-
Calcium supplementation during pregnancy for preventing hypertensive disorders and related problems.The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Oct 2018Pre-eclampsia and eclampsia are common causes of serious morbidity and death. Calcium supplementation may reduce the risk of pre-eclampsia, and may help to prevent... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Pre-eclampsia and eclampsia are common causes of serious morbidity and death. Calcium supplementation may reduce the risk of pre-eclampsia, and may help to prevent preterm birth. This is an update of a review last published in 2014.
OBJECTIVES
To assess the effects of calcium supplementation during pregnancy on hypertensive disorders of pregnancy and related maternal and child outcomes.
SEARCH METHODS
We searched Cochrane Pregnancy and Childbirth's Trials Register, ClinicalTrials.gov, the WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP) (18 September 2017), and reference lists of retrieved studies.
SELECTION CRITERIA
We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs), including cluster-randomised trials, comparing high-dose calcium supplementation (at least 1 g daily of calcium) during pregnancy with placebo. For low-dose calcium we included quasi-randomised trials, trials without placebo, trials with cointerventions and dose comparison trials.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Two researchers independently assessed trials for inclusion and risk of bias, extracted data and checked them for accuracy. Two researchers assessed the evidence using the GRADE approach.
MAIN RESULTS
We included 27 studies (18,064 women). We assessed the included studies as being at low risk of bias, although bias was frequently difficult to assess due to poor reporting and inadequate information on methods.High-dose calcium supplementation (≥ 1 g/day) versus placeboFourteen studies examined this comparison, however one study contributed no data. The 13 studies contributed data from 15,730 women to our meta-analyses. The average risk of high blood pressure (BP) was reduced with calcium supplementation compared with placebo (12 trials, 15,470 women: risk ratio (RR) 0.65, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.53 to 0.81; I² = 74%). There was also a reduction in the risk of pre-eclampsia associated with calcium supplementation (13 trials, 15,730 women: average RR 0.45, 95% CI 0.31 to 0.65; I² = 70%; low-quality evidence). This effect was clear for women with low calcium diets (eight trials, 10,678 women: average RR 0.36, 95% CI 0.20 to 0.65; I² = 76%) but not those with adequate calcium diets. The effect appeared to be greater for women at higher risk of pre-eclampsia, though this may be due to small-study effects (five trials, 587 women: average RR 0.22, 95% CI 0.12 to 0.42). These data should be interpreted with caution because of the possibility of small-study effects or publication bias. In the largest trial, the reduction in pre-eclampsia was modest (8%) and the CI included the possibility of no effect.The composite outcome maternal death or serious morbidity was reduced with calcium supplementation (four trials, 9732 women; RR 0.80, 95% CI 0.66 to 0.98). Maternal deaths were no different (one trial of 8312 women: one death in the calcium group versus six in the placebo group). There was an anomalous increase in the risk of HELLP syndrome in the calcium group (two trials, 12,901 women: RR 2.67, 95% CI 1.05 to 6.82, high-quality evidence), however, the absolute number of events was low (16 versus six).The average risk of preterm birth was reduced in the calcium supplementation group (11 trials, 15,275 women: RR 0.76, 95% CI 0.60 to 0.97; I² = 60%; low-quality evidence); this reduction was greatest amongst women at higher risk of developing pre-eclampsia (four trials, 568 women: average RR 0.45, 95% CI 0.24 to 0.83; I² = 60%). Again, these data should be interpreted with caution because of the possibility of small-study effects or publication bias. There was no clear effect on admission to neonatal intensive care. There was also no clear effect on the risk of stillbirth or infant death before discharge from hospital (11 trials, 15,665 babies: RR 0.90, 95% CI 0.74 to 1.09).One study showed a reduction in childhood systolic BP greater than 95th percentile among children exposed to calcium supplementation in utero (514 children: RR 0.59, 95% CI 0.39 to 0.91). In a subset of these children, dental caries at 12 years old was also reduced (195 children, RR 0.73, 95% CI 0.62 to 0.87).Low-dose calcium supplementation (< 1 g/day) versus placebo or no treatmentTwelve trials (2334 women) evaluated low-dose (usually 500 mg daily) supplementation with calcium alone (four trials) or in association with vitamin D (five trials), linoleic acid (two trials), or antioxidants (one trial). Most studies recruited women at high risk for pre-eclampsia, and were at high risk of bias, thus the results should be interpreted with caution. Supplementation with low doses of calcium reduced the risk of pre-eclampsia (nine trials, 2234 women: RR 0.38, 95% CI 0.28 to 0.52). There was also a reduction in high BP (five trials, 665 women: RR 0.53, 95% CI 0.38 to 0.74), admission to neonatal intensive care unit (one trial, 422 women, RR 0.44, 95% CI 0.20 to 0.99), but not preterm birth (six trials, 1290 women, average RR 0.83, 95% CI 0.34 to 2.03), or stillbirth or death before discharge (five trials, 1025 babies, RR 0.48, 95% CI 0.14 to 1.67).High-dose (=/> 1 g) versus low-dose (< 1 g) calcium supplementationWe included one trial with 262 women, the results of which should be interpreted with caution due to unclear risk of bias. Risk of pre-eclampsia appeared to be reduced in the high-dose group (RR 0.42, 95% CI 0.18 to 0.96). No other differences were found (preterm birth: RR 0.31, 95% CI 0.09 to 1.08; eclampsia: RR 0.32, 95% CI 0.07 to 1.53; stillbirth: RR 0.48, 95% CI 0.13 to 1.83).
