making regarding breech delivery. Research on strategies to improve the safety of breech delivery and to further investigate the possible association of caesarean section with infant medical problems is needed.

Alternative versus standard packages of antenatal care for low-risk pregnancy

BACKGROUND

The number of visits for antenatal (prenatal) care developed without evidence of how many visits are necessary. The content of each visit also needs evaluation.

OBJECTIVES

To compare the effects of antenatal care programmes with reduced visits for low-risk women with standard care.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Pregnancy and Childbirth Group's Trials Register (23 March 2015), reference lists of articles and contacted researchers in the field.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised trials comparing a reduced number of antenatal visits, with or without goal-oriented care, versus standard care.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently assessed trials for inclusion and risk of bias, extracted data and checked for accuracy. We assessed studies for risk of bias and graded the quality of the evidence.

MAIN RESULTS

We included seven trials (more than 60,000 women): four in high-income countries with individual randomisation; three in low- and middle-income countries with cluster randomisation (clinics as the unit of randomisation). Most of the data included in the review came from the three large, well-designed cluster-randomised trials that took place in Argentina, Cuba, Saudi Arabia, Thailand and Zimbabwe. All results have been adjusted for the cluster design effect. All of the trials were at some risk of bias as blinding of women and staff was not feasible with this type of intervention. For primary outcomes, evidence was graded as being of moderate or low quality, with downgrading decisions due to risks of bias and imprecision of effects.The number of visits for standard care varied, with fewer visits in low- and middle- income country trials. In studies in high-income countries, women in the reduced visits groups, on average, attended between 8.2 and 12 times. In low- and middle- income country trials, many women in the reduced visits group attended on fewer than five occasions, although in these trials the content as well as the number of visits was changed, so as to be more 'goal-oriented'.Perinatal mortality was increased for those randomised to reduced visits rather than standard care, and this difference was borderline for statistical significance (risk ratio (RR) 1.14; 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.00 to 1.31; five trials, 56,431 babies; moderate-quality evidence). In the subgroup analysis, for high-income countries the number of deaths was small (32/5108), and there was no clear difference between the groups (RR 0.90; 95% CI 0.45 to 1.80, two trials); for low- and middle-income countries perinatal mortality was significantly higher in the reduced visits group (RR 1.15; 95% CI 1.01 to 1.32, three trials).There was no clear difference between groups for our other primary outcomes: maternal death (RR 1.13, 95%CI 0.50 to 2.57, three cluster-randomised trials, 51,504 women, low-quality evidence); hypertensive disorders of pregnancy (various definitions including pre-eclampsia) (RR 0.95, 95% CI 0.80 to 1.12, six studies, 54,108 women, low-quality evidence); preterm birth (RR 1.02, 95% CI 0.94 to 1.11; seven studies, 53,661 women, moderate-quality evidence); and small-for-gestational age (RR 0.99, 95% CI 0.91 to 1.09, four studies 43,045 babies, moderate-quality evidence).Reduced visits were associated with a reduction in admission to neonatal intensive care that was borderline for significance (RR 0.89; 95% CI 0.79 to 1.02, five studies, 43,048 babies, moderate quality evidence). There were no clear differences between the groups for the other secondary clinical outcomes.Women in all settings were less satisfied with the reduced visits schedule and perceived the gap between visits as too long. Reduced visits may be associated with lower costs.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

In settings with limited resources where the number of visits is already low, reduced visits programmes of antenatal care are associated with an increase in perinatal mortality compared to standard care, although admission to neonatal intensive care may be reduced. Women prefer the standard visits schedule. Where the standard number of visits is low, visits should not be reduced without close monitoring of fetal and neonatal outcome.