Mediterranean-style diet in pregnant women with metabolic risk factors (ESTEEM): A pragmatic multicentre randomised trial.

BACKGROUND: Pregnant women with metabolic risk factors are at high risk of complications. We aimed to assess whether a Mediterranean-style diet reduces adverse pregnancy outcomes in high-risk women. METHODS AND FINDINGS: We conducted a multicentre randomised trial in 5 maternity units (4 in London and 1 in Birmingham) between 12 September 2014 and 29 February 2016. We randomised inner-city pregnant women with metabolic risk factors (obesity, chronic hypertension, or hypertriglyceridaemia) to a Mediterranean-style diet with high intake of nuts, extra virgin olive oil, fruits, vegetables, nonrefined grains, and legumes; moderate to high consumption of fish; low to moderate intake of poultry and dairy products; low intake of red and processed meat; and avoidance of sugary drinks, fast food, and food rich in animal fat versus usual care. Participants received individualised dietary advice at 18, 20, and 28 weeks' gestation. The primary endpoints were composite maternal (gestational diabetes or preeclampsia) and composite offspring (stillbirth, small for gestational age, or admission to neonatal care unit) outcomes prioritised by a Delphi survey. We used an intention-to-treat (ITT) analysis with multivariable models and identified the stratification variables and prognostic factors a priori. We screened 7,950 and randomised 1,252 women. Baseline data were available for 593 women in the intervention (93.3% follow-up, 553/593) and 612 in the control (95.6% follow-up, 585/612) groups. Over a quarter of randomised women were primigravida (330/1,205; 27%), 60% (729/1,205) were of Black or Asian ethnicity, and 69% (836/1,205) were obese. Women in the intervention arm consumed more nuts (70.1% versus 22.9%; adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 6.8, 95% confidence interval [CI] 4.3-10.6, p ≤ 0.001) and extra virgin olive oil (93.2% versus 49.0%; aOR 32.2, 95% CI 16.0-64.6, p ≤ 0.001) than controls; increased their intake of fish (p < 0.001), white meat (p < 0.001), and pulses (p = 0.05); and reduced their intake of red meat (p < 0.001), butter, margarine, and cream (p < 0.001). There was no significant reduction in the composite maternal (22.8% versus 28.6%; aOR 0.76, 95% CI 0.56-1.03, p = 0.08) or composite offspring (17.3% versus 20.9%; aOR 0.79, 95% CI 0.58-1.08, p = 0.14) outcomes. There was an apparent reduction in the odds of gestational diabetes by 35% (aOR 0.65, 95% CI 0.47-0.91, p = 0.01) but not in other individual components of the composite outcomes. Mothers gained less gestational weight (mean 6.8 versus 8.3 kg; adjusted difference -1.2 Kg, 95% CI -2.2 to -0.2, p = 0.03) with intervention versus control. There was no difference in any of the other maternal and offspring complications between both groups. When we pooled findings from the Effect of Simple, Targeted Diet in Pregnant Women With Metabolic Risk Factors on Pregnancy Outcomes (ESTEEM) trial with similar trials using random effects meta-analysis, we observed a significant reduction in gestational diabetes (odds ratio [OR] 0.67, 95% CI 0.53-0.84, I2 = 0%), with no heterogeneity (2 trials, 2,397 women). The study's limitations include the use of participant reported tools for adherence to the intervention instead of objective biomarkers. CONCLUSIONS: A simple, individualised, Mediterranean-style diet in pregnancy did not reduce the overall risk of adverse maternal and offspring complications but has the potential to reduce gestational weight gain and the risk of gestational diabetes. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT02218931.

Cost-effectiveness of cell salvage and donor blood transfusion during caesarean section: results from a randomised controlled trial.

OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the cost-effectiveness of routine use of cell salvage during caesarean section in mothers at risk of haemorrhage compared with current standard of care. DESIGN: Model-based cost-effectiveness evaluation alongside a multicentre randomised controlled trial. Three main analyses were carried out on the trial data: (1) based on the intention-to-treat principle; (2) based on the per-protocol principle; (3) only participants who underwent an emergency caesarean section. SETTING: 26 obstetric units in the UK. PARTICIPANTS: 3028 women at risk of haemorrhage recruited between June 2013 and April 2016. INTERVENTIONS: Cell salvage (intervention) versus routine care without salvage (control). PRIMARY OUTCOME MEASURES: Cost-effectiveness based on incremental cost per donor blood transfusion avoided. RESULTS: In the intention-to-treat analysis, the mean difference in total costs between cell salvage and standard care was £83. The estimated incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) was £8110 per donor blood transfusion avoided. For the per-protocol analysis, the mean difference in total costs was £92 and the ICER was £8252. In the emergency caesarean section analysis, the mean difference in total costs was £55 and the ICER was £13 713 per donor blood transfusion avoided. This ICER is driven by the increased probability that these patients would require a higher level of postoperative care and additional surgeries. The results of these analyses were shown to be robust for the majority of deterministic sensitivity analyses. CONCLUSIONS: The results of the economic evaluation suggest that while routine cell salvage is a marginally more effective strategy than standard care in avoiding a donor blood transfusion, there is uncertainty in relation to whether it is a less or more costly strategy. The lack of long-term data on the health and quality of life of patients in both arms of the trial means that further research is needed to fully understand the cost implications of both strategies. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ISRCTN66118656.

Improving the healthcare response to domestic violence and abuse in primary care: protocol for a mixed method evaluation of the implementation of a complex intervention.

BACKGROUND: Domestic violence and abuse remains a major health concern. It is unknown whether the improved healthcare response to domestic violence and abuse demonstrated in a cluster randomised controlled trial of IRIS (Identification and Referral to Improve Safety), a complex intervention, including general practice based training, support and referral programme, can be achieved outside a trial setting. AIM: To evaluate the impact over four years of a system wide implementation of IRIS, sequentially into multiple areas, outside the setting of a trial. METHODS: An interrupted time series analysis of referrals received by domestic violence and abuse workers from 201 general practices, in five northeast London boroughs; alongside a mixed methods process evaluation and qualitative analysis. Segmented regression interrupted time series analysis to estimate impact of the IRIS intervention over a 53-month period. A secondary analysis compares the segmented regression analysis in each of the four implementation boroughs, with a fifth comparator borough. DISCUSSION: This is the first interrupted time series analysis of an intervention to improve the health care response to domestic violence. The findings will characterise the impact of IRIS implementation outside a trial setting and its suitability for national implementation in the United Kingdom.

A randomised controlled trial and economic evaluation of intraoperative cell salvage during caesarean section in women at risk of haemorrhage: the SALVO (cell SALVage in Obstetrics) trial.

BACKGROUND: Caesarean section is associated with blood loss and maternal morbidity. Excessive blood loss requires transfusion of donor (allogeneic) blood, which is a finite resource. Cell salvage returns blood lost during surgery to the mother. It may avoid the need for donor blood transfusion, but reliable evidence of its effects is lacking. OBJECTIVES: To determine if routine use of cell salvage during caesarean section in mothers at risk of haemorrhage reduces the rates of blood transfusion and postpartum maternal morbidity, and is cost-effective, in comparison with standard practice without routine salvage use. DESIGN: Individually randomised controlled, multicentre trial with cost-effectiveness analysis. Treatment was not blinded. SETTING: A total of 26 UK obstetric units. PARTICIPANTS: Out of 3054 women recruited between June 2013 and April 2016, we randomly assigned 3028 women at risk of haemorrhage to cell salvage or routine care. Randomisation was stratified using random permuted blocks of variable sizes. Of these, 1672 had emergency and 1356 had elective caesareans. We excluded women for whom cell salvage or donor blood transfusion was contraindicated. INTERVENTIONS: Cell salvage (intervention) versus routine care without salvage (control). In the intervention group, salvage was set up in 95.6% of the women and, of these, 50.8% had salvaged blood returned. In the control group, 3.9% had salvage deployed. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Primary - donor blood transfusion. Secondary - units of donor blood transfused, time to mobilisation, length of hospitalisation, mean fall in haemoglobin, fetomaternal haemorrhage (FMH) measured by Kleihauer-Betke test, and maternal fatigue. Analyses were adjusted for stratification factors and other factors that were believed to be prognostic a priori. Cost-effectiveness outcomes - costs of resources and service provision taking the UK NHS perspective. RESULTS: We analysed 1498 and 1492 participants in the intervention and control groups, respectively. Overall, the transfusion rate was 2.5% in the intervention group and 3.5% in the control group [adjusted odds ratio (OR) 0.65, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.42 to 1.01; p = 0.056]. In a planned subgroup analysis, the transfusion rate was 3.0% in the intervention group and 4.6% in the control group among emergency caesareans (adjusted OR 0.58, 95% CI 0.34 to 0.99), whereas it was 1.8% in the intervention group and 2.2% in the control group among elective caesareans (adjusted OR 0.83, 95% CI 0.38 to 1.83) (interaction p = 0.46, suggesting that the difference in effect between subgroups was not statistically significant). Secondary outcomes did not differ between groups, except for FMH, which was higher under salvage in rhesus D (RhD)-negative women with RhD-positive babies (25.6% vs. 10.5%, adjusted OR 5.63, 95% CI 1.43 to 22.14; p = 0.013). No case of amniotic fluid embolism was observed. The additional cost of routine cell salvage during caesarean was estimated, on average, at £8110 per donor blood transfusion avoided. CONCLUSIONS: The modest evidence for an effect of routine use of cell salvage during caesarean section on rates of donor blood transfusion was associated with increased FMH, which emphasises the need for adherence to guidance on anti-D prophylaxis. We are unable to comment on long-term antibody sensitisation effects. Based on the findings of this trial, cell salvage is unlikely to be considered cost-effective. FUTURE WORK: Research into risk of alloimmunisation among women exposed to cell salvage is needed. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN66118656. FUNDING: This project was funded by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Health Technology Assessment programme and will be published in full in Health Technology Assessment; Vol. 22, No. 2. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information.