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
High-dose calcium supplementation (≥ 1 g/day) may reduce the risk of pre-eclampsia and preterm birth, particularly for women with low calcium diets (low-quality evidence). The treatment effect may be overestimated due to small-study effects or publication bias. It reduces the occurrence of the composite outcome 'maternal death or serious morbidity', but not stillbirth or neonatal high care admission. There was an increased risk of HELLP syndrome with calcium supplementation, which was small in absolute numbers.The limited evidence on low-dose calcium supplementation suggests a reduction in pre-eclampsia, hypertension and admission to neonatal high care, but needs to be confirmed by larger, high-quality trials.
Topics: Calcium; Dietary Supplements; Female; Humans; Hypertension; Linoleic Acid; Pre-Eclampsia; Pregnancy; Pregnancy Complications, Cardiovascular; Premature Birth; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Vitamin D; Vitamins
PubMed: 30277579
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD001059.pub5 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Dec 2018Postpartum haemorrhage (PPH) is the leading cause of maternal mortality worldwide. Prophylactic uterotonic agents can prevent PPH, and are routinely recommended. The... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Postpartum haemorrhage (PPH) is the leading cause of maternal mortality worldwide. Prophylactic uterotonic agents can prevent PPH, and are routinely recommended. The current World Health Organization (WHO) recommendation for preventing PPH is 10 IU (international units) of intramuscular or intravenous oxytocin. There are several uterotonic agents for preventing PPH but there is still uncertainty about which agent is most effective with the least side effects. This is an update of a Cochrane Review which was first published in April 2018 and was updated to incorporate results from a recent large WHO trial.
OBJECTIVES
To identify the most effective uterotonic agent(s) to prevent PPH with the least side effects, and generate a ranking according to their effectiveness and side-effect profile.
SEARCH METHODS
We searched the Cochrane Pregnancy and Childbirth's Trials Register, ClinicalTrials.gov, the World Health Organization (WHO) International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP) (24 May 2018), and reference lists of retrieved studies.
SELECTION CRITERIA
All randomised controlled trials or cluster-randomised trials comparing the effectiveness and side effects of uterotonic agents with other uterotonic agents, placebo or no treatment for preventing PPH were eligible for inclusion. Quasi-randomised trials were excluded. Randomised trials published only as abstracts were eligible if sufficient information could be retrieved.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
At least three review authors independently assessed trials for inclusion and risk of bias, extracted data and checked them for accuracy. We estimated the relative effects and rankings for preventing PPH ≥ 500 mL and PPH ≥ 1000 mL as primary outcomes. Secondary outcomes included blood loss and related outcomes, morbidity outcomes, maternal well-being and satisfaction and side effects. Primary outcomes were also reported for pre-specified subgroups, stratifying by mode of birth, prior risk of PPH, healthcare setting, dosage, regimen and route of administration. We performed pairwise meta-analyses and network meta-analysis to determine the relative effects and rankings of all available agents.
