-
Reproductive Health Jan 2021Unintended pregnancies (UIP) have a significant impact on health of women and the health budget of countries. Contraception is an effective way to prevent UIPs. The... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Unintended pregnancies (UIP) have a significant impact on health of women and the health budget of countries. Contraception is an effective way to prevent UIPs. The study objective was to collate evidence on clinical effectiveness of etonogestrel subdermal implant (ESI), continuation rate and side effect profile among eligible women of reproductive age group, as compared to levonorgestrel intrauterine system (LNG-IUS), copper intrauterine device (Cu-IUD) and depot medroxy progesterone acetate injections; other types of contraceptive implants were excluded as comparators.
METHODS
The protocol of the systematic review was registered in Prospero (registration number: CRD42018116580). MEDLINE via PubMed, Cochrane library and web of science were the electronic databases searched. A search strategy was formulated and studies from 1998 to 2019 were included. Clinical trial registries and grey literature search was done. Critical assessment of included studies was done using appropriate tools. A qualitative synthesis of included studies was done and a meta-analysis was conducted in RevMan software for continuation rates of ESI as compared to other long acting reversible contraceptives (LARC) e.g. LNG IUS and Cu-IUD.
RESULTS
The search yielded 23,545 studies. After excluding 467 duplicates, 23,078 titles were screened and 51 studies were included for the review. Eight of the 15 studies reporting clinical effectiveness reported 100% effectiveness and overall pearl index ranged from 0 to 1.4. One-year continuation rates ranged from 57-97%; 44-95% at the end of second year and 25-78% by 3 years of use. Abnormal menstruation was the most commonly reported side effect. There was no significant difference in bone mineral density at 1 year follow-up. The meta-analyses showed that odds ratio (OR) of 1-year continuation rate was 1.55 (1.36, 1.76) for LNG-IUS vs. ESI and 1.34 (1.13, 1.58) for copper-IUD vs. ESI; showing that continuation rates at the end of one-year were higher in LNG-IUS and copper-IUD as compared to ESI.
CONCLUSION
ESI is clinically effective and safe contraceptive method to use, yet 1-year continuation rates are lower as compared to LNG-IUS and copper-IUD, mostly attributed to the disturbances in the menstruation.
Topics: Adolescent; Adult; Contraception Behavior; Contraceptive Agents, Female; Contraceptive Agents, Hormonal; Desogestrel; Female; Humans; Intrauterine Devices, Copper; Pregnancy; Treatment Outcome; Young Adult
PubMed: 33407632
DOI: 10.1186/s12978-020-01054-y -
Nutrients Jun 2023Dysmenorrhea causes pain and inconvenience during menstruation. In addition to medication, natural compounds are widely used to relieve various types of pain. In this... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
Dysmenorrhea causes pain and inconvenience during menstruation. In addition to medication, natural compounds are widely used to relieve various types of pain. In this study, we aimed to assess the effects of vitamin D (vit. D) supplementation in relieving the symptoms of primary dysmenorrhea. A comprehensive systematic database search of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) was performed. Oral forms of vit. D supplementation were included and compared with a placebo or standard care. The degree of dysmenorrhea pain was measured with a visual analogue scale or numerical rating scale. Outcomes were compared using the standardized mean difference (SMD) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) in a meta-analysis. RCTs were assessed using the Cochrane risk-of-bias v2 (RoB 2) tool. The meta-analysis included 8 randomized controlled trials involving 695 participants. The results of the quantitative analysis showed a significantly lower degree of pain in the vit. D versus placebo in those with dysmenorrhea (SMD: -1.404, 95% CI: -2.078 to -0.731). The results of subgroup analysis revealed that pain lessened when the average weekly dose of vit. D was over 50,000 IU, in which dysmenorrhea was relieved regardless of whether vit. D was administered for more or less than 70 days and in any dose interval. The results revealed that vit. D treatment substantially reduced the pain level in the primary dysmenorrhea population. We concluded that vit. D supplementation is an alternative treatment for relieving the pain symptoms of dysmenorrhea.
