Interventions with pregnant women, new mothers and other primary caregivers for preventing early childhood caries

BACKGROUND

Dental caries, a common chronic disease of childhood, is associated with adverse health and economic consequences for infants and their families. Socioeconomically disadvantaged children have a higher risk of early childhood caries (ECC). This review updates one published in 2019.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effects of interventions undertaken with pregnant women, new mothers or other primary caregivers of infants in the first year of life, for preventing ECC (from birth to six years).

SEARCH METHODS

We searched Cochrane Oral Health's Trials Register, Cochrane Pregnancy and Childbirth's Trials Register, CENTRAL, MEDLINE (Ovid), Embase (Ovid), CINAHL EBSCO, the US National Institutes of Health Ongoing Trials Register (clinicaltrials.gov) and WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (apps.who.int/trialsearch). The latest searches were run on 3 January, 2023.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing interventions with pregnant women, or new mothers and other primary caregivers of infants in the first year of life, against standard care, placebo or another intervention, reporting on a primary outcome: caries presence in primary teeth, dmfs (decayed, missing, filled primary surfaces index), or dmft (decayed, missing, filled teeth index), in children up to six years of age. Intervention types include clinical, oral health promotion/education (hygiene education, breastfeeding and other dietary advice) and policy or service.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently assessed study eligibility, extracted data, assessed risk of bias, and assessed certainty of evidence (GRADE).

MAIN RESULTS

We included 23 RCTs (5 cluster-randomised), involving 25,953 caregivers (mainly mothers) and their children. Fifteen trials assessed oral health education/promotion interventions against standard care. Six trials assessed a clinical intervention for mother dentition, against placebo, or a different type of clinical intervention. Two trials assessed oral health/education promotion plus clinical intervention (for mother's dentition) against standard care. At most, five trials (maximum of 1326 children and 130 mothers) contributed data to any comparison. Enamel-only caries were included in the diagnosis of caries in some studies. For many trials, the risk of bias was unclear due to lack of methodological details reported. In thirteen trials, participants were socioeconomically disadvantaged. No trial indicated receiving funding that was likely to have influenced their results. Oral health education/promotion interventions Child diet and feeding practice advice versus standard care: We observed a probable 15 per cent reduced risk of caries presence in primary teeth with the intervention (RR 0.85, 95% CI 0.75 to 0.97; 3 trials; 782 participants; moderate-certainty evidence), and there may be a slightly lower mean dmfs (MD -0.29, 95% CI -0.58 to 0; 2 trials; 757 participants; low-certainty evidence); however, the evidence is very uncertain regarding the difference between groups in mean dmft (MD -0.90, 95% CI -1.85 to 0.05; 1 trial; 340 participants; very low-certainty evidence). Breastfeeding promotion and support versus standard care: We observed little or no difference between groups in the risk of caries presence in primary teeth (RR 0.96, 95% CI 0.89 to 1.03; 2 trials; 1148 participants; low-certainty evidence) and in mean dmft (MD -0.12, 95% CI -0.59 to 0.36; 2 trials; 652 participants; low-certainty evidence). dmfs was not reported. Child diet advice compared with standard care: We are very uncertain about the effect on the risk of caries presence in primary teeth (RR 1.08, 95% CI 0.34 to 3.37; 1 trial; 148 participants; very low-certainty evidence). dmfs and dmft were not reported. Oral hygiene, child diet and feeding practice advice versus standard care: The evidence is very uncertain about the effect on the risk of caries presence in primary teeth (RR 0.73, 95% CI 0.50 to 1.07; 5 trials; 1326 participants; very low-certainty evidence) and there maybe little to no difference in mean dmfs (MD -0.87, 95% CI -2.18 to 0.43; 2 trials; 657 participants; low-certainty evidence) and mean dmft (MD -0.30, 95% CI -0.96 to 0.36; 1 trial; 187 participants; low-certainty evidence). High-dose versus low-dose vitamin D supplementation during pregnancy: We are very uncertain about the effect on risk of caries presence in primary teeth (RR 0.99, 95% CI 0.70 to 1.41; 1 trial; 496 participants; very low-certainty evidence). dmfs and dmft were not reported. Clinical interventions (for mother dentition) Chlorhexidine (CHX, a commonly prescribed antiseptic agent) or iodine-NaF application and prophylaxis versus placebo: We are very uncertain regarding the difference in risk of caries presence in primary teeth between antimicrobial and placebo treatment for mother dentition (RR 0.97, 95% CI 0.80 to 1.19; 3 trials; 479 participants; very low-certainty evidence). No trial reported dmfs or dmft. Xylitol compared with CHX antimicrobial treatment: We are very uncertain about the effect on caries presence in primary teeth (RR 0.62, 95% CI 0.27 to 1.39; 1 trial, 96 participants; very low-certainty evidence), but we observed there may be a lower mean dmft with xylitol (MD -2.39; 95% CI -4.10 to -0.68; 1 trial, 113 participants; low-certainty evidence). No trial reported dmfs. Oral health education/promotion plus clinical interventions (for mother dentition) Diet and feeding practice advice for infants and young children plus basic dental care for mothers compared with standard care: We are very uncertain about the effect on risk of caries presence in primary teeth (RR 0.44, 95% CI 0.05 to 3.95; 2 trials, 324 participants; very low-certainty evidence) or on mean dmft (1 study, not estimable). No trial reported dmfs. No trials evaluated policy or health service interventions.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