MAIN RESULTS
The network meta-analysis included 196 trials (135,559 women) involving seven uterotonic agents and placebo or no treatment, conducted across 53 countries (including high-, middle- and low-income countries). Most trials were performed in a hospital setting (187/196, 95.4%) with women undergoing a vaginal birth (71.5%, 140/196).Relative effects from the network meta-analysis suggested that all agents were effective for preventing PPH ≥ 500 mL when compared with placebo or no treatment. The three highest ranked uterotonic agents for prevention of PPH ≥ 500 mL were ergometrine plus oxytocin combination, misoprostol plus oxytocin combination and carbetocin. There is evidence that ergometrine plus oxytocin (RR 0.70, 95% CI 0.59 to 0.84, moderate certainty), carbetocin (RR 0.72, 95% CI 0.56 to 0.93, moderate certainty) and misoprostol plus oxytocin (RR 0.70, 95% CI 0.58 to 0.86, low certainty) may reduce PPH ≥ 500 mL compared with oxytocin. Low-certainty evidence suggests that misoprostol, injectable prostaglandins, and ergometrine may make little or no difference to this outcome compared with oxytocin.All agents except ergometrine and injectable prostaglandins were effective for preventing PPH ≥ 1000 mL when compared with placebo or no treatment. High-certainty evidence suggests that ergometrine plus oxytocin (RR 0.83, 95% CI 0.66 to 1.03) and misoprostol plus oxytocin (RR 0.88, 95% CI 0.70 to 1.11) make little or no difference in the outcome of PPH ≥ 1000 mL compared with oxytocin. Low-certainty evidence suggests that ergometrine may make little or no difference to this outcome compared with oxytocin meanwhile the evidence on carbetocin was of very low certainty. High-certainty evidence suggests that misoprostol is less effective in preventing PPH ≥ 1000 mL when compared with oxytocin (RR 1.19, 95% CI 1.01 to 1.42). Despite the comparable relative treatment effects between all uterotonics (except misoprostol) and oxytocin, ergometrine plus oxytocin, misoprostol plus oxytocin combinations and carbetocin were the highest ranked agents for PPH ≥ 1000 mL.Misoprostol plus oxytocin reduces the use of additional uterotonics (RR 0.56, 95% CI 0.42 to 0.73, high certainty) and probably also reduces the risk of blood transfusion (RR 0.51, 95% CI 0.37 to 0.70, moderate certainty) when compared with oxytocin. Carbetocin, injectable prostaglandins and ergometrine plus oxytocin may also reduce the use of additional uterotonics but the certainty of the evidence is low. No meaningful differences could be detected between all agents for maternal deaths or severe morbidity as these outcomes were rare in the included randomised trials where they were reported.The two combination regimens were associated with important side effects. When compared with oxytocin, misoprostol plus oxytocin combination increases the likelihood of vomiting (RR 2.11, 95% CI 1.39 to 3.18, high certainty) and fever (RR 3.14, 95% CI 2.20 to 4.49, moderate certainty). Ergometrine plus oxytocin increases the likelihood of vomiting (RR 2.93, 95% CI 2.08 to 4.13, moderate certainty) and may make little or no difference to the risk of hypertension, however absolute effects varied considerably and the certainty of the evidence was low for this outcome.Subgroup analyses did not reveal important subgroup differences by mode of birth (caesarean versus vaginal birth), setting (hospital versus community), risk of PPH (high versus low risk for PPH), dose of misoprostol (≥ 600 mcg versus < 600 mcg) and regimen of oxytocin (bolus versus bolus plus infusion versus infusion only).
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
All agents were generally effective for preventing PPH when compared with placebo or no treatment. Ergometrine plus oxytocin combination, carbetocin, and misoprostol plus oxytocin combination may have some additional desirable effects compared with the current standard oxytocin. The two combination regimens, however, are associated with significant side effects. Carbetocin may be more effective than oxytocin for some outcomes without an increase in side effects.
Topics: Drug Therapy, Combination; Ergonovine; Female; Fever; Humans; Hypertension; Misoprostol; Network Meta-Analysis; Oxytocics; Oxytocin; Postpartum Hemorrhage; Prostaglandins; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Vomiting
PubMed: 30569545
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD011689.pub3 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Oct 2018Antihypertensive drugs are often used in the belief that lowering blood pressure will prevent progression to more severe disease, and thereby improve pregnancy outcome.... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Antihypertensive drugs are often used in the belief that lowering blood pressure will prevent progression to more severe disease, and thereby improve pregnancy outcome. This Cochrane Review is an updated review, first published in 2001 and subsequently updated in 2007 and 2014.
OBJECTIVES
To assess the effects of antihypertensive drug treatments for women with mild to moderate hypertension during pregnancy.
SEARCH METHODS
We searched Cochrane Pregnancy and Childbirth's Trials Register, ClinicalTrials.gov, the WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP) (13 September 2017), and reference lists of retrieved studies.
SELECTION CRITERIA
All randomised trials evaluating any antihypertensive drug treatment for mild to moderate hypertension during pregnancy, defined as systolic blood pressure 140 to 169 mmHg and/or diastolic blood pressure 90 to 109 mmHg. Comparisons were of one or more antihypertensive drug(s) with placebo, with no antihypertensive drug, or with another antihypertensive drug, and where treatment was planned to continue for at least seven days.