Cell salvage and donor blood transfusion during cesarean section: A pragmatic, multicentre randomised controlled trial (SALVO).

BACKGROUND: Excessive haemorrhage at cesarean section requires donor (allogeneic) blood transfusion. Cell salvage may reduce this requirement. METHODS AND FINDINGS: We conducted a pragmatic randomised controlled trial (at 26 obstetric units; participants recruited from 4 June 2013 to 17 April 2016) of routine cell salvage use (intervention) versus current standard of care without routine salvage use (control) in cesarean section among women at risk of haemorrhage. Randomisation was stratified, using random permuted blocks of variable sizes. In an intention-to-treat analysis, we used multivariable models, adjusting for stratification variables and prognostic factors identified a priori, to compare rates of donor blood transfusion (primary outcome) and fetomaternal haemorrhage ≥2 ml in RhD-negative women with RhD-positive babies (a secondary outcome) between groups. Among 3,028 women randomised (2,990 analysed), 95.6% of 1,498 assigned to intervention had cell salvage deployed (50.8% had salvaged blood returned; mean 259.9 ml) versus 3.9% of 1,492 assigned to control. Donor blood transfusion rate was 3.5% in the control group versus 2.5% in the intervention group (adjusted odds ratio [OR] 0.65, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.42 to 1.01, p = 0.056; adjusted risk difference -1.03, 95% CI -2.13 to 0.06). In a planned subgroup analysis, the transfusion rate was 4.6% in women assigned to control versus 3.0% in the intervention group among emergency cesareans (adjusted OR 0.58, 95% CI 0.34 to 0.99), whereas it was 2.2% versus 1.8% among elective cesareans (adjusted OR 0.83, 95% CI 0.38 to 1.83) (interaction p = 0.46). No case of amniotic fluid embolism was observed. The rate of fetomaternal haemorrhage was higher with the intervention (10.5% in the control group versus 25.6% in the intervention group, adjusted OR 5.63, 95% CI 1.43 to 22.14, p = 0.013). We are unable to comment on long-term antibody sensitisation effects. CONCLUSIONS: The overall reduction observed in donor blood transfusion associated with the routine use of cell salvage during cesarean section was not statistically significant. TRIAL REGISTRATION: This trial was prospectively registered on ISRCTN as trial number 66118656 and can be viewed on http://www.isrctn.com/ISRCTN66118656.

Effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of implementing HIV testing in primary care in East London: protocol for an interrupted time series analysis.