There is moderate-certainty evidence that providing advice on diet and feeding to pregnant women, mothers or other caregivers with children up to the age of one year probably leads to a slightly reduced risk of early childhood caries (ECC). The remaining evidence is low to very-low certainty and is insufficient for determining which, if any, other intervention types and features may be effective for preventing ECC, and in which settings. Large, high-quality RCTs of oral health education/promotion, clinical, and policy and service access interventions, are warranted to determine the effects and relative effects of different interventions and inform practice. We have identified 13 ongoing studies. Future studies should consider if and how effects are modified by intervention features and participant characteristics (including socioeconomic status).

Chinese family care partners of older adults in Canada have grit: A qualitative study

AIM

To explain the process taken by Chinese family care partners of older adults in the Greater Toronto Area, Canada, to access health and social services in their communities. The research question was: What mechanisms and structures impact the agency of Chinese family care partners of older adults, in the process of assisting them to access health and social services?

DESIGN

This qualitative study was informed by critical realism.

METHODS

Chinese family care partners of older adults in the Greater Toronto Area, Canada, were interviewed from August 2020 to June 2021. Transcripts underwent thematic analysis.

FINDINGS

Twenty-eight Chinese family care partners expressed a firm commitment to maintain caregiving conditions and to judiciously access health and social services. Their commitment was made up of three parts: (a) legislative and cultural norms of family, work, and society; (b) their perseverance to fill gaps with limited social and financial resources; (c) the quality of their relationship to, and illness trajectory of the older adults. The social structures created tension in how Chinese family care partners made decisions, negotiated resources, and ultimately monitored and coordinated timely access with older adults.

CONCLUSION

Participants' commitment and perseverance were conceptualized as "grit," central to their agency to conform to legislative and cultural norms. Moreover, findings support grit's power to motivate and sustain family caregiving, in order for older adults to age in place as long as possible with finite resources.

IMPLICATIONS FOR THE PROFESSION

This study highlights the importance of cultural awareness education for nurses, enabling continuity of care at a systems level and for a more resilient healthcare system.

IMPACT

Family care partners' grit may be crucial for nurses to harness when together, they face limited access to culturally appropriate health and social services in a system grounded in values of equity and inclusion, as in Canada.

REPORTING METHOD

When writing this manuscript, we adhered to relevant EQUATOR guidelines of the Consolidated Criteria for Reporting Qualitative Research (COREQ).

PATIENT OR PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT AND ENGAGEMENT

No patient or public involvement.

Respite care for people with dementia and their carers

BACKGROUND

Caring for someone with dementia can be emotionally and physically demanding. Respite care is any intervention designed to give rest or relief to caregivers. It is not clear what positive and negative effects such care may have on them, or on people with dementia.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the benefits and harms of respite care for people with dementia and their caregivers, in particular the effect of respite care on rates of institutionalisation.

SEARCH METHODS

The trials were identified from a search of ALOIS, the Specialized Register of the Cochrane Dementia and Cognitive Improvement Group, using the terms respite* OR daycare OR caregiver* relief. ALOIS contains up-to-date records from all major healthcare databases and many ongoing trial databases.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials comparing respite care with a control intervention for people with dementia.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors carried out study selection independently and reached a consensus through discussion. Data were extracted by a single review author. The review authors contacted all investigators for methodological details not reported in the text and for additional data for three studies included in the previous version of the review.