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
For this update, we included 63 trials (data from 58 trials, 5909 women), with moderate to high risk of bias overall.We carried out GRADE assessments for the main 'antihypertensive drug versus placebo/no antihypertensive drug' comparison only. Evidence was graded from very low to moderate certainty, with downgrading mainly due to design limitations and imprecision.For many outcomes, trials contributing data evaluated different hypertensive drugs; while we did not downgrade for this indirectness, results should be interpreted with caution.Antihypertensive drug versus placebo/no antihypertensive drug (31 trials, 3485 women)Primary outcomes: moderate-certainty evidence suggests that use of antihypertensive drug(s) probably halves the risk of developing severe hypertension (risk ratio (RR) 0.49; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.40 to 0.60; 20 trials, 2558 women), but may have little or no effect on the risk of proteinuria/pre-eclampsia (average risk ratio (aRR) 0.92; 95% CI 0.75 to 1.14; 23 trials, 2851 women; low-certainty evidence). Moderate-certainty evidence also shows that antihypertensive drug(s) probably have little or no effect in the risk of total reported fetal or neonatal death (including miscarriage) (aRR 0.72; 95% CI 0.50 to 1.04; 29 trials, 3365 women), small-for-gestational-age babies (aRR 0.96; 95% CI 0.78 to 1.18; 21 trials, 2686 babies) or preterm birth less than 37 weeks (aRR 0.96; 95% CI 0.83 to 1.12; 15 trials, 2141 women).
SECONDARY OUTCOMES
we are uncertain of the effect of antihypertensive drug(s) on the risk of maternal death, severe pre-eclampsia, or eclampsia, orimpaired long-term growth and development of the baby in infancy and childhood, because the certainty of this evidence is very low. There may be little or no effect on the risk of changed/stopped drugs due to maternal side-effects, or admission to neonatal or intensive care nursery (low-certainty evidence). There is probably little or no difference in the risk of elective delivery (moderate-certainty evidence).Antihypertensive drug versus another antihypertensive drug (29 trials, 2774 women)Primary outcomes: beta blockers and calcium channel blockers together in the meta-analysis appear to be more effective than methyldopa in avoiding an episode of severe hypertension (RR 0.70; 95% CI 0.56 to 0.88; 11 trials, 638 women). There was also an increase in this risk when other antihypertensive drugs were compared with calcium channel blockers (RR 1.86; 95% CI 1.09 to 3.15; 5 trials, 223 women), but no evidence of a difference when methyldopa and calcium channel blockers together were compared with beta blockers (RR1.18, 95% CI 0.95 to 1.48; 10 trials, 692 women). No evidence of a difference in the risk of proteinuria/pre-eclampsia was found when alternative drugs were compared with methyldopa (aRR 0.78; 95% CI 0.58 to 1.06; 11 trials, 997 women), with calcium channel blockers (aRR: 1.24, 95% CI 0.70 to 2.19; 5 trials, 375 women), or with beta blockers (aRR 1.21, 95% CI 0.88 to 1.67; 12 trials, 1107 women).For the babies, we found no evidence of a difference in the risk oftotal reported fetal or neonatal death (including miscarriage) when comparing other antihypertensive drugs with methyldopa (aRR 0.77, 95% CI 0.52 to 1.14; 22 trials, 1791 babies), with calcium channel blockers (aRR 0.90, 95% CI 0.52 to 1.57; nine trials, 700 babies), or with beta blockers (aRR: 1.23, 95% CI 0.81 to 1.88; 19 trials, 1652 babies); nor in the risk for small-for-gestational age in the comparison with methyldopa (aRR 0.79, 95% CI 0.52 to 1.20; seven trials, 597 babies), with calcium channel blockers (aRR 1.05, 95% CI 0.64 to 1.73; four trials, 200 babies), or with beta blockers (average RR 1.13, 95% CI 0.80 to 1.60; 7 trials, 680 babies). No evidence of an overall difference among groups in the risk of preterm birth (less than 37 weeks) was found in the comparison with methyldopa (aRR: 0.91; 95% CI 0.68 to 1.22; 11 trials, 835 women), with calcium channel blockers (aRR 0.85, 95% CI 0.59 to 1.23; six trials, 330 women), or with beta blockers (aRR 1.22, 95% CI 0.90 to 1.66; 9 trials, 806 women).
