-
Paediatric and Perinatal Epidemiology Jan 2019Currently, no federal guidelines provide recommendations on healthy birth spacing for women in the United States. This systematic review summarises associations between...
BACKGROUND
Currently, no federal guidelines provide recommendations on healthy birth spacing for women in the United States. This systematic review summarises associations between short interpregnancy intervals and adverse maternal outcomes to inform the development of birth spacing recommendations for the United States.
METHODS
PubMed/Medline, POPLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, and a previous systematic review were searched to identify relevant articles published from 1 January 2006 and 1 May 2017. Included studies reported maternal health outcomes following a short versus longer interpregnancy interval, were conducted in high-resource settings, and adjusted estimates for at least maternal age. Two investigators independently assessed study quality and applicability using established methods.
RESULTS
Seven cohort studies met inclusion criteria. There was limited but consistent evidence that short interpregnancy interval is associated with increased risk of precipitous labour and decreased risks of labour dystocia. There was some evidence that short interpregnancy interval is associated with increased risks of subsequent pre-pregnancy obesity and gestational diabetes, and decreased risk of preeclampsia. Among women with a previous caesarean delivery, short interpregnancy interval was associated with increased risk of uterine rupture in one study. No studies reported outcomes related to maternal depression, interpregnancy weight gain, maternal anaemia, or maternal mortality.
CONCLUSIONS
In studies from high-resource settings, short interpregnancy intervals are associated with both increased and decreased risks of adverse maternal outcomes. However, most outcomes were evaluated in single studies, and the strength of evidence supporting associations is low.
Topics: Birth Intervals; Female; Humans; Maternal Age; Obstetric Labor Complications; Pregnancy; Pregnancy Complications; Pregnancy Outcome; Socioeconomic Factors
PubMed: 30311955
DOI: 10.1111/ppe.12518 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Jun 2015This is an update of a Cochrane review first published in 2012, Issue 4. Excessive weight gain during pregnancy is associated with poor maternal and neonatal outcomes... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
This is an update of a Cochrane review first published in 2012, Issue 4. Excessive weight gain during pregnancy is associated with poor maternal and neonatal outcomes including gestational diabetes, hypertension, caesarean section, macrosomia, and stillbirth. Diet or exercise interventions, or both, may reduce excessive gestational weight gain (GWG) and associated poor outcomes; however, evidence from the original review was inconclusive.
OBJECTIVES
To evaluate the effectiveness of diet or exercise, or both, interventions for preventing excessive weight gain during pregnancy and associated pregnancy complications.
SEARCH METHODS
We searched the Cochrane Pregnancy and Childbirth Group's Trials Register (5 November 2014), contacted investigators of the previously identified ongoing studies and scanned reference lists of retrieved studies.
SELECTION CRITERIA
Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of diet or exercise, or both, interventions for preventing excessive weight gain in pregnancy.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Two review authors independently assessed trials for inclusion and risk of bias, extracted data and checked them for accuracy. We organised RCTs according to the type of interventions and pooled data using the random-effects model in the Review Manager software. We also performed subgroup analyses according to the initial risk of adverse effects related to poor weight control. We performed sensitivity analysis to assess the robustness of the findings.
