Search Results Heading

MBRLSearchResults

mbrl.module.common.modules.added.book.to.shelf
Title added to your shelf!
View what I already have on My Shelf.
Oops! Something went wrong.
Oops! Something went wrong.
While trying to add the title to your shelf something went wrong :( Kindly try again later!
Are you sure you want to remove the book from the shelf?
Oops! Something went wrong.
Oops! Something went wrong.
While trying to remove the title from your shelf something went wrong :( Kindly try again later!
    Done
    Filters
    Reset
  • Discipline
      Discipline
      Clear All
      Discipline
  • Is Peer Reviewed
      Is Peer Reviewed
      Clear All
      Is Peer Reviewed
  • Item Type
      Item Type
      Clear All
      Item Type
  • Subject
      Subject
      Clear All
      Subject
  • Year
      Year
      Clear All
      From:
      -
      To:
  • More Filters
333 result(s) for "Thornton, Jim"
Sort by:
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
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. 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. 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.
Checklist to assess Trustworthiness in RAndomised Controlled Trials (TRACT checklist): concept proposal and pilot
Objectives To propose a checklist that can be used to assess trustworthiness of randomized controlled trials (RCTs). Design A screening tool was developed using the four-stage approach proposed by Moher et al . This included defining the scope, reviewing the evidence base, suggesting a list of items from piloting, and holding a consensus meeting. The initial checklist was set-up by a core group who had been involved in the assessment of problematic RCTs for several years. We piloted this in a consensus panel of several stakeholders, including health professionals, reviewers, journal editors, policymakers, researchers, and evidence-synthesis specialists. Each member was asked to score three articles with the checklist and the results were then discussed in consensus meetings. Outcome The Trustworthiness in RAndomised Clinical Trials (TRACT) checklist includes 19 items organised into seven domains that are applicable to every RCT: 1) Governance, 2) Author Group, 3) Plausibility of Intervention Usage, 4) Timeframe, 5) Drop-out Rates, 6) Baseline Characteristics, and 7) Outcomes. Each item can be answered as either no concerns, some concerns/no information, or major concerns. If a study is assessed and found to have a majority of items rated at a major concern level, then editors, reviewers or evidence synthesizers should consider a more thorough investigation, including assessment of original individual participant data. Conclusions The TRACT checklist is the first checklist developed specifically to detect trustworthiness issues in RCTs. It might help editors, publishers and researchers to screen for such issues in submitted or published RCTs in a transparent and replicable manner.
Immediate delivery compared with expectant management after preterm pre-labour rupture of the membranes close to term (PPROMT trial): a randomised controlled trial
Preterm pre-labour ruptured membranes close to term is associated with increased risk of neonatal infection, but immediate delivery is associated with risks of prematurity. The balance of risks is unclear. We aimed to establish whether immediate birth in singleton pregnancies with ruptured membranes close to term reduces neonatal infection without increasing other morbidity. The PPROMT trial was a multicentre randomised controlled trial done at 65 centres across 11 countries. Women aged over 16 years with singleton pregnancies and ruptured membranes before the onset of labour between 34 weeks and 36 weeks and 6 days weeks who had no signs of infection were included. Women were randomly assigned (1:1) by a computer-generated randomisation schedule with variable block sizes, stratified by centre, to immediate delivery or expectant management. The primary outcome was the incidence of neonatal sepsis. Secondary infant outcomes included a composite neonatal morbidity and mortality indicator (ie, sepsis, mechanical ventilation ≥24 h, stillbirth, or neonatal death); respiratory distress syndrome; any mechanical ventilation; and duration of stay in a neonatal intensive or special care unit. Secondary maternal outcomes included antepartum or intrapartum haemorrhage, intrapartum fever, postpartum treatment with antibiotics, and mode of delivery. Women and caregivers could not be masked, but those adjudicating on the primary outcome were masked to group allocation. Analyses were by intention to treat. This trial is registered with the International Clinical Trials Registry, number ISRCTN44485060. Between