SECONDARY OUTCOMES
There were no cases of maternal death andeclampsia. There is no evidence of a difference in the risk of severe pre-eclampsia, changed/stopped drug due to maternal side-effects, elective delivery, admission to neonatal or intensive care nursery when other antihypertensive drugs are compared with methyldopa, calcium channel blockers or beta blockers. Impaired long-term growth and development in infancy and childhood was not reported for these comparisons.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
Antihypertensive drug therapy for mild to moderate hypertension during pregnancy reduces the risk of severe hypertension. The effect on other clinically important outcomes remains unclear. If antihypertensive drugs are used, beta blockers and calcium channel blockers appear to be more effective than the alternatives for preventing severe hypertension. High-quality large sample-sized randomised controlled trials are required in order to provide reliable estimates of the benefits and adverse effects of antihypertensive treatment for mild to moderate hypertension for both mother and baby, as well as costs to the health services, women and their families.
Topics: Antihypertensive Agents; Female; Fetal Death; Humans; Hypertension; Infant, Newborn; Infant, Premature; Infant, Small for Gestational Age; Maternal Death; Placebo Effect; Pre-Eclampsia; Pregnancy; Pregnancy Complications, Cardiovascular; Proteinuria; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
PubMed: 30277556
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD002252.pub4 -
Global Health Research and Policy 2019Studies regarding blood pressure of Nepal have demonstrated a contrasting prevalence. We aimed at providing a generalized estimate of the prevalence of hypertension and... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Studies regarding blood pressure of Nepal have demonstrated a contrasting prevalence. We aimed at providing a generalized estimate of the prevalence of hypertension and prehypertension in urban, suburban, and rural areas of Nepal.
METHODS
This systematic review followed PRISMA guidelines. A thorough search of PubMed, EMBASE, and Web of Science was performed, and studies satisfying the eligibility criteria were reviewed. Pooled prevalence was calculated by random-effects model, and the sources of heterogeneity were explored with meta-regression and subgroup analysis.
RESULTS
Twenty-three studies with 99,792 subjects were identified, and the estimated rate of hypertension and prehypertension were found to be 27.3% (95% CI: 23.8-30.9) and 35.4% (30.3-40.8). The prevalence of hypertension was 28.4% (22.4-34.7), 25.5% (21.4-29.8), and 24.4% (17.9-31.6) among urban, suburban, and rural populations, respectively. Moreover, rates of hypertension were found to be substantially higher in male (31.6%, 27.3-36.1) compared to female (20.0%, 14.2-26.6), and significantly higher among the middle-aged (≥40 years; 36.8%, 29.4-44.5) than among younger adults (< 40 years; 13.2%, 9.2-17.7). Further, prehypertension prevalence was found to be highest in rural areas (40.4%, 25.4-56.4) followed by urban areas (29.3%, 20.8-38.5) and lowest in suburban areas (25.5%, 18.9-32.7).
CONCLUSIONS
Our study identified an alarming situation of hypertension among Nepalese males and middle-aged, and a situation of concern with prehypertension in rural areas affecting almost 40 % of the population.
PubMed: 31165100
DOI: 10.1186/s41256-019-0102-6 -
BMJ Clinical Evidence Aug 2008Pre-eclampsia (raised blood pressure and proteinuria) complicates 2-8% of pregnancies, and raises morbidity and mortality in the mother and child. Pre-eclampsia is more... (Review)
Review
INTRODUCTION
Pre-eclampsia (raised blood pressure and proteinuria) complicates 2-8% of pregnancies, and raises morbidity and mortality in the mother and child. Pre-eclampsia is more common in women with multiple pregnancy and in those who have conditions associates with microvascular disease.
METHODS AND OUTCOMES
We conducted a systematic review and aimed to answer the following clinical questions: What are the effects of preventive interventions in women at risk of pre-eclampsia? What are the effects of interventions in women who develop mild-moderate hypertension during pregnancy? What are the effects of interventions in women who develop severe pre-eclampsia or very high blood pressure during pregnancy? What is the best choice of anticonvulsant for women with eclampsia? We searched: Medline, Embase, The Cochrane Library, and other important databases up to June 2007 (BMJ Clinical Evidence reviews are updated periodically, please check our website for the most up-to-date version of this review). We included harms alerts from relevant organisations such as the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and the UK Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency (MHRA).
RESULTS
We found 53 systematic reviews, RCTs, or observational studies that met our inclusion criteria. We performed a GRADE evaluation of the quality of evidence for interventions.
CONCLUSIONS
In this systematic review we present information relating to the effectiveness and safety of the following interventions: anticonvulsants, antihypertensive drugs, antioxidants, antiplatelet drugs, atenolol, bed rest, hospital admission or day care, calcium supplementation, choice of analgesia during labour, early delivery (interventionist care), evening primrose oil, fish oil, glyceryl trinitrate, magnesium supplementation, plasma volume expansion, and salt restriction.