Topics: Female; Humans; Dysmenorrhea; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Menstruation; Vitamin D; Dietary Supplements
PubMed: 37447156
DOI: 10.3390/nu15132830 -
BMJ Clinical Evidence Aug 2015A woman has premenstrual syndrome (PMS) if she complains of recurrent psychological and/or physical symptoms occurring during the luteal phase of the menstrual cycle,... (Review)
Review
INTRODUCTION
A woman has premenstrual syndrome (PMS) if she complains of recurrent psychological and/or physical symptoms occurring during the luteal phase of the menstrual cycle, and often resolving by the end of menstruation. Symptom severity can vary between women. Premenstrual symptoms occur in 95% of women of reproductive age. Severe, debilitating symptoms occur in about 5% of those women. There is no consensus on how symptom severity should be assessed for PMS, which has led to the use of a wide variety of symptom scores and scales, thus making it difficult to synthesise data on treatment efficacy. The cyclical nature of the condition also makes it difficult to conduct RCTs.
METHODS AND OUTCOMES
We conducted a systematic overview, aiming to answer the following clinical question: What are the effects of continuous hormonal treatments in women with premenstrual syndrome? We searched: Medline, Embase, The Cochrane Library, and other important databases up to April 2014 (Clinical Evidence overviews are updated periodically; please check our website for the most up-to-date version of this overview).
RESULTS
At this update, searching of electronic databases retrieved 132 studies. After deduplication and removal of conference abstracts, 132 records were screened for inclusion in the overview. Appraisal of titles and abstracts led to the exclusion of 102 studies and the further review of 30 full publications. Of the 30 full articles evaluated, one systematic review and three RCTs were added to this overview. We performed a GRADE evaluation for three PICO combinations.
CONCLUSIONS
In this systematic overview, we categorised the efficacy for three interventions based on information relating to the effectiveness and safety of continuous combined oral contraceptives, continuous transdermal estradiol, and continuous subcutaneous estradiol implants.
Topics: Administration, Cutaneous; Contraceptives, Oral, Combined; Drug Implants; Estradiol; Female; Humans; Infusions, Subcutaneous; Premenstrual Syndrome
PubMed: 26303988
DOI: No ID Found -
American Journal of Obstetrics and... Aug 2017Premenstrual syndrome is characterized by the cyclic occurrence of physical, behavioral and psychological symptoms during the luteal phase of the menstrual cycle... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Premenstrual syndrome is characterized by the cyclic occurrence of physical, behavioral and psychological symptoms during the luteal phase of the menstrual cycle disappearing within a few days of the onset of menstruation. Generally symptoms are mild, but 5-8% of women suffer from severe PMS. Apart from conventional drugs, like serotonin reuptake inhibitors and oral contraceptives, complementary and alternative medicines such as Vitex agnus castus are used by many women experiencing PMS.
OBJECTIVE
Our objective was to determine the efficacy, tolerability, and acceptability of Vitex agnus castus preparations for treatment of premenstrual syndrome.
STUDY DESIGN
All journals in the Ovid software from inception through January 2016 were searched, including the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, MEDLINE, Embase, and PsycINFO. Gray literature was searched by Google Scholar and manufacturers of Vitex agnus castus preparations were contacted for information about unpublished trials. We included randomized controlled trials with Vitex agnus castus in women with premenstrual syndrome and/or premenstrual dysphoric disorder with a minimal duration of 2 menstrual cycles. The eligibility of the manuscripts was assessed by 2 reviewers independently. The data abstracted included characteristics of the study design, characteristics of the patient population, intervention details, type of comparator, method of diagnosis, and outcome measures. We adhered to the PRISMA guidelines.