May 28, 2004, and June 30, 2013, 1839 women were recruited and randomly assigned: 924 to the immediate birth group and 915 to the expectant management group. One woman in the immediate birth group and three in the expectant group were excluded from the primary analyses. Neonatal sepsis occurred in 23 (2%) of 923 neonates whose mothers were assigned to immediate birth and 29 (3%) of 912 neonates of mothers assigned to expectant management (relative risk [RR] 0·8, 95% CI 0·5–1·3; p=0·37). The composite secondary outcome of neonatal morbidity and mortality occurred in 73 (8%) of 923 neonates of mothers assigned to immediate delivery and 61 (7%) of 911 neonates of mothers assigned to expectant management (RR 1·2, 95% CI 0·9–1·6; p=0·32). However, neonates born to mothers in the immediate delivery group had increased rates of respiratory distress (76 [8%] of 919 vs 47 [5%] of 910, RR 1·6, 95% CI 1·1–2·30; p=0·008) and any mechanical ventilation (114 [12%] of 923 vs 83 [9%] of 912, RR 1·4, 95% CI 1·0–1·8; p=0·02) and spent more time in intensive care (median 4·0 days [IQR 0·0–10·0] vs 2·0 days [0·0–7·0]; p<0·0001) compared with neonates born to mothers in the expectant management group. Compared with women assigned to the immediate delivery group, those assigned to the expectant management group had higher risks of antepartum or intrapartum haemorrhage (RR 0·6, 95% CI 0·4–0·9), intrapartum fever (0·4, 0·2–0·9), and use of postpartum antibiotics (0·8, 0·7–1·0), and longer hospital stay (p<0·0001), but a lower risk of caesarean delivery (RR 1·4, 95% CI 1·2–1·7). In the absence of overt signs of infection or fetal compromise, a policy of expectant management with appropriate surveillance of maternal and fetal wellbeing should be followed in pregnant women who present with ruptured membranes close to term. Australian National Health and Medical Research Council, the Women's and Children's Hospital Foundation, and The University of Sydney.
Less-Tight versus Tight Control of Hypertension in Pregnancy
In this trial comparing less-tight control of hypertension (target diastolic blood pressure, 100 mm Hg) with tight control (85 mm Hg) among pregnant women, rates of pregnancy loss, high-level neonatal care, and serious maternal complications were similar between groups. Almost 10% of pregnant women have hypertension; hypertension is preexisting in 1%, gestational hypertension without proteinuria develops in 5 to 6%, and preeclampsia develops in 2%. 1 Preexisting hypertension and gestational hypertension before 34 weeks are associated with an increased risk of perinatal and maternal complications. 2 – 4 Blood-pressure targets for women with nonsevere hypertension during pregnancy are much debated. Relevant randomized, controlled trials have been small and of moderate or poor quality; tight control (the use of antihypertensive therapy to normalize blood pressure) has been associated with maternal benefits (e.g., a decrease in the frequency of severe hypertension and possibly in . . .
Haemostatic and thrombo-embolic complications in pregnant women with COVID-19: a systematic review and critical analysis
Background As pregnancy is a physiological prothrombotic state, pregnant women may be at increased risk of developing coagulopathic and/or thromboembolic complications associated with COVID-19. Methods Two biomedical databases were searched between September 2019 and June 2020 for case reports and series of pregnant women with a diagnosis of COVID-19 based either on a positive swab or high clinical suspicion where no swab had been performed. Additional registry cases known to the authors were included. Steps were taken to minimise duplicate patients. Information on coagulopathy based on abnormal coagulation test results or clinical evidence of disseminated intravascular coagulation (DIC), and on arterial or venous thrombosis, were extracted using a standard form. If available, detailed laboratory results and information on maternal outcomes were analysed. Results One thousand sixty-three women met the inclusion criteria, of which three (0.28, 95% CI 0.0 to 0.6) had arterial and/or venous thrombosis, seven (0.66, 95% CI 0.17 to 1.1) had DIC, and a further three (0.28, 95% CI 0.0 to 0.6) had coagulopathy without meeting the definition of DIC. Five hundred and thirty-seven women (56%) had been reported as having given birth and 426 (40%) as having an ongoing pregnancy. There were 17 (1.6, 95% CI 0.85 to 2.3) maternal deaths in which DIC was reported as a factor in two. Conclusions Our data suggests that coagulopathy and thromboembolism are both increased in pregnancies affected by COVID-19. Detection of the former may be useful in the identification of women at risk of deterioration.
