Antenatal dietary and lifestyle advice for women who are overweight or obese and the effect on fetal growth and adiposity: the LIMIT randomised trial.

OBJECTIVE: To report the influence of maternal overweight and obesity on fetal growth and adiposity and effects of an antenatal dietary and lifestyle intervention among these women on measures of fetal growth and adiposity as secondary outcomes of the LIMIT Trial. DESIGN: Randomised controlled trial. SETTING: Public maternity hospitals in metropolitan Adelaide, South Australia. POPULATION: Pregnant women with a body mass index ≥ 25 kg/m(2), and singleton gestation between 10(+0) and 20(+0) weeks. METHODS: Women were randomised to Lifestyle Advice or continued Standard Care and offered two research ultrasound scans at 28 and 36 weeks of gestation. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Ultrasound measures of fetal growth and adiposity. RESULTS: For each fetal body composition parameter, mean Z-scores were substantially higher when compared with population standards. Fetuses of women receiving Lifestyle Advice demonstrated significantly greater mean mid-thigh fat mass, when compared with fetuses of women receiving Standard Care (adjusted difference in means 0.17; 95% CI 0.02-0.32; P = 0.0245). While subscapular fat mass increased between 28 and 36 weeks of gestation in fetuses in both treatment groups, the rate of adipose tissue deposition slowed among fetuses of women receiving Lifestyle Advice, when compared with fetuses of women receiving Standard Care (P = 0.0160). No other significant differences were observed. CONCLUSIONS: These findings provide the first evidence of changes to fetal growth following an antenatal dietary and lifestyle intervention among women who are overweight or obese.

Consumers attitudes and beliefs towards the receipt of antenatal corticosteroids and use of clinical practice guidelines.

BACKGROUND: Active participation of consumers in health care decision making, policy and clinical research is increasingly encouraged by governments, influential bodies and funders. Identifying the best way to achieve this is difficult due to the paucity of evidence. Consumers have mixed feelings towards clinical practice guidelines (CPG) demonstrating scepticism towards their purpose and applicability to their needs. There is no information pertaining to consumers' views and attitudes on the receipt of antenatal corticosteroids (ACS). The aim of this study was to examine the barriers and enablers to receiving ACS and use of CPG amongst consumers. METHODS: Consumers were recruited from neonatal units across three district health boards (DHBs) in Auckland, New Zealand. Participants completed a semi-structured interview or questionnaire. The questions posed and analyses were informed by the Theoretical Domains Framework (TDF). Barriers and enablers were identified by the presence of conflicting beliefs within a domain; the frequency of beliefs; and the likely strength of the impact of a belief on use of CPG and receipt of ACS. RESULTS: Twenty four consumers participated in the study. Six domains were identified as barriers to receipt of ACS and use of CPG. Key barriers to receipt of ACS included: difficulty retaining information conveyed, requiring further information in a variety of formats, and time constraints faced by consumers and health professionals in the provision and understanding of information to facilitate decision making. Barriers to use of CPG included: uncertainty about applicability of guideline use among consumers and scepticism about health professionals adhering too rigidly to guidelines. Enablers to receipt of ACS included: optimism toward ACS use, a strong knowledge of why ACS were administered, improved resilience in their pregnancy and confidence in their decision making following receipt of information about ACS. Enablers to use of CPG included: validation and standardisation of decision making among health professionals providing care and facilitating the best care for women and their babies. CONCLUSIONS: Key barriers and enablers exist among consumers regarding receipt of ACS and use of CPG. These need to be addressed or modified in any intervention strategy to facilitate implementation of the ACS CPG.

Identifying the barriers and enablers in the implementation of the New Zealand and Australian Antenatal Corticosteroid Clinical Practice Guidelines.