RESULTS
We found 17 randomized controlled trials of Vitex agnus castus in the treatment of premenstrual syndrome. Fourteen of these could be included in the quantitative analysis. Thirteen of 14 studies with placebo, dietary supplements, or herbal preparations as controls reported positive effects of Vitex agnus castus on total premenstrual syndrome symptoms. Unfortunately most of the trials are associated with a high risk of bias. The pooled effect of Vitex agnus castus in placebo-controlled trials was large (Hedges g, -1.21; 95% confidence interval, -1.53 to -0.88), but heterogeneity was extremely high (I, 91%). We were unable to single out factors that could explain this heterogeneity satisfactorily. The funnel plot and Egger tests suggest the presence of publication bias.
CONCLUSION
Although meta-analysis shows a large pooled effect of Vitex agnus castus in placebo-controlled trials, the high risk of bias, high heterogeneity, and risk of publication bias of the included studies preclude a definitive conclusion. The pooled treatment effects should be viewed as merely explorative and, at best, overestimating the real treatment effect of Vitex agnus castus for premenstrual syndrome symptoms. There is a clear need for high-quality trials of appropriate size examining the effect of standardized extracts of Vitex agnus castus in comparison to placebo, selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors, and oral contraceptives to establish relative efficacy.
Topics: Female; Humans; Phytotherapy; Plant Extracts; Premenstrual Syndrome; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Vitex
PubMed: 28237870
DOI: 10.1016/j.ajog.2017.02.028 -
Sports Medicine (Auckland, N.Z.) Oct 2023Menstrual cycle (MC) disorders and MC-related symptoms can have debilitating effects on the health and performance of female athletes. As the participation of women in...
BACKGROUND
Menstrual cycle (MC) disorders and MC-related symptoms can have debilitating effects on the health and performance of female athletes. As the participation of women in sports continues to increase, understanding the prevalence of a range of MC disorders and MC-related symptoms may guide preventive strategies to protect the health and optimise the performance of female athletes.
OBJECTIVE
To examine the prevalence of MC disorders and MC-related symptoms among female athletes who are not using hormonal contraceptives and evaluate the assessment methods used to identify MC disorders and MC-related symptoms.
METHODS
This systematic review was performed in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA). Six databases were searched until September 2022 for all original research that reported the prevalence of MC disorders and/or MC-related symptoms in athletes not using hormonal contraceptives, which included the definitions of the MC disorders examined, and the assessment methods used. MC disorders included amenorrhoea, anovulation, dysmenorrhoea, heavy menstrual bleeding (HMB), luteal phase deficiency (LPD), oligomenorrhoea, premenstrual syndrome (PMS) and premenstrual dysphoric disorder (PMDD). MC-related symptoms included any affective and physical symptoms related to the MC that do not cause significant personal, interpersonal or functional impairment. The prevalence data across eligible studies were combined, and all studies were qualitatively synthesised to evaluate the assessment methods and tools used to identify MC disorders and MC-related symptoms. The methodological quality of studies was assessed using a modified Downs and Black checklist.
RESULTS
Sixty studies involving 6380 athletes were included. A wide range of prevalence was observed for all types of MC disorders, with a dearth of data on anovulation and LPD. Based on pooled data, dysmenorrhoea (32.3%; range 7.8-85.6%) was the most prevalent MC disorder. Studies reporting MC-related symptoms mostly examined the premenstrual and menstruation phases, where affective symptoms appeared more prevalent than physical symptoms. A larger proportion of athletes reported symptoms during the initial days of menstruation compared with the premenstrual phase. MC disorders and MC-related symptoms were retrospectively assessed using self-report methods in 90.0% of studies. Most studies (76.7%) in this review were graded as moderate quality.
DISCUSSION
MC disorders and MC-related symptoms are commonplace among female athletes, warranting further research examining their impact on performance and preventive/management strategies to optimise athlete health. To increase the quality of future studies, researchers should adopt standardised definitions of MC disorders and assessment methods such as a combination of calendar counting, urinary ovulation tests and a mid-luteal phase serum progesterone measurement when assessing menstrual function. Similarly, standardised diagnostic criteria should be used when examining MC disorders such as HMB, PMS and PMDD. Practically, implementing prospective cycle monitoring that includes ovulation testing, mid-luteal blood sampling (where feasible) and symptom logging throughout the MC could support athletes and practitioners to promptly identify and manage MC disorders and/or MC-related symptoms.