INTRODUCTION: HIV remains underdiagnosed. Guidelines recommend routine HIV testing in primary care, but evidence on implementing testing is lacking. In a previous study, the Rapid HIV Assessment 2 (RHIVA2) cluster randomised controlled trial, we showed that providing training and rapid point-of-care HIV testing at general practice registration (RHIVA2 intervention) in Hackney led to cost-effective, increased and earlier diagnosis of HIV. However, interventions effective in a trial context may be less so when implemented in routine practice. We describe the protocol for an MRC phase IV implementation programme, evaluating the impact of rolling out the RHIVA2 intervention in a post-trial setting. We will use a longitudinal study to examine if the post-trial implementation in Hackney practices is effective and cost-effective, and a cross-sectional study to compare Hackney with two adjacent boroughs providing usual primary care (Newham) and an enhanced service promoting HIV testing in primary care (Tower Hamlets). METHODS AND ANALYSIS: Service evaluation using interrupted time series and cost-effectiveness analyses. We will include all general practices in three contiguous high HIV prevalence East London boroughs. All adults aged 16 and above registered with the practices will be included. The interventions to be examined are: a post-trial RHIVA2 implementation programme (including practice-based education and training, external quality assurance, incentive payments for rapid HIV testing and incorporation of rapid HIV testing in the sexual health Local Enhanced Service) in Hackney; the general practice sexual health Network Improved Service in Tower Hamlets and usual care in Newham. Coprimary outcomes are rates of HIV testing and new HIV diagnoses. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: The chair of the Camden and Islington NHS Research Ethics Committee, London, has endorsed this programme as an evaluation of routine care. Study results will be published in peer-reviewed journals and reported to commissioners.

Mediterranean diet based intervention in pregnancy to improve maternal and fetal outcomes: Methodological challenges and lessons learned from the multicentre ESTEEM study.

INTRODUCTION: Evaluating complex dietary interventions such as Mediterranean diet in pregnancy presents unique methodological challenges. We present the challenges and the lessons learned from a multicentre randomised trial (ESTEEM) on Mediterranean-based dietary intervention in pregnancy. METHODS: We recruited pregnant women who met our predefined inclusion criteria and randomised those with metabolic risk factors to the Mediterranean-based dietary intervention or routine antenatal care. We evaluated the effect of the ESTEEM intervention on composite maternal and fetal outcomes. CHALLENGES AND SOLUTIONS: The main challenges were encountered in recruiting to ESTEEM, delivering the intervention, engaging clinical staff, assessing adherence and choosing the outcome measures. The large sample size coupled with the slow recruitment rate forced us to extend the recruitment period by 4 months. The limitation in available resources was overcome by opening sites in a step-wise approach. Engaging healthcare providers was promoted by embedding the recruitment and the follow-up activities into current clinical practice, and promoting research skills training. We delivered the intervention early on in the pregnancy to promote the dietary effect on healthy placentation and reduce metabolic risk factors. Participants and their families were actively involved in the dietary intervention to improve adherence through a series of group teaching sessions. A user-friendly short dietary questionnaire was developed and validated to assess adherence to the intervention. The trial composite primary outcome was chosen in consensus based on input from a panel of experts. CONCLUSION: The ESTEEM experience offers an insight into future pragmatic nutritional studies in pregnancy. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT02218931.

Effect of simple, targeted diet in pregnant women with metabolic risk factors on maternal and fetal outcomes (ESTEEM): study protocol for a pragmatic multicentre randomised trial.

INTRODUCTION: Women with metabolic risk factors are at higher risk of adverse pregnancy outcomes. Mediterranean-based dietary interventions have the potential to minimise these risks. We aim to evaluate the effectiveness of a simple, targeted intervention modelled on Mediterranean diet in preventing maternal and fetal complications in pregnant women with metabolic risk factors. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: Pregnant women with a singleton pregnancy <18 weeks gestation, and without pre-existing diabetes, chronic renal disease and autoimmune diseases will be recruited. Women with metabolic risk factors will be randomised to receive a dietary intervention based on a Mediterranean pattern, supplemented with extra virgin olive oil and mixed nuts until delivery. The intervention will be delivered through a series of one to one and group sessions. The primary outcome is a composite maternal outcome of pre-eclampsia or gestational diabetes and a composite fetal outcome of stillbirth, small for gestational age fetus or admission to the neonatal intensive care unit. Secondary outcomes include maternal, fetal, dietary and laboratory outcomes. We aim to randomise 1230 eligible women with metabolic risk factors. We will also compare the outcomes in women with and without these risk factors. The sample size will provide us with 80% power at 5% significance, assuming a 20% loss to follow-up to detect a 30% reduction in maternal and fetal complications. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: The ESTEEM trial is designed to provide a definitive estimate of the effects of Mediterranean dietary pattern in pregnancy on maternal and fetal outcomes. The pragmatic nature of ESTEEM ensures the applicability of its findings into clinical practice. The findings of the study will be published in peer-reviewed journals and presented at national and international scientific meetings and congresses. Ethical approval was granted by the NHS Research Ethics Committees (14/EE/1048). TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT02218931; Pre-results.