Ursodeoxycholic acid versus placebo in women with intrahepatic cholestasis of pregnancy (PITCHES): a randomised controlled trial
Intrahepatic cholestasis of pregnancy, characterised by maternal pruritus and increased serum bile acid concentrations, is associated with increased rates of stillbirth, preterm birth, and neonatal unit admission. Ursodeoxycholic acid is widely used as a treatment without an adequate evidence base. We aimed to evaluate whether ursodeoxycholic acid reduces adverse perinatal outcomes in women with intrahepatic cholestasis of pregnancy. We did a double-blind, multicentre, randomised placebo-controlled trial at 33 hospital maternity units in England and Wales. We recruited women with intrahepatic cholestasis of pregnancy, who were aged 18 years or older and with a gestational age between 20 weeks and 40 weeks and 6 days, with a singleton or twin pregnancy and no known lethal fetal anomaly. Participants were randomly assigned 1:1 to ursodeoxycholic acid or placebo, given as two oral tablets a day at an equivalent dose of 500 mg twice a day. The dose could be increased or decreased at the clinician's discretion, to a maximum of four tablets and a minimum of one tablet a day. We recommended that treatment should be continued from enrolment until the infant's birth. The primary outcome was a composite of perinatal death (in-utero fetal death after randomisation or known neonatal death up to 7 days after birth), preterm delivery (<37 weeks' gestation), or neonatal unit admission for at least 4 h (from birth until hospital discharge). Each infant was counted once within this composite. All analyses were done according to the intention-to-treat principle. The trial was prospectively registered with the ISRCTN registry, number 91918806. Between Dec 23, 2015, and Aug 7, 2018, 605 women were enrolled and randomly allocated to receive ursodeoxycholic acid (n=305) or placebo (n=300). The primary outcome analysis included 304 women and 322 infants in the ursodeoxycholic acid group, and 300 women and 318 infants in the placebo group (consent to use data was withdrawn for 1 woman and 2 infants). The primary composite outcome occurred in 74 (23%) of 322 infants in the ursodeoxycholic acid group and 85 (27%) of 318 infants in the placebo group (adjusted risk ratio 0·85 [95% CI 0·62–1·15]). Two serious adverse events were reported in the ursodeoxycholic acid group and six serious adverse events were reported in the placebo group; no serious adverse events were regarded as being related to treatment. Treatment with ursodeoxycholic acid does not reduce adverse perinatal outcomes in women with intrahepatic cholestasis of pregnancy. Therefore, its routine use for this condition should be reconsidered. National Institute for Health Research Efficacy and Mechanism Evaluation Programme.
Encouraging awareness of fetal movements is harmful
The concept that perception by pregnant women of reduced or altered movements of their fetuses can be used to predict stillbirth, thereby enabling early birth to save the baby, seems plausible.1 However, although mothers of stillborn babies, with hindsight, remember altered movements preceding the diagnosis of the death more often than controls,2,3 to our knowledge, no one has ever shown this prospectively. With few exceptions,4 the accuracy of tests of fetal health done in response to altered movements has been poorly evaluated, and the only treatment—delivery—can harm as well as benefit.5 A 2015 Cochrane review6 on routine perinatal fetal movement counting was dominated by a cluster trial by Adrian Grant and colleagues,7 who investigated routine use of movement counting among 68 000 women and found that this method “did not translate into reduced perinatal mortality”. The intervention was associated with an induction rate of 41%, compared with 36% in the control group (adjusted odds ratio [AOR] 1·05, 95% CI 1·02–1·08); if the correct women had been induced and no harm caused, this intervention should have had a substantial effect.