TRIAL REGISTRATION
This review has been registered in the PROSPERO database (CRD42021268757).
Topics: Female; Humans; Dysmenorrhea; Prevalence; Prospective Studies; Anovulation; Retrospective Studies; Menstrual Cycle; Premenstrual Syndrome; Menstruation Disturbances; Premenstrual Dysphoric Disorder; Athletes; Contraceptive Agents
PubMed: 37389782
DOI: 10.1007/s40279-023-01871-8 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Apr 2016Iron-deficiency anaemia is highly prevalent among non-pregnant women of reproductive age (menstruating women) worldwide, although the prevalence is highest in... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Iron-deficiency anaemia is highly prevalent among non-pregnant women of reproductive age (menstruating women) worldwide, although the prevalence is highest in lower-income settings. Iron-deficiency anaemia has been associated with a range of adverse health outcomes, which restitution of iron stores using iron supplementation has been considered likely to resolve. Although there have been many trials reporting effects of iron in non-pregnant women, these trials have never been synthesised in a systematic review.
OBJECTIVES
To establish the evidence for effects of daily supplementation with iron on anaemia and iron status, as well as on physical, psychological and neurocognitive health, in menstruating women.
SEARCH METHODS
In November 2015 we searched CENTRAL, Ovid MEDLINE, EMBASE, and nine other databases, as well as four digital thesis repositories. In addition, we searched the World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (WHO ICTRP) and reference lists of relevant reviews.
SELECTION CRITERIA
We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and quasi-RCTs comparing daily oral iron supplementation with or without a cointervention (folic acid or vitamin C), for at least five days per week at any dose, to control or placebo using either individual- or cluster-randomisation. Inclusion criteria were menstruating women (or women aged 12 to 50 years) reporting on predefined primary (anaemia, haemoglobin concentration, iron deficiency, iron-deficiency anaemia, all-cause mortality, adverse effects, and cognitive function) or secondary (iron status measured by iron indices, physical exercise performance, psychological health, adherence, anthropometric measures, serum/plasma zinc levels, vitamin A status, and red cell folate) outcomes.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
We used the standard methodological procedures of Cochrane.
MAIN RESULTS
The search strategy identified 31,767 records; after screening, 90 full-text reports were assessed for eligibility. We included 67 trials (from 76 reports), recruiting 8506 women; the number of women included in analyses varied greatly between outcomes, with endpoint haemoglobin concentration being the outcome with the largest number of participants analysed (6861 women). Only 10 studies were considered at low overall risk of bias, with most studies presenting insufficient details about trial quality.Women receiving iron were significantly less likely to be anaemic at the end of intervention compared to women receiving control (risk ratio (RR) 0.39 (95% confidence interval (CI) 0.25 to 0.60, 10 studies, 3273 women, moderate quality evidence). Women receiving iron had a higher haemoglobin concentration at the end of intervention compared to women receiving control (mean difference (MD) 5.30, 95% CI 4.14 to 6.45, 51 studies, 6861 women, high quality evidence). Women receiving iron had a reduced risk of iron deficiency compared to women receiving control (RR 0.62, 95% CI 0.50 to 0.76, 7 studies, 1088 women, moderate quality evidence). Only one study (55 women) specifically reported iron-deficiency anaemia and no studies reported mortality. Seven trials recruiting 901 women reported on 'any side effect' and did not identify an overall increased prevalence of side effects from iron supplements (RR 2.14, 95% CI 0.94 to 4.86, low quality evidence). Five studies recruiting 521 women identified an increased prevalence of gastrointestinal side effects in women taking iron (RR 1.99, 95% CI 1.26 to 3.12, low quality evidence). Six studies recruiting 604 women identified an increased prevalence of loose stools/diarrhoea (RR 2.13, 95% CI 1.10, 4.11, high quality evidence); eight studies recruiting 1036 women identified an increased prevalence of hard stools/constipation (RR 2.07, 95% CI 1.35 to 3.17, high quality evidence). Seven studies recruiting 1190 women identified evidence of an increased prevalence of abdominal pain among women randomised to iron (RR 1.55, 95% CI 0.99 to 2.41, low quality evidence). Eight studies recruiting 1214 women did not find any evidence of an increased prevalence of nausea among women randomised to iron (RR 1.19, 95% CI 0.78 to 1.82). Evidence that iron supplementation improves cognitive performance in women is uncertain, as studies could not be meta-analysed and individual studies reported conflicting results. Iron supplementation improved maximal and submaximal exercise performance, and appears to reduce symptomatic fatigue. Although adherence could not be formally meta-analysed due to differences in reporting, there was no evident difference in adherence between women randomised to iron and control.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
Daily iron supplementation effectively reduces the prevalence of anaemia and iron deficiency, raises haemoglobin and iron stores, improves exercise performance and reduces symptomatic fatigue. These benefits come at the expense of increased gastrointestinal symptomatic side effects.