BACKGROUND: The ineffective implementation of evidence based practice guidelines can mean that the best health outcomes are not achieved. This study examined the barriers and enablers to the uptake and implementation of the new bi-national (Australia and New Zealand) antenatal corticosteroid clinical practice guidelines among health professionals, using the Theoretical Domains Framework. METHODS: Semi-structured interviews or online questionnaires were conducted across four health professional groups and three district health boards in Auckland, New Zealand. The questions were constructed to reflect the 14 behavioural domains from the Theoretical Domains Framework. Relevant domains were identified by the presence of conflicting beliefs within a domain; the frequency of beliefs; and the likely strength of the impact of a belief on the behaviour using thematic analysis. The influence of health professional group and organisation on the different barriers and enablers identified were explored. RESULTS: Seventy-three health professionals completed either a semi-structured interview (n = 35) or on-line questionnaire (n = 38). Seven behavioural domains were identified as overarching enablers: belief about consequences; knowledge; social influences; environmental context and resource; belief about capabilities; social professional role and identity; and behavioural regulation. Five behavioural domains were identified as overarching barriers: environmental context and resources; knowledge; social influences; belief about consequences; and social professional role and identity. Differences in beliefs between individual health professional groups were identified within the domains: belief about consequences; social professional role and identity; and emotion. Organisational differences were identified within the domains: belief about consequences; social influences; and belief about capabilities. CONCLUSION: This study has identified some of the enablers and barriers to implementation of the New Zealand and Australian Antenatal Corticosteroid Clinical Practice Guidelines using the validated Theoretical Domains Framework, as perceived by health professionals. We have identified differences between individual health professional groups and organisations. The identification of these behavioural determinants can be used to enhance an implementation strategy, assist in the design of interventions to achieve improved implementation and facilitate process evaluations to understand why or how change interventions are effective.

Postpartum SMS reminders to women who have experienced gestational diabetes to test for Type 2 diabetes: the DIAMIND randomized trial.

AIMS: This parallel group randomized controlled trial assessed whether an SMS reminder system for women, after gestational diabetes, would increase their attendance for an oral glucose tolerance test (OGTT) by six months postpartum. METHODS: Women were eligible for inclusion if they were diagnosed with gestational diabetes in their recent pregnancy, had a mobile phone and normal blood glucose profile prior to postnatal discharge from the Women's and Children's Hospital, Adelaide. A computer-generated random number sequence and telephone randomization were used. Two hundred and seventy-six women were randomized. Women in the six-week group (n = 140) were sent a text reminder to attend for an OGTT at six weeks postpartum, with further reminders at three and six months if required. Women in the control group (n = 136) received one text reminder at six months postpartum. Blinding was not feasible. The primary outcome was OGTT attendance within six months postpartum. RESULTS: Women in the six-week group did not increase their attendance for an OGTT within six months postpartum compared with women in the control group, 104 (77.6% of 134) versus 103 (76.8% of 134), relative risk (RR) 1.01, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.89-1.15. CONCLUSIONS: The SMS reminder system did not increase postpartum OGTT, fasting plasma glucose or HbA1c completion, although high rates of test completion were measured in both groups. Further research is required into factors influencing attendance for postpartum testing from the perspective of women, and into optimal counselling relating to Type 2 diabetes risk in the postpartum period for increasing postpartum glucose testing rates.

Maternal adverse effects with different loading infusion rates of antenatal magnesium sulphate for preterm fetal neuroprotection: the IRIS randomised trial.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate a slower (compared with a standard) infusion rate of the loading dose of magnesium sulphate for preterm fetal neuroprotection as a strategy to reduce maternal adverse effects. DESIGN: Randomised controlled trial. SETTING: South Australian maternity hospital. POPULATION: Fifty-one women at <30 weeks of gestation, where birth was planned or expected within 24 hours. METHODS: Women received a loading infusion of 4 g of magnesium sulphate over either 60 or 20 minutes (followed by maintenance of 1 g/hour until birth, or for up to 24 hours). MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Any maternal adverse effects associated with the infusion. RESULTS: Overall, 71% of women experienced adverse effects during the first hour of their infusion; the difference between groups was not significant [15/25 (60%) 60-minute loading; 21/26 (81%) 20-minute loading; risk ratio (RR) 0.74; 95% confidence interval (95% CI) 0.51-1.08]. Although no serious maternal complications occurred, adverse effects led to three women ceasing the loading treatment (1/25 in the 60-minute loading group; 2/26 in the 20-minute loading group; RR 0.52; 95% CI 0.05-5.38). Women in the 60-minute loading group experienced significantly less warmth and flushing at 20 minutes into the infusion (7/25 in the 60-minute loading group; 15/26 in the 20-minute loading group; RR 0.49; 95% CI 0.24-0.99). No other differences between groups for maternally reported and clinical adverse effects were shown. CONCLUSIONS: A slower rate of administering the loading dose of magnesium sulphate did not reduce the occurrence of maternal adverse effects overall. Flushing and warmth at 20 minutes into the infusion was reduced with a slower infusion.