MAIN RESULTS
We included 65 RCTs, out of which 49 RCTs involving 11,444 women contributed data to quantitative meta-analysis. Twenty studies were at moderate-to-high risk of bias. Study interventions involved mainly diet only, exercise only, and combined diet and exercise interventions, usually compared with standard care. Study methods varied widely; therefore, we estimated the average effect across studies and performed sensitivity analysis, where appropriate, by excluding outliers and studies at high risk of bias.Diet or exercise, or both, interventions reduced the risk of excessive GWG on average by 20% overall (average risk ratio (RR) 0.80, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.73 to 0.87; participants = 7096; studies = 24; I² = 52%). This estimate was robust to sensitivity analysis, which reduced heterogeneity, therefore we graded this evidence as high-quality. Interventions involving low glycaemic load diets, supervised or unsupervised exercise only, or diet and exercise combined all led to similar reductions in the number of women gaining excessive weight in pregnancy.Women receiving diet or exercise, or both interventions were more likely to experience low GWG than those in control groups (average RR 1.14, 95% CI 1.02 to 1.27; participants = 4422; studies = 11; I² = 3%; moderate-quality evidence). We found no difference between intervention and control groups with regard to pre-eclampsia (RR 0.95, 95% CI 0.77 to 1.16; participants = 5330; studies = 15; I² = 0%; high-quality evidence); however, maternal hypertension (not a pre-specified outcome) was reduced in the intervention group compared with the control group overall (average RR 0.70, 95% CI 0.51 to 0.96; participants = 5162; studies = 11; I² = 43%; low-quality evidence).There was no clear difference between groups with regard to caesarean delivery overall (RR 0.95, 95% CI 0.88 to 1.03; participants = 7534; studies = 28; I² = 9%; high-quality evidence); although the effect estimate suggested a small difference (5%) in favour of the interventions. In addition, for combined diet and exercise counselling interventions there was a 13% (-1% to 25%) reduction in this outcome (borderline statistical significance).We found no difference between groups with regard to preterm birth overall (average RR 0.91, 95% CI 0.68 to 1.22; participants = 5923; studies = 16; I² = 16%; moderate-quality evidence); however limited evidence suggested that these effect estimates may differ according to the types of interventions, with a trend towards an increased risk for exercise-only interventions.We found no clear difference between intervention and control groups with regard to infant macrosomia (average RR 0.93, 95% CI 0.86 to 1.02; participants = 8598; studies = 27; I² = 0%; high-quality evidence), although the effect estimate suggested a small difference (7% reduction) in favour of the intervention group. The largest effect size occurred in the supervised exercise-only intervention group (RR 0.81, 95% CI 0.64 to 1.02; participants = 2445; studies = 7; I² = 0%), which approached statistical significance (P = 0.07). Furthermore, in subgroup analysis by risk, high-risk women (overweight or obese women, or women with or at risk of gestational diabetes) receiving combined diet and exercise counselling interventions experienced a 15% reduced risk of infant macrosomia (average RR 0.85, 95% CI 0.73 to 1.00; participants = 3252; studies = nine; I² = 0; P = 0.05; moderate-quality evidence)There were no differences in the risk of poor neonatal outcomes including shoulder dystocia, neonatal hypoglycaemia, hyperbilirubinaemia, or birth trauma (all moderate-quality evidence) between intervention and control groups; however, infants of high-risk women had a reduced risk of respiratory distress syndrome if their mothers were in the intervention group (RR 0.47, 95% CI 0.26 to 0.85; participants = 2256; studies = two; I² = 0%; moderate-quality evidence).
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
High-quality evidence indicates that diet or exercise, or both, during pregnancy can reduce the risk of excessive GWG. Other benefits may include a lower risk of caesarean delivery, macrosomia, and neonatal respiratory morbidity, particularly for high-risk women receiving combined diet and exercise interventions. Maternal hypertension may also be reduced. Exercise appears to be an important part of controlling weight gain in pregnancy and more research is needed to establish safe guidelines. Most included studies were carried out in developed countries and it is not clear whether these results are widely applicable to lower income settings.
Topics: Counseling; Diet; Exercise; Female; Humans; Infant, Newborn; Overweight; Pregnancy; Pregnancy Complications; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Weight Gain
PubMed: 26068707
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD007145.pub3 -
PLoS Medicine Oct 2020The effectiveness of screening for macrosomia is not well established. One of the critical elements of an effective screening program is the diagnostic accuracy of a... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
Universal third-trimester ultrasonic screening using fetal macrosomia in the prediction of adverse perinatal outcome: A systematic review and meta-analysis of diagnostic test accuracy.
BACKGROUND
The effectiveness of screening for macrosomia is not well established. One of the critical elements of an effective screening program is the diagnostic accuracy of a test at predicting the condition. The objective of this study is to investigate the diagnostic effectiveness of universal ultrasonic fetal biometry in predicting the delivery of a macrosomic infant, shoulder dystocia, and associated neonatal morbidity in low- and mixed-risk populations.