Topics: Adolescent; Adult; Anemia, Iron-Deficiency; Dietary Supplements; Female; Hemoglobin A; Humans; Iron; Iron Deficiencies; Menstruation; Middle Aged; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
PubMed: 27087396
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD009747.pub2 -
PloS One 2023Eumenorrheic women experience cyclic variations in sex hormones attributed to the menstrual cycle (MC) which can impact anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) properties, knee...
Effects of the menstrual cycle phase on anterior cruciate ligament neuromuscular and biomechanical injury risk surrogates in eumenorrheic and naturally menstruating women: A systematic review.
BACKGROUND
Eumenorrheic women experience cyclic variations in sex hormones attributed to the menstrual cycle (MC) which can impact anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) properties, knee laxity, and neuromuscular function. This systematic review aimed to examine the effects of the MC on ACL neuromuscular and biomechanical injury risk surrogates during dynamic tasks, to establish whether a particular MC phase predisposes women to greater ACL injury risk.
METHODS
PubMed, Medline, SPORTDiscus, and Web of Science were searched (May-July 2021) for studies that investigated the effects of the MC on ACL neuromuscular and biomechanical injury risk surrogates. Inclusion criteria were: 1) injury-free women (18-40 years); 2) verified MC phases via biochemical analysis and/or ovulation kits; 3) examined neuromuscular and/or biomechanical injury risk surrogates during dynamic tasks; 4) compared ≥1 outcome measure across ≥2 defined MC phases.
RESULTS
Seven of 418 articles were included. Four studies reported no significant differences in ACL injury risk surrogates between MC phases. Two studies showed evidence the mid-luteal phase may predispose women to greater risk of non-contact ACL injury. Three studies reported knee laxity fluctuated across the MC; two of which demonstrated MC attributed changes in knee laxity were associated with changes in knee joint loading (KJL). Study quality (Modified Downs and Black Checklist score: 7-9) and quality of evidence were low to very low (Grading of Recommendations Assessment Development and Evaluation: very low).
CONCLUSION
It is inconclusive whether a particular MC phase predisposes women to greater non-contact ACL injury risk based on neuromuscular and biomechanical surrogates. Practitioners should be cautious manipulating their physical preparation, injury mitigation, and screening practises based on current evidence. Although variable (i.e., magnitude and direction), MC attributed changes in knee laxity were associated with changes in potentially hazardous KJLs. Monitoring knee laxity could therefore be a viable strategy to infer possible ACL injury risk.
Topics: Humans; Female; Anterior Cruciate Ligament; Anterior Cruciate Ligament Injuries; Menstruation; Joint Instability; Knee Joint; Menstrual Cycle; Biomechanical Phenomena
PubMed: 36701354
DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0280800 -
Journal of Science and Medicine in Sport Dec 2020To systematically review the current body of research that has investigated changes in strength-related variables during different phases of the menstrual cycle in... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
OBJECTIVES
To systematically review the current body of research that has investigated changes in strength-related variables during different phases of the menstrual cycle in eumenorrheic women.