Topics: Anticonvulsants; Antihypertensive Agents; Antioxidants; Eclampsia; Female; Humans; Hypertension; Pre-Eclampsia; Pregnancy
PubMed: 19445808
DOI: No ID Found -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Mar 2016Many people with chronic disease have more than one chronic condition, which is referred to as multimorbidity. The term comorbidity is also used but this is now taken to... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Many people with chronic disease have more than one chronic condition, which is referred to as multimorbidity. The term comorbidity is also used but this is now taken to mean that there is a defined index condition with other linked conditions, for example diabetes and cardiovascular disease. It is also used when there are combinations of defined conditions that commonly co-exist, for example diabetes and depression. While this is not a new phenomenon, there is greater recognition of its impact and the importance of improving outcomes for individuals affected. Research in the area to date has focused mainly on descriptive epidemiology and impact assessment. There has been limited exploration of the effectiveness of interventions to improve outcomes for people with multimorbidity.
OBJECTIVES
To determine the effectiveness of health-service or patient-oriented interventions designed to improve outcomes in people with multimorbidity in primary care and community settings. Multimorbidity was defined as two or more chronic conditions in the same individual.
SEARCH METHODS
We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL and seven other databases to 28 September 2015. We also searched grey literature and consulted experts in the field for completed or ongoing studies.
SELECTION CRITERIA
Two review authors independently screened and selected studies for inclusion. We considered randomised controlled trials (RCTs), non-randomised clinical trials (NRCTs), controlled before-after studies (CBAs), and interrupted time series analyses (ITS) evaluating interventions to improve outcomes for people with multimorbidity in primary care and community settings. Multimorbidity was defined as two or more chronic conditions in the same individual. This includes studies where participants can have combinations of any condition or have combinations of pre-specified common conditions (comorbidity), for example, hypertension and cardiovascular disease. The comparison was usual care as delivered in that setting.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Two review authors independently extracted data from the included studies, evaluated study quality, and judged the certainty of the evidence using the GRADE approach. We conducted a meta-analysis of the results where possible and carried out a narrative synthesis for the remainder of the results. We present the results in a 'Summary of findings' table and tabular format to show effect sizes across all outcome types.
MAIN RESULTS
We identified 18 RCTs examining a range of complex interventions for people with multimorbidity. Nine studies focused on defined comorbid conditions with an emphasis on depression, diabetes and cardiovascular disease. The remaining studies focused on multimorbidity, generally in older people. In 12 studies, the predominant intervention element was a change to the organisation of care delivery, usually through case management or enhanced multidisciplinary team work. In six studies, the interventions were predominantly patient-oriented, for example, educational or self-management support-type interventions delivered directly to participants. Overall our confidence in the results regarding the effectiveness of interventions ranged from low to high certainty. There was little or no difference in clinical outcomes (based on moderate certainty evidence). Mental health outcomes improved (based on high certainty evidence) and there were modest reductions in mean depression scores for the comorbidity studies that targeted participants with depression (standardized mean difference (SMD) -2.23, 95% confidence interval (CI) -2.52 to -1.95). There was probably a small improvement in patient-reported outcomes (moderate certainty evidence) although two studies that specifically targeted functional difficulties in participants had positive effects on functional outcomes with one of these studies also reporting a reduction in mortality at four year follow-up (Int 6%, Con 13%, absolute difference 7%). The intervention may make little or no difference to health service use (low certainty evidence), may slightly improve medication adherence (low certainty evidence), probably slightly improves patient-related health behaviours (moderate certainty evidence), and probably improves provider behaviour in terms of prescribing behaviour and quality of care (moderate certainty evidence). Cost data were limited.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
This review identifies the emerging evidence to support policy for the management of people with multimorbidity and common comorbidities in primary care and community settings. There are remaining uncertainties about the effectiveness of interventions for people with multimorbidity in general due to the relatively small number of RCTs conducted in this area to date, with mixed findings overall. It is possible that the findings may change with the inclusion of large ongoing well-organised trials in future updates. The results suggest an improvement in health outcomes if interventions can be targeted at risk factors such as depression, or specific functional difficulties in people with multimorbidity.
Topics: Age Factors; Chronic Disease; Community Health Services; Comorbidity; Disease Management; Humans; Patient-Centered Care; Primary Health Care; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Risk Factors; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 26976529
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD006560.pub3 -
Interventions in hypertension: systematic review and meta-analysis of natural and quasi-experiments.Clinical Hypertension May 2022Hypertension is an urgent public health problem. Consistent summary from natural and quasi-experiments employed to evaluate interventions that aim at preventing or...