MAIN RESULTS

Four trials are now included in the review, with 753 participants. They were different in many ways including the intervention, duration, outcomes and control group so pooling of data was not possible. Overall, the quality of the evidence was rated as very low. Re-analysis of outcomes using data from the published studies found no significant effects of respite care compared to no respite care on any caregiver variable. When respite care was compared to polarity therapy a significant effect was found in favour of polarity therapy for caregiver perceived stress (n = 38, MD 5.80, 95% CI 1.43 to 10.17), but not for other measures of psychological health and other caregiver outcomes. No studies reported evaluable data on outcomes related to the people with dementia.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Current evidence does not demonstrate any benefits or adverse effects from the use of respite care for people with dementia or their caregivers. These results should be treated with caution, however, as they may reflect the lack of high quality research in this area rather than an actual lack of benefit. Given the frequency with which respite care is advocated and provided, well-designed trials are needed in this area.

Communication skills training for healthcare professionals working with people who have cancer

BACKGROUND

This is an updated version of a review that was originally published in the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews in 2004, Issue 2. People with cancer, their families and carers have a high prevalence of psychological stress which may be minimised by effective communication and support from their attending healthcare professionals (HCPs). Research suggests communication skills do not reliably improve with experience, therefore, considerable effort is dedicated to courses that may improve communication skills for HCPs involved in cancer care. A variety of communication skills training (CST) courses have been proposed and are in practice. We conducted this review to determine whether CST works and which types of CST, if any, are the most effective.

OBJECTIVES

To assess whether CST is effective in improving the communication skills of HCPs involved in cancer care, and in improving patient health status and satisfaction.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the following electronic databases: Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) Issue 2, 2012, MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsycInfo and CINAHL to February 2012. The original search was conducted in November 2001. In addition, we handsearched the reference lists of relevant articles and relevant conference proceedings for additional studies.

SELECTION CRITERIA

The original review was a narrative review that included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and controlled before-and-after studies. In this updated version, we limited our criteria to RCTs evaluating 'CST' compared with 'no CST' or other CST in HCPs working in cancer care. Primary outcomes were changes in HCP communication skills measured in interactions with real and/or simulated patients with cancer, using objective scales. We excluded studies whose focus was communication skills in encounters related to informed consent for research.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently assessed trials and extracted data to a pre-designed data collection form. We pooled data using the random-effects model and, for continuous data, we used standardised mean differences (SMDs).

MAIN RESULTS

We included 15 RCTs (42 records), conducted mainly in outpatient settings. Eleven studies compared CST with no CST intervention, three studies compared the effect of a follow-up CST intervention after initial CST training, and one study compared two types of CST. The types of CST courses evaluated in these trials were diverse. Study participants included oncologists (six studies), residents (one study) other doctors (one study), nurses (six studies) and a mixed team of HCPs (one study). Overall, 1147 HCPs participated (536 doctors, 522 nurses and 80 mixed HCPs).Ten studies contributed data to the meta-analyses. HCPs in the CST group were statistically significantly more likely to use open questions in the post-intervention interviews than the control group (five studies, 679 participant interviews; P = 0.04, I² = 65%) and more likely to show empathy towards patients (six studies, 727 participant interviews; P = 0.004, I² = 0%); we considered this evidence to be of moderate and high quality, respectively. Doctors and nurses did not perform statistically significantly differently for any HCP outcomes.There were no statistically significant differences in the other HCP communication skills except for the subgroup of participant interviews with simulated patients, where the intervention group was significantly less likely to present 'facts only' compared with the control group (four studies, 344 participant interviews; P = 0.01, I² = 70%).There were no significant differences between the groups with regard to outcomes assessing HCP 'burnout', patient satisfaction or patient perception of the HCPs communication skills. Patients in the control group experienced a greater reduction in mean anxiety scores in a meta-analyses of two studies (169 participant interviews; P = 0.02; I² = 8%); we considered this evidence to be of a very low quality.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Various CST courses appear to be effective in improving some types of HCP communication skills related to information gathering and supportive skills. We were unable to determine whether the effects of CST are sustained over time, whether consolidation sessions are necessary, and which types of CST programs are most likely to work. We found no evidence to support a beneficial effect of CST on HCP 'burnout', patients' mental or physical health, and patient satisfaction.

Stroke liaison workers for stroke patients and carers: an individual patient data meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Many patients experience depression, social isolation and anxiety post stroke. These are associated with a poorer outcome. Ameliorating these problems may improve patient wellbeing.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the impact of a healthcare worker or volunteer whose multi-dimensional roles have been grouped under the title 'stroke liaison worker'.