DESIGN
Systematic review and meta-analysis.
METHODS
A literature search was conducted in Pubmed, SPORTDiscus and Web of Science using search terms related to the menstrual cycle and strength-related measures. Two reviewers reached consensus that 21 studies met the criteria for inclusion. Methodological rigour was assessed using the Quality Assessment Tool for Observational Cohort and Cross-Sectional Studies. Random effects meta-analyses were used to compare the early-follicular, ovulatory and mid-luteal phases for maximal voluntary contraction, isokinetic peak torque, and explosive strength.
RESULTS
The assessment of study quality showed that a high level of bias exists in specific areas of study design. Non-significant and small or trivial effect sizes (p≥0.26, Hedges g≤0.35) were identified for all strength-related variables in each comparison between phases. 95% confidence intervals for each comparison suggested the uncertainty associated with each estimate extends to a small effect on strength performance with unclear direction (-0.42≤g≤0.48). The heterogeneity for each comparison was also small (p≥0.83, I=0%).
CONCLUSIONS
Strength-related measures appear to be minimally altered (g≤0.35) by the fluctuations in ovarian sex hormones that occur during the menstrual cycle. This finding should be interpreted with caution due to the methodological shortcomings identified by the quality assessment.
Topics: Athletic Performance; Estrogens; Female; Humans; Menstrual Cycle; Muscle Strength; Progesterone; Research Design
PubMed: 32456980
DOI: 10.1016/j.jsams.2020.04.022 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Dec 2021Dysmenorrhoea (period pain) is a common condition with a substantial impact on the well-being and productivity of women. Primary dysmenorrhoea is defined as recurrent,... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Dysmenorrhoea (period pain) is a common condition with a substantial impact on the well-being and productivity of women. Primary dysmenorrhoea is defined as recurrent, cramping pelvic pain that occurs with periods, in the presence of a normal uterus, ovaries and fallopian tubes. It is thought to be caused by uterine contractions (cramps) associated with a high level of production of local chemicals such as prostaglandins. The muscle of the uterus (the myometrium) responds to these high levels of prostaglandins by contracting forcefully, causing low oxygen levels and consequently pain. Nifedipine is a calcium channel blocker in widespread clinical use for preterm labour due to its ability to inhibit uterine contractions in that setting. This review addresses whether this effect of nifedipine also helps with relief of the uterine contractions during menstruation OBJECTIVES: To assess the effectiveness and safety of nifedipine for primary dysmenorrhoea.
SEARCH METHODS
We searched for all published and unpublished randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of nifedipine for dysmenorrhoea, without language restriction and in consultation with the Cochrane Gynaecology and Fertility Group (CGF) Information Specialist. The following databases were searched to 25 November 2021: the Cochrane Gynaecology and Fertility Group (CGF) Specialised Register of Controlled Trials, CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, PsycINFO, and CINAHL. Also searched were the international trial registers: ClinicalTrials.gov, and the World Health Organization (WHO) International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP) search portal, the Web of Science, OpenGrey, LILACS database, PubMed and Google Scholar. We checked the reference lists of relevant articles.
SELECTION CRITERIA
We included RCTs comparing nifedipine with placebo for the treatment of primary dysmenorrhoea.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
The primary outcomes to be assessed were pain, and health-related quality of life. Secondary outcomes were adverse effects, satisfaction, and need for additional medication. The two review authors independently assessed the included trials. There were insufficient data to allow meaningful meta-analysis.