METHODS AND FINDINGS
We conducted a predefined literature search in Medline, Excerpta Medica database (EMBASE), the Cochrane library and ClinicalTrials.gov from inception to May 2020. No language restrictions were applied. We included studies where the ultrasound was performed as part of universal screening and those that included low- and mixed-risk pregnancies and excluded studies confined to high risk pregnancies. We used the estimated fetal weight (EFW) (multiple formulas and thresholds) and the abdominal circumference (AC) to define suspected large for gestational age (LGA). Adverse perinatal outcomes included macrosomia (multiple thresholds), shoulder dystocia, and other markers of neonatal morbidity. The risk of bias was assessed using the Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies (QUADAS-2) tool. Meta-analysis was carried out using the hierarchical summary receiver operating characteristic (ROC) and the bivariate logit-normal (Reitsma) models. We identified 41 studies that met our inclusion criteria involving 112,034 patients in total. These included 11 prospective cohort studies (N = 9986), one randomized controlled trial (RCT) (N = 367), and 29 retrospective cohort studies (N = 101,681). The quality of the studies was variable, and only three studies blinded the ultrasound findings to the clinicians. Both EFW >4,000 g (or 90th centile for the gestational age) and AC >36 cm (or 90th centile) had >50% sensitivity for predicting macrosomia (birthweight above 4,000 g or 90th centile) at birth with positive likelihood ratios (LRs) of 8.74 (95% confidence interval [CI] 6.84-11.17) and 7.56 (95% CI 5.85-9.77), respectively. There was significant heterogeneity at predicting macrosomia, which could reflect the different study designs, the characteristics of the included populations, and differences in the formulas used. An EFW >4,000 g (or 90th centile) had 22% sensitivity at predicting shoulder dystocia with a positive likelihood ratio of 2.12 (95% CI 1.34-3.35). There was insufficient data to analyze other markers of neonatal morbidity.
CONCLUSIONS
In this study, we found that suspected LGA is strongly predictive of the risk of delivering a large infant in low- and mixed-risk populations. However, it is only weakly (albeit statistically significantly) predictive of the risk of shoulder dystocia. There was insufficient data to analyze other markers of neonatal morbidity.
Topics: Birth Weight; Diagnostic Tests, Routine; Female; Fetal Macrosomia; Fetal Weight; Gestational Age; Humans; Mass Screening; Noninvasive Prenatal Testing; Parturition; Pregnancy; Pregnancy Complications; Pregnancy Trimester, Third; Prospective Studies; Retrospective Studies; Ultrasonics; Ultrasonography; Ultrasonography, Prenatal
PubMed: 33048935
DOI: 10.1371/journal.pmed.1003190 -
BMC Pregnancy and Childbirth May 2023Caesarean section (CS) is widely perceived as protective against obstetric brachial plexus injury (BPI), but few studies acknowledge the factors associated with such...
BACKGROUND
Caesarean section (CS) is widely perceived as protective against obstetric brachial plexus injury (BPI), but few studies acknowledge the factors associated with such injury. The objectives of this study were therefore to aggregate cases of BPI after CS, and to illuminate risk factors for BPI.
METHODS
Pubmed Central, EMBASE and MEDLINE databases were searched using free text: ("brachial plexus injury" or "brachial plexus injuries" or "brachial plexus palsy" or "brachial plexus palsies" or "Erb's palsy" or "Erb's palsies" or "brachial plexus birth injury" or "brachial plexus birth palsy") and ("caesarean" or "cesarean" or "Zavanelli" or "cesarian" or "caesarian" or "shoulder dystocia"). Studies with clinical details of BPI after CS were included. Studies were assessed using the National Institutes for Healthy Study Quality Assessment Tool for Case Series, Cohort and Case-Control Studies.
MAIN RESULTS
39 studies were eligible. 299 infants sustained BPI after CS. 53% of cases with BPI after CS had risk factors for likely challenging handling/manipulation of the fetus prior to delivery, in the presence of considerable maternal or fetal concerns, and/or in the presence of poor access due to obesity or adhesions.
CONCLUSIONS
In the presence of factors that would predispose to a challenging delivery, it is difficult to justify that BPI could occur due to in-utero, antepartum events alone. Surgeons should exercise care when operating on women with these risk factors.
Topics: Female; Pregnancy; Humans; Cesarean Section; Brachial Plexus; Brachial Plexus Neuropathies; Case-Control Studies; Risk Factors; Paralysis; Birth Injuries; Dystocia
PubMed: 37198580
DOI: 10.1186/s12884-023-05696-1 -
Developmental Medicine and Child... Jun 2020To provide a comprehensive update on the most prevalent, significant risk factors for neonatal brachial plexus palsy (NBPP). (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
AIM
To provide a comprehensive update on the most prevalent, significant risk factors for neonatal brachial plexus palsy (NBPP).
METHOD
Cochrane CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Web of Science, Embase, and ClinicalTrials.gov were searched for relevant publications up to March 2019. Studies assessing risk factors of NBPP in relation to typically developing comparison individuals were included. Meta-analysis was performed for the five most significant risk factors, on the basis of the PRISMA statement and MOOSE guidelines. Pooled odds ratios (ORs), 95% confidence intervals (CIs), and across-study heterogeneity (I ) were reported. Reporting bias and quality of evidence was rated. In addition, we assessed the incidence of NBPP.