SEARCH STRATEGY

We searched the Cochrane Stroke Group Trials Register (searched February 2009), the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (The Cochrane Library Issue 1, 2009), MEDLINE (1966 to 2009), EMBASE (1980 to 2009) and four other databases. We performed a cited reference search, searched conference proceedings and trials registers, checked reference lists and contacted authors and trial investigators.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials investigating the impact of a stroke liaison worker versus usual care.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We invited trialists to participate in a review of individual patient data. Primary outcomes for patients were subjective health status and extended activities of daily living. Primary outcomes for carers were subjective health status including measures of carer strain.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 16 trials involving 4759 participants. Analysis did not show a significant overall difference for subjective health status (standardised mean difference (SMD) -0.03, 95% confidence interval (CI) -0.11 to 0.04, P = 0.34) or extended activities of daily living (SMD 0.04, 95% CI -0.03 to 0.11, P = 0.22). There was no overall significant effect for the outcome of carer subjective health status (SMD 0.04, 95% CI -0.05 to 0.14, P = 0.37). Patients with mild to moderate disability (Barthel 15 to 19) had a significant reduction in dependence (odds ratio (OR) 0.62, 95% CI 0.44 to 0.87, P = 0.006). This would equate to 10 fewer dependent patients (95% CI 17 fewer to 4 fewer) for every 100 patients seen by the stroke liaison worker. Similar results were seen for the outcome of death or dependence for the subgroup with Barthel 15 to 19 (OR 0.55, 95% CI 0.38 to 0.81, P = 0.002). This risk difference equates to 11 fewer dead or dependent patients (95% CI 17 fewer to 4 fewer) for every 100 patients seen by the stroke liaison worker.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

There is no evidence for the effectiveness of this multifaceted intervention in improving outcomes for all groups of patients or carers. Patients with mild to moderate disability benefit from a reduction in death and disability. Patients and carers do report improved satisfaction with some aspects of service provision.

Support for carers of people with Alzheimer's type dementia

BACKGROUND

Research has highlighted the problems for carers of people with dementia. These include the effective loss of companionship and support of a life partner, social isolation and complex financial, legal and social decision making. The burden of caring is financially, emotionally and physically significant. Studies of the effects of ways of supporting carers and reducing the burden of caring often examine a range of outcomes. Probably because of these characteristics, no formal overview of this area of service provision has been undertaken. Moreover, the term 'intervention' in relation to caregivers of people with Alzheimer's disease is open to wide variations in interpretation at the level of service provision. Interventions range from the application of 'hi-tech' computer technology for socialy isolated carers, to the formation of specialist support groups and respite services.

OBJECTIVES

The objective of this review is to provide an assessment of the effectiveness of health and/or social interventions designed to help support the carers of people with Alzheimer's-type dementias.

SEARCH STRATEGY

The Cochrane Controlled Trials Register was searched using the terms 'carer*' and 'caregiv*'. See the Cochrane Dementia & Cognitive Impairment group's details for the full search strategy.

SELECTION CRITERIA

All randomised trials in which primary carers of people with Alzheimer's disease are allocated to either intervention or non-intervention/control groups and where the intervention was provided by healthcare and/or social services.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Data was extracted by both reviewers and was found to be unsuitable for quantitative synthesis. A qualitative overview is presented and structured according to the comparisons used in the review. Weighted Mean Differences (weighted by sample size) for each outcome and its subcategories are also presented.

MAIN RESULTS

The results of the review are inconclusive. No evidence was found for the following comparison interventions: 1) individualised service assessment and planning versus conventional support 2) technology-based carer networking (via computers or telephones) versus conventional support 3) carer-education/training versus conventional support 4) multi-faceted/dimensional strategies (such as specialised carer assessment and training) versus conventional support Whilst the overview suggests little or no evidence that interventions to support caregivers of people with Alzheimer's disease are of quantifiable benefit, the poor quality and small sample sizes of the studies, as well as the diversity of interventions examined and outcomes reported, mean that this conclusion cannot be put forward without the need for caution, particularly as some of the studies put forward qualitative evidence which contradicts this conclusion.

REVIEWER'S CONCLUSIONS

With the limited nature of the research evidence in mind, it is not possible to recommend either wholesale investment in caregiver support programmes or withdrawal of the same. With the addition of further studies in future updates of this review, expected in early 1999, this presently inconclusive picture may become clearer. A number of conclusions relating to future areas of research can be put forward with more conviction. Specifically, 1) Future trials need to examine interventions included in the existing knowledge base on Alzheimer's carer-supportive interventions. 2) Outcome measures used should mirror those in similar studies. 3) Outcome measures need to be clinically and 'lay' relevant. 4) Trials need to be of longer duration given the 7-10 years median life expectancy of people with Alzheimer's Disease. 5) Sample sizes need to be increased and calculated properly given the likelihood of a moderate intervention effect (if any). 7) Blinding at the outcome assessment stage needs to be a part of future basic trial designs if bias is to be avoided. 8) If reviews are to have their power increased then quality o