MAIN RESULTS
The evidence assessed was of very low quality overall. We examined three small RCTs, with a total of 106 participants. Data for analysis could be extracted from only two of these trials (with a total of 66 participants); two trials were published in the 1980s, and the third in 1993. Nifedipine may be effective for "any pain relief" compared to placebo in women with primary dysmenorrhoea (odds ratio (OR) 9.04, 95% confidence interval (CI) 2.61 to 31.31; 2 studies, 66 participants; very low-quality evidence). The evidence suggests that if the rate of pain relief using placebo is 40%, the rate using nifedipine would be between 64% and 95%. For the outcome of "good" or "excellent" pain relief, nifedipine may be more effective than placebo; the confidence interval was very wide (OR 43.78, 95% CI 5.34 to 259.01; 2 studies, 66 participants; very low-quality evidence). We are uncertain if the use of nifedipine was associated with less requirement for additional analgesia use than placebo (OR 0.54, 95% CI 0.07 to 4.20, 1 study, 42 participants; very low-quality evidence). Participants indicated that they would choose to use nifedipine over their previous analgesic if the option was available. There were similar levels of adverse effects and menstruation-related symptoms in the placebo and intervention groups (OR 0.94, 95% CI 0.08 to 10.90; 1 study, 24 participants; very low-quality evidence); if the chance of adverse effects with placebo is 80%, the rate using nifedipine would be between 24% and 98%. There were no results regarding formal assessment of health-related quality of life.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
The evidence is insufficient to confirm whether nifedipine is a possible medical treatment for primary dysmenorrhoea. The trials included in this review had very low numbers and were of low quality. Notably, there was a large imbalance in numbers randomised between placebo and treatment groups in one of the two trials with data available for analysis. While there was no evidence of a difference noted in adverse effects between groups, more data from larger participant numbers are needed for this outcome. Larger, more well-conducted trials are required to elucidate the potential role of nifedipine in the treatment of this common condition, as it could be a useful addition to the therapeutic options available if shown to be well tolerated and effective. The safety of nifedipine in women of reproductive age is well established from trials of its use in preterm labour, and clinicians are accustomed to off-label use for this indication. The drug is inexpensive and readily available. Other options for relief of primary dysmenorrhoea are not suitable for all women; NSAIDs and the oral contraceptive pill (OCP) are contraindicated for some women, and the OCP is not suitable for women who are trying to conceive. In addition, the trials examined suggest there may be a participant preference for nifedipine.
Topics: Anti-Inflammatory Agents, Non-Steroidal; Dysmenorrhea; Female; Humans; Infant, Newborn; Menstruation; Nifedipine; Pelvic Pain; Pregnancy
PubMed: 34921554
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD012912.pub2 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Jan 2019Anaemia is a condition in which the number of red blood cells is insufficient to meet physiologic needs; it is caused by many conditions, particularly iron deficiency.... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Anaemia is a condition in which the number of red blood cells is insufficient to meet physiologic needs; it is caused by many conditions, particularly iron deficiency. Traditionally, daily iron supplementation has been a standard practice for preventing and treating anaemia. However, its long-term use has been limited, as it has been associated with adverse side effects such as nausea, constipation, and teeth staining. Intermittent iron supplementation has been suggested as an effective and safer alternative to daily iron supplementation for preventing and reducing anaemia at the population level, especially in areas where this condition is highly prevalent.
OBJECTIVES
To assess the effects of intermittent oral iron supplementation, alone or in combination with other nutrients, on anaemia and its associated impairments among menstruating women, compared with no intervention, a placebo, or daily supplementation.
SEARCH METHODS
In February 2018, we searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, nine other databases, and two trials registers. In March 2018, we also searched LILACS, IBECS and IMBIOMED. In addition, we examined reference lists, and contacted authors and known experts to identify additional studies.
SELECTION CRITERIA
Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and quasi-RCTs with either individual or cluster randomisation. Participants were menstruating women; that is, women beyond menarche and prior to menopause who were not pregnant or lactating and did not have a known condition that impeded the presence of menstrual periods. The intervention was the use of iron supplements intermittently (one, two or three times a week on non-consecutive days) compared with placebo, no intervention, or the same supplements provided on a daily basis.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Both review authors independently assessed the eligibility of studies against the inclusion criteria, extracted data from included studies, checked data entry for accuracy, assessed the risk of bias of the included studies, and rated the quality of the evidence using GRADE.