RESULTS
Twenty-two observational studies with a total sample size of 29 419 037 live births were selected. Significant risk factors included shoulder dystocia (OR 115.27; 95% CI 81.35-163.35; I =92%), macrosomia (OR 9.75; 95% CI 8.29-11.46; I =70%), (gestational) diabetes (OR 5.33; 95% CI 3.77-7.55; I =59%), instrumental delivery (OR 3.8; 95% CI 2.77-5.23; I =77%), and breech delivery (OR 2.49; 95% CI 1.67-3.7; I =70%). Caesarean section appeared as a protective factor (OR 0.13; 95% CI 0.11-0.16; I =41%). The pooled overall incidence of NBPP was 1.74 per 1000 live births. It has decreased in recent years.
INTERPRETATION
The incidence of NBPP is decreasing. Shoulder dystocia, macrosomia, maternal diabetes, instrumental delivery, and breech delivery are risk factors for NBPP. Caesarean section appears as a protective factor.
WHAT THIS PAPER ADDS
The overall incidence of neonatal brachial plexus palsy is 1.74 per 1000 live births. The incidence has declined significantly. Shoulder dystocia, macrosomia, maternal diabetes, instrumental delivery, and breech delivery are the main risk factors. Prevention is difficult owing to unpredictability and often labour-related risk.
Topics: Humans; Incidence; Neonatal Brachial Plexus Palsy; Odds Ratio; Risk Factors
PubMed: 31670385
DOI: 10.1111/dmcn.14381 -
Health Policy and Planning May 2019Providing quality emergency obstetric care (EmOC) reduces the risk of maternal and newborn mortality and morbidity. There is evidence that over 50% of maternal health...
Providing quality emergency obstetric care (EmOC) reduces the risk of maternal and newborn mortality and morbidity. There is evidence that over 50% of maternal health programmes that result in improving access to EmOC and reduce maternal mortality have an EmOC training component. The objective was to review the evidence for the effectiveness of training in EmOC. Eleven databases and websites were searched for publications describing EmOC training evaluations between 1997 and 2017. Effectiveness was assessed at four levels: (1) participant reaction, (2) knowledge and skills, (3) change in behaviour and clinical practice and (4) availability of EmOC and health outcomes. Weighted means for change in knowledge and skills obtained, narrative synthesis of results for other levels. One hundred and one studies including before-after studies (n = 44) and randomized controlled trials (RCTs) (n = 15). Level 1 and/or 2 was assessed in 68 studies; Level 3 in 51, Level 4 in 21 studies. Only three studies assessed effectiveness at all four levels. Weighted mean scores pre-training, and change after training were 67.0% and 10.6% for knowledge (7750 participants) and 53.1% and 29.8% for skills (6054 participants; 13 studies). There is strong evidence for improved clinical practice (adherence to protocols, resuscitation technique, communication and team work) and improved neonatal outcomes (reduced trauma after shoulder dystocia, reduced number of babies with hypothermia and hypoxia). Evidence for a reduction in the number of cases of post-partum haemorrhage, case fatality rates, stillbirths and institutional maternal mortality is less strong. Short competency-based training in EmOC results in significant improvements in healthcare provider knowledge/skills and change in clinical practice. There is emerging evidence that this results in improved health outcomes.
Topics: Competency-Based Education; Delivery, Obstetric; Emergency Medicine; Female; Health Personnel; Humans; Infant, Newborn; Obstetrics; Pregnancy; Program Evaluation
PubMed: 31056670
DOI: 10.1093/heapol/czz028 -
Acta Obstetricia Et Gynecologica... Jan 2022Little is known about the optimal simulation-based team training in obstetric emergencies. We aimed to review how simulation-based team training affects patient outcomes... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
INTRODUCTION
Little is known about the optimal simulation-based team training in obstetric emergencies. We aimed to review how simulation-based team training affects patient outcomes in obstetric emergencies.
MATERIAL AND METHODS
Search Strategy: MEDLINE, Embase, Cochrane Library, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials were searched up to and including May 15, 2021.
SELECTION CRITERIA
randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and cohort studies on obstetric teams in high-resource settings comparing the effect of simulation-based obstetric emergency team training with no training on the risk of Apgar scores less than 7 at 5 min, neonatal hypoxic ischemic encephalopathy, severe postpartum hemorrhage, blood transfusion of four or more units, and delay of emergency cesarean section by more than 30 min.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
The included studies were assessed using PRISMA, EPCO, and GRADE.