Hypnosis antenatal training for childbirth: a randomised controlled trial.

OBJECTIVE: To determine the use of pharmacologic analgesia during childbirth when antenatal hypnosis is added to standard care. DESIGN: Randomised controlled clinical trial, conducted from December 2005 to December 2010. SETTING: The largest tertiary referral centre for maternity care in South Australia. POPULATION: A cohort of 448 women at >34 weeks of gestation, with a singleton pregnancy and cephalic presentation, planning a vaginal birth. Exclusions were: the need for an interpreter; pre-existing pain; psychiatric illness; younger than 18 years; and previous experience of hypnosis for childbirth. METHODS: All participants received usual care. The group of women termed Hypnosis + CD (hypnotherapist guided) were offered three antenatal live hypnosis sessions plus each session's corresponding audio CD for further practise, as well as a final fourth CD to listen to during labour. The group of women termed CD only (nurse administered) were played the same antenatal hypnosis CDs as group 1, but did not receive live hypnosis training. The control group participants were given no additional intervention or CDs. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE: Use of pharmacological analgesia during labour and childbirth. RESULTS: No difference in the use of pharmacological analgesia during labour and childbirth was found comparing hypnosis + CD with control (81.2 versus 76.2%; relative risk, RR 1.07; 95% confidence interval, 95% CI 0.95-1.20), or comparing CD only with control (76.9 versus 76.2%, RR 1.01, 95% CI 0.89-1.15). CONCLUSIONS: Antenatal group hypnosis using the Hypnosis Antenatal Training for Childbirth (HATCh) intervention in late pregnancy does not reduce the use of pharmacological analgesia during labour and childbirth.

Elective birth at 37 weeks of gestation versus standard care for women with an uncomplicated twin pregnancy at term: the Twins Timing of Birth Randomised Trial.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate whether for women with an uncomplicated twin pregnancy, elective birth at 37 weeks of gestation was associated with reduced risk of death or serious outcomes for babies, without increasing harm. DESIGN: Randomised controlled trial. SETTING: Maternity hospitals across Australia, New Zealand and Italy. POPULATION: A total of 235 women with an uncomplicated twin pregnancy at 36(+6) weeks of gestation, with no contraindication to continuing their pregnancy. METHODS: Using a computer-generated, central telephone randomisation service, 235 women were randomised to Elective Birth (birth at 37 weeks; n=116) or Standard Care (continued expectant management, with birth planned from 38 weeks; n=119). Outcome assessors were masked to treatment allocation. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE: A composite of serious adverse outcome for the infant. RESULTS: For women with an uncomplicated twin pregnancy, elective birth at 37 weeks of gestation was associated with a significant reduction in risk of serious adverse outcome for the infant (Elective Birth 11/232 [4.7%] versus Standard Care 29/238 [12.2%]; risk ratio [RR] 0.39; 95% CI 0.20-0.75; P=0.005), reflecting a reduction in birthweight less than the third centile using singleton gestational age-specific charts (Elective Birth 7/232 [3.0%] versus Standard Care 24/238 [10.1%]; RR 0.30; 95% CI 0.13-0.67; P=0.004). In a post hoc analysis using twin gestational age-specific charts, there was evidence of a trend towards a reduction in the primary composite of serious adverse infant outcome (Elective Birth Group 4/232 [1.7%] versus Standard Care Group 12/238 [5.0%]; RR 0.34; 95% CI 0.11 to 1.05; P=0.06). CONCLUSION: The findings of our study support recommendations for women with an uncomplicated twin pregnancy to birth at 37 weeks of gestation.

Antenatal interventions for overweight or obese pregnant women: a systematic review of randomised trials.