MAIN RESULTS
We included 25 studies involving 10,996 women. Study methods were not well described in many of the included studies and thus assessing risk of bias was difficult. The main limitations of the studies were lack of blinding and high attrition. Studies were mainly funded by international organisations, universities, and ministries of health within the countries. Approximately one third of the included studies did not provide a funding source.Although quality across studies was variable, the results consistently showed that intermittent iron supplementation (alone or with any other vitamins and minerals) compared with no intervention or a placebo, reduced the risk of having anaemia (risk ratio (RR) 0.65, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.49 to 0.87; 11 studies, 3135 participants; low-quality evidence), and improved the concentration of haemoglobin (mean difference (MD) 5.19 g/L, 95% CI 3.07 to 7.32; 15 studies, 2886 participants; moderate-quality evidence), and ferritin (MD 7.46 μg/L, 95% CI 5.02 to 9.90; 7 studies, 1067 participants; low-quality evidence). Intermittent regimens may also reduce the risk of having iron deficiency (RR 0.50, 95% CI 0.24 to 1.04; 3 studies, 624 participants; low-quality evidence), but evidence was inconclusive regarding iron deficiency anaemia (RR 0.07, 95% CI 0.00 to 1.16; 1 study, 97 participants; very low-quality evidence) and all-cause morbidity (RR 1.12, 95% CI 0.82 to 1.52; 1 study, 119 participants; very low-quality evidence). Women in the control group were less likely to have any adverse side effects than those receiving intermittent iron supplements (RR 1.98, 95% CI 0.31 to 12.72; 3 studies, 630 participants; moderate-quality evidence).In comparison with daily supplementation, results showed that intermittent supplementation (alone or with any other vitamins and minerals) produced similar effects to daily supplementation (alone or with any other vitamins and minerals) on anaemia (RR 1.09, 95% CI 0.93 to 1.29; 8 studies, 1749 participants; moderate-quality evidence). Intermittent supplementation may produce similar haemoglobin concentrations (MD 0.43 g/L, 95% CI -1.44 to 2.31; 10 studies, 2127 participants; low-quality evidence) but lower ferritin concentrations on average (MD -6.07 μg/L, 95% CI -10.66 to -1.48; 4 studies, 988 participants; low-quality evidence) compared to daily supplementation. Compared to daily regimens, intermittent regimens may also reduce the risk of having iron deficiency (RR 4.30, 95% CI 0.56 to 33.20; 1 study, 198 participants; very low-quality evidence). Women receiving iron supplements intermittently were less likely to have any adverse side effects than those receiving iron supplements daily (RR 0.41, 95% CI 0.21 to 0.82; 6 studies, 1166 participants; moderate-quality evidence). No studies reported on the effect of intermittent regimens versus daily regimens on iron deficiency anaemia and all-cause morbidity.Information on disease outcomes, adherence, economic productivity, and work performance was scarce, and evidence about the effects of intermittent supplementation on these outcomes unclear.Overall, whether the supplements were given once or twice weekly, for less or more than three months, contained less or more than 60 mg of elemental iron per week, or given to populations with different degrees of anaemia at baseline did not seem to affect the findings. Furthermore, the response did not differ in areas where malaria was frequent, although very few trials were conducted in these settings.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
Intermittent iron supplementation may reduce anaemia and may improve iron stores among menstruating women in populations with different anaemia and malaria backgrounds. In comparison with daily supplementation, the provision of iron supplements intermittently is probably as effective in preventing or controlling anaemia. More information is needed on morbidity (including malaria outcomes), side effects, work performance, economic productivity, depression, and adherence to the intervention. The quality of this evidence base ranged from very low to moderate quality, suggesting that we are uncertain about these effects.
Topics: Administration, Oral; Adolescent; Adult; Anemia, Iron-Deficiency; Dietary Supplements; Drug Administration Schedule; Female; Ferritins; Ferrous Compounds; Humans; Iron Deficiencies; Iron, Dietary; Menstruation; Micronutrients; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Young Adult
PubMed: 30699468
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD009218.pub3