RESULTS
We found 21 studies, four RCTs and 17 cohort studies, evaluating patient outcomes after obstetric team training compared with no training. Annual obstetric emergency team training may reduce brachial plexus injury (six cohort studies: odds ratio [OR] 0.47, 95% CI 0.33-0.68; one RCT: OR 1.30, 95 CI% 0.39-4.33, low certainty evidence) and suggest a positive effect; but it was not significant on Apgar score below 7 at 5 min (three cohort studies: OR 0.77, 95% CI 0.51-1.19; two RCT: OR 0.87, 95% CI 0.72-1.05, moderate certainty evidence). The effect was unclear for hypoxic ischemic encephalopathy, umbilical prolapse, decision to birth interval in emergency cesarean section, and for severe postpartum hemorrhage. Studies with in situ multi-professional simulation-based training demonstrated the best effect.
CONCLUSIONS
Emerging evidence suggests an effect of obstetric team training on obstetric outcomes, but conflicting results call for controlled trials targeted to identify the optimal methodology for effective team training.
Topics: Emergency Service, Hospital; Female; Humans; Infant, Newborn; Outcome Assessment, Health Care; Patient Care Team; Postpartum Hemorrhage; Pregnancy; Prenatal Care; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Simulation Training
PubMed: 34622945
DOI: 10.1111/aogs.14263 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Dec 2015Gestational diabetes, glucose intolerance with onset or first recognition during pregnancy, is a rising problem worldwide. Both non-pharmacological and pharmacological... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Gestational diabetes, glucose intolerance with onset or first recognition during pregnancy, is a rising problem worldwide. Both non-pharmacological and pharmacological approaches to the prevention of gestational diabetes have been, and continue to be explored. Myo-inositol, an isomer of inositol, is a naturally occurring sugar commonly found in cereals, corn, legumes and meat. It is one of the intracellular mediators of the insulin signal and correlated with insulin sensitivity in type 2 diabetes. The potential beneficial effect on improving insulin sensitivity suggests that myo-inositol may be useful for women in preventing gestational diabetes.
OBJECTIVES
To assess if antenatal dietary supplementation with myo-inositol is safe and effective, for the mother and fetus, in preventing gestational diabetes.
SEARCH METHODS
We searched the Pregnancy and Childbirth Group's Trials Register, ClinicalTrials.gov, WHO ICTRP (2 November 2015) and reference lists of retrieved studies.
SELECTION CRITERIA
We sought published and unpublished randomised controlled trials, including conference abstracts, assessing the effects of myo-inositol for the prevention of gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM). Quasi-randomised and cross-over trials were not eligible for inclusion, but cluster designs were eligible. Participants in the trials were pregnant women. Women with pre-existing type 1 or type 2 diabetes were excluded. Trials that compared the administration of any dose of myo-inositol, alone or in a combination preparation were eligible for inclusion. Trials that used no treatment, placebo or another intervention as the comparator were eligible for inclusion.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Two review authors independently assessed trials for inclusion, risk of bias and extracted the data. Data were checked for accuracy.