BACKGROUND
Hypertension is an urgent public health problem. Consistent summary from natural and quasi-experiments employed to evaluate interventions that aim at preventing or controlling hypertension is lacking in the current literature. This study aims to summarize the evidence from natural and quasi-experiments that evaluated interventions used to prevent or control hypertension.
METHODS
We searched PubMed, Embase and Web of Science for natural and quasi-experiments evaluating interventions used to prevent hypertension, improve blood pressure control or reduce blood pressure levels from January 2008 to November 2018. Descriptions of studies and interventions were systematically summarized, and a meta-analysis was conducted.
RESULTS
Thirty studies were identified, and all used quasi-experimental designs including a difference-in-difference, a pre-post with a control group or a propensity score matching design. Education and counseling on lifestyle modifications such as promoting physical activity (PA), promoting a healthy diet and smoking cessation consultations could help prevent hypertension in healthy people. The use of computerized clinical practice guidelines by general practitioners, education and management of hypertension, the screening for cardiovascular disease (CVD) goals and referral could help improve hypertension control in patients with hypertension. The educating and counseling on PA and diet, the monitoring of patients' metabolic factors and chronic diseases, the combination of education on lifestyles with management of hypertension, the screening for economic risk factors, medical needs, and CVD risk factors and referral all could help reduce blood pressure. In the meta-analysis, the largest reduction in blood pressure was seen for interventions which combined education, counseling and management strategies: weighted mean difference in systolic blood pressure was - 5.34 mmHg (95% confidence interval [CI], - 7.35 to - 3.33) and in diastolic blood pressure was - 3.23 mmHg (95% CI, - 5.51 to - 0.96).
CONCLUSIONS
Interventions that used education and counseling strategies; those that used management strategies; those that used combined education, counseling and management strategies and those that used screening and referral strategies were beneficial in preventing, controlling hypertension and reducing blood pressure levels. The combination of education, counseling and management strategies appeared to be the most beneficial intervention to reduce blood pressure levels.
PubMed: 35490246
DOI: 10.1186/s40885-022-00198-2 -
Journal of the American College of... Oct 2013The goal of this study was to systematically review the peripartum cardiomyopathy (PPCM) literature and determine the prevalence of pre-eclampsia (PE) in women with... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
OBJECTIVES
The goal of this study was to systematically review the peripartum cardiomyopathy (PPCM) literature and determine the prevalence of pre-eclampsia (PE) in women with PPCM. Secondary analyses included evaluation of the prevalence of hypertensive disorders, multiple gestations, and multiparity.
BACKGROUND
PPCM is a significant cause of maternal and infant morbidity and mortality worldwide, yet its etiology remains unknown. PE is often cited as a risk factor for the development of PPCM and recent research suggests that PE and PPCM share mechanisms that contribute to their pathobiology. No comprehensive evaluation of the relationship between PE and PPCM exists.
METHODS
A systematic predetermined search strategy was performed in multiple databases to identify studies describing ≥3 women with PPCM. Prevalence rates of PE, hypertension, multiple gestations, and multiparity were pooled.
RESULTS
Data from 22 studies (n = 979) were included in this analysis. The pooled prevalence of 22% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 16% to 28%) was more than quadruple the 5% average worldwide background rate of PE in pregnancy (p < 0.001). There were no geographic or racial differences detected in the prevalence of PE in women with PPCM. The rates of hypertension during pregnancy (37% [95% CI: 29% to 45%]) and multiple gestations (9% [95% CI: 7% to 11%]) were also elevated.
CONCLUSIONS
The prevalence of PE, hypertensive disorders, and multiple gestations in women with PPCM is markedly higher than that in the general population. These findings support the concept of a shared pathogenesis between PE and PPCM and highlight the need for awareness of the overlap between these 2 diseases.
Topics: Cardiomyopathies; Female; Humans; Hypertension; Hypertension, Pregnancy-Induced; Peripartum Period; Pregnancy; Pregnancy Complications, Cardiovascular; Pregnancy, Multiple; Prevalence; Racial Groups
PubMed: 24013055
DOI: 10.1016/j.jacc.2013.08.717 -
BMC Medicine Sep 2014Dietary factors have been suggested to play a role in the prevention of hypertensive disorders of pregnancy (HDP), including gestational hypertension and pre-eclampsia,... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Dietary factors have been suggested to play a role in the prevention of hypertensive disorders of pregnancy (HDP), including gestational hypertension and pre-eclampsia, but inconsistent findings have been reported. A systematic review and meta-analyses were performed to synthesize evidence from observational studies of reproductive-aged women on the association between dietary factors and HDP.