MAIN RESULTS
We included four randomised controlled trials (all conducted in Italy) reporting on 567 women who were less than 11 weeks' to 24 weeks' pregnant at the start of the trials. The trials had small sample sizes and one trial only reported an interim analysis. Two trials were open-label. The overall risk of bias was unclear.For the mother, supplementation with myo-inositol was associated with a reduction in the incidence of gestational diabetes compared with control (risk ratio (RR) 0.43, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.29 to 0.64; three trials; n = 502 women). Using GRADE methods this evidence was assessed as low with downgrading due to unclear risk of bias for allocation concealment in two of the included trials and lack of generalisability of findings. For women who received myo-inositol supplementation, the incidence of GDM ranged from 8% to 18%; for women in the control group, the incidence of GDM was 28%, using International Association of Diabetes and Pregnancy Study Groups Consensus Panel 2010 criteria to diagnose GDM.Two trials reported on hypertensive disorders of pregnancy, a primary maternal outcome of this review. There was no clear difference in risk of hypertensive disorders of pregnancy between the myo-inositol and control groups (average RR 0.43, 95% CI 0.02 to 8.41; two trials; n = 398 women; Tau(2) = 3.23; I(2) = 69%). Using GRADE methods, this evidence was assessed as very low, with downgrading due to wide confidence intervals with very low event rates, a small sample size, and lack of blinding and unclear allocation concealment methods, and a lack of generalisability. For women who received myo-inositol the risk of hypertensive disorders of pregnancy ranged from 0% to 33%; for women in the control group the risk was 4%.For the infant, none of the included trials reported on the primary neonatal outcomes of this systematic review (large-for-gestational age, perinatal mortality, mortality or morbidity composite).In terms of this review's secondary outcomes, there was no clear difference in the risk of caesarean section between the myo-inositol and control groups (RR 0.95, 95% CI 0.76 to 1.19; two trials; n = 398 women). Using GRADE methods, this evidence was assessed as low, with downgrading due to unclear risk of bias in one trial and lack of generalisability. For women who received myo-inositol supplementation, the risk of having a caesarean section ranged from 34% to 54%; for women in the control group the was 45%. There were no maternal adverse effects of therapy in the two trials that reported on this outcome (the other two trials did not report this outcome).Two trials found no clear difference in the risk of macrosomia between infants whose mothers received myo-inositol supplementation compared with controls (average RR 0.35, 95% CI 0.02 to 6.37; two trials; n = 398 infants;Tau(2) = 3.33; I(2) = 73%). Similarly, there was no clear difference between groups in terms of neonatal hypoglycaemia (RR 0.36, 95% CI 0.01 to 8.66) or shoulder dystocia (average RR 2.33, 95% CI 0.12 to 44.30, Tau(2) = 3.24; I(2) = 72%).There was a lack of data available for a large number of maternal and neonatal secondary outcomes, and no data for any of the long-term childhood or adulthood outcomes, or for health service cost outcomes.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
Evidence from four trials of antenatal dietary supplementation with myo-inositol during pregnancy shows a potential benefit for reducing the incidence of gestational diabetes. No data were reported for any of this review's primary neonatal outcomes. There were very little outcome data for the majority of this review's secondary outcomes. There is no clear evidence of a difference for macrosomia when compared with control.The current evidence is based on small trials that are not powered to detect differences in outcomes including perinatal mortality and serious infant morbidity. All of the included studies were conducted in Italy which raises concerns about the lack of generalisability of the evidence to other settings. There is evidence of inconsistency and indirectness and as a result, many of the judgements on the quality of the evidence were downgraded to low or very low quality (GRADEpro Guideline Development Tool).Further trials for this promising antenatal intervention for preventing gestational diabetes are encouraged and should include pregnant women of different ethnicities and varying risk factors and use of myo-inositol (different doses, frequency and timing of administration) in comparison with placebo, diet and exercise or pharmacological interventions. Outcomes should include potential harms including adverse effects.
Topics: Diabetes, Gestational; Female; Humans; Incidence; Inositol; Isomerism; Pregnancy; Prenatal Care; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
PubMed: 26678256
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD011507.pub2 -
Nutrients Jan 2020Gestational diabetes (GDM) has deleterious effects on the offspring. Maternal obesity and excessive gestational weight gain (GWG), often associated with diabetes, also... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
UNLABELLED
Gestational diabetes (GDM) has deleterious effects on the offspring. Maternal obesity and excessive gestational weight gain (GWG), often associated with diabetes, also contribute to these adverse outcomes.
OBJECTIVES
To assess the benefit for the offspring of maternal lifestyle interventions, including diets and physical activity, to prevent or to improve GDM and to limit excessive GWG.
METHOD
Systematic review of meta-analyses published in English between December 2014 and November 2019.
RESULTS
Lifestyle interventions to reduce the risk of GDM reported a decreased risk of 15% to 40%, with a greater effect of exercise compared to diet. Combined lifestyle interventions specifically designed to limit GWG reduced GWG by 1.6 kg in overweight and obese women, and on average by 0.7 to 1 kg in all pregnant women. In these trials, adverse neonatal outcomes were poorly studied. Combined lifestyle interventions in women with GDM significantly reduced fetal growth. Altogether, lifestyle interventions reduced the risk of preterm birth and shoulder dystocia, but individually, diets or exercise alone had no effect on neonatal adverse outcomes.
CONCLUSION
Specific maternal, neonatal and offspring benefits of lifestyle interventions during pregnancy to prevent or improve GDM control or to limit GWG still require clarification.
Topics: Adult; Diabetes, Gestational; Female; Humans; Infant, Newborn; Life Style; Pregnancy; Weight Gain
PubMed: 32013197
DOI: 10.3390/nu12020353