METHODS
MEDLINE and EMBASE were searched to identify studies published until the end of May 2014. Studies were included if they were observational studies of reproductive-age women and reported results on dietary factors (energy, nutrients, foods or overall dietary patterns, alone or in combination with dietary supplements) and gestational hypertension and/or pre-eclampsia. Studies were excluded if they reported on supplements not in combination with dietary intake, or examined a biomarker of dietary intake. Random effects meta-analyses were performed on calculated weighted mean differences (WMD) of dietary intake between cases and non-cases, and effect estimates were pooled.
RESULTS
In total, 23 cohort and 15 case-control studies were identified for systematic review, of which 16 could be included in the meta-analyses. Based on meta-analyses of cohort studies, unadjusted energy intake was higher for pre-eclampsia cases (WMD 46 kcal/day, 95% confidence interval (CI) -13.80 to 106.23; I 2 = 23.9%, P = 0.26), although this was not statistically significant. Unadjusted intakes of magnesium (WMD 8 mg/day, 95% CI -13.99 to -1.38; I 2 = 0.0%, P = 0.41) and calcium (WMD 44 mg/day, 95% CI -84.31 to -3.62, I 2 = 51.1%, P = 0.03) were lower for the HDP cases, compared with pregnant women without HDP. Higher calcium intake consistently showed lower odds for HDP after adjustment for confounding factors (OR = 0.76, 95% CI 0.57 to 1.01, I 2 = 0.0%, P = 0.79). A few studies examining foods and dietary patterns suggested a beneficial effect of a diet rich in fruit and vegetables on pre-eclampsia, although not all the results were statistically significant.
CONCLUSIONS
Based on a limited number of studies, higher total energy and lower magnesium and calcium intake measured during pregnancy were identified as related to HDP. Further prospective studies are required to provide an evidence base for development of preventive health strategies, particularly focusing on dietary factors during pre-pregnancy and early pregnancy.
Topics: Adult; Diet; Dietary Supplements; Female; Humans; Hypertension, Pregnancy-Induced; Observational Studies as Topic; Pre-Eclampsia; Pregnancy
PubMed: 25241701
DOI: 10.1186/s12916-014-0157-7 -
Journal of Research in Medical Sciences... 2023Researchers have shown that diet is associated with hypertensive disorders of pregnancy, and there are some reports of performed meta-analyses on observational studies.... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Researchers have shown that diet is associated with hypertensive disorders of pregnancy, and there are some reports of performed meta-analyses on observational studies. However, very few randomized-controlled trials have systematically summarized. Thus, we reviewed and meta-analyzed the effects of nutritional interventions on risks of gestational hypertension (GH) or/and preeclampsia (PE).
MATERIALS AND METHODS
A systematic search was performed using Medline, Cochrane library, Google Scholar, ISI Web of Science, Scopus, and ProQuest to find randomized clinical trials assessing the effect of nutritional interventions on incidences of GH or/and PE compared to control or placebo interventions.
RESULTS
After considering duplicates, 1066 articles were screened from the database searches. Full-text articles were retrieved for 116 records, while 87 did not have the inclusion criteria and were later omitted. Twenty-nine studies were eligible, but 8 studies were not included in the meta-analysis due to insufficient data. Finally, seven studies were included in qualitative analysis. Furthermore, 7 studies (693 in intervention vs. 721 in control) were pooled for managed nutritional interventions, three (1255 vs. 1257) for a Mediterranean-style diet, and 4 (409 vs. 312) for sodium restricted. Our results revealed that managed nutritional programs were effective in reducing the incidence of GH (odds ratio [OR] = 0.37; 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.15, 0.92); = 66.9%; = 0.010), but not for PE (OR = 0.50; 95% CI = 0.23, 1.07); = 58.9%; = 0.032. The Mediterranean-style diets in three trials (1255 vs. 1257) did not reduce the risk of PE (OR = 1.10; 95% CI = 0.71, 1.70); = 2.3%; = 0.359). Likewise, sodium-restricted interventions in four trials (409 vs. 312) did not decrease total risk of GH (OR = 0.99; 95% CI = 0.68, 1.45); = 0%; = 0.520). Meta-regression did not indicate any significant association between maternal age, body mass index, gestational weight gain, and start time of all interventions with the incidence of GH or/and PE ( > 0.05).
CONCLUSION
The present meta-analysis showed that Mediterranean-style diets and sodium-restriction interventions did not decrease the incidence of GH or/and PE in healthy pregnancies; however, managed nutritional programs reduced the risk of GH, the total incidence of GH and PE, but not PE.
PubMed: 37213454
DOI: 10.4103/jrms.jrms_89_22