BACKGROUND: Overweight and obesity during pregnancy is an increasing health problem. OBJECTIVE: A systematic review to assess the benefits and harms of antenatal dietary or lifestyle interventions for pregnant women who are overweight or obese. SEARCH STRATEGY: The Cochrane Controlled Trials Register(CENTRAL) was searched (last search January 2010). Reference lists of retrieved studies were searched by hand. No date or language restrictions were used. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised controlled trials comparing antenatal dietary and/or lifestyle or other interventions with no treatment for overweight or obese women were considered.Studies were evaluated independently for appropriateness for inclusion and methodological quality. The primary outcome was large-for-gestational-age infants. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Nine randomised controlled trials were included involving 743 women who were overweight or obese during pregnancy. Seven trials compared a dietary intervention with standard antenatal care. MAIN RESULTS: There were no statistically significant differences identified between women who received an antenatal intervention and those who did not for the large-for-gestational-age infant outcome (three studies; 366 women; risk ratio 2.02; 95% CI 0.84,4.86) or mean gestational weight gain [four studies; 416 women;weighted mean difference )3.10 kg; 95% CI )8.32, 2.13 (random effects model)]. There were no statistically significant differences identified for other reported outcomes. AUTHOR'S CONCLUSIONS: The effect of providing an antenatal dietary intervention for overweight or obese pregnant women on maternal and infant health outcomes remains unclear.

Antioxidants for preventing pre-eclampsia.

BACKGROUND: Oxidative stress has been proposed as a key factor involved in the development of pre-eclampsia. Supplementing women with antioxidants during pregnancy may help to counteract oxidative stress and thereby prevent or delay the onset of pre-eclampsia. OBJECTIVES: To determine the effectiveness and safety of any antioxidant supplementation during pregnancy and the risk of developing pre-eclampsia and its related complications. SEARCH STRATEGY: We searched the Cochrane Pregnancy and Childbirth Group's Trials Register (May 2007), the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (The Cochrane Library 2006, Issue 3), MEDLINE (1950 to October 2007) and Current Contents (1998 to August 2004). SELECTION CRITERIA: All randomised trials comparing one or more antioxidants with either placebo or no antioxidants during pregnancy for the prevention of pre-eclampsia, and trials comparing one or more antioxidants with another, or with other interventions. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors independently assessed trials for inclusion and trial quality and extracted data. MAIN RESULTS: Ten trials, involving 6533 women, were included in this review, five trials were rated high quality. For the majority of trials, the antioxidant assessed was combined vitamin C and E therapy. There was no significant difference between antioxidant and control groups for the relative risk (RR) of pre-eclampsia (RR 0.73, 95% confidence intervals (CI) 0.51 to 1.06; nine trials, 5446 women) or any other primary outcome: severe pre-eclampsia (RR 1.25, 95% CI 0.89 to 1.76; two trials, 2495 women), preterm birth (before 37 weeks) (RR 1.10, 95% CI 0.99 to 1.22; five trials, 5198 women), small-for-gestational-age infants (RR 0.83, 95% CI 0.62 to 1.11; five trials, 5271 babies) or any baby death (RR 1.12, 95% CI 0.81 to 1.53; four trials, 5144 babies). Women allocated antioxidants were more likely to self-report abdominal pain late in pregnancy (RR 1.61, 95% CI 1.11 to 2.34; one trial, 1745 women), require antihypertensive therapy (RR 1.77, 95% CI 1.22 to 2.57; two trials, 4272 women) and require an antenatal hospital admission for hypertension (RR 1.54, 95% CI 1.00 to 2.39; one trial, 1877 women). However, for the latter two outcomes, this was not clearly reflected in an increase in any other hypertensive complications. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Evidence from this review does not support routine antioxidant supplementation during pregnancy to reduce the risk of pre-eclampsia and other serious complications in pregnancy.

Repeat doses of prenatal corticosteroids for women at risk of preterm birth for preventing neonatal respiratory disease.

BACKGROUND: It is not clear whether there is benefit in repeating the dose of prenatal corticosteroids for women who remain at risk of preterm birth after an initial course. OBJECTIVES: To assess the effectiveness and safety of a repeat dose(s) of prenatal corticosteroids. SEARCH STRATEGY: We searched the Cochrane Pregnancy and Childbirth Group's Trials Register (February 2007), the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (The Cochrane Library 2006, Issue 4), MEDLINE (1965 to November 2006), EMBASE (1988 to November 2006) and Current Contents (1997 to November 2006). SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised controlled trials of women who have already received a single course of corticosteroids seven or more days previously and are still considered to be at risk of preterm birth; outcomes compared for women randomised to receive a repeat dose(s) of prenatal corticosteroids, with women given no further prenatal corticosteroids. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: We assessed trial quality and extracted the data independently. MAIN RESULTS: Five trials, involving over 2000 women between 23 and 33 weeks' gestation, are included. Treatment with repeat dose(s) of corticosteroid was associated with a reduction in occurrence (relative risk (RR) 0.82, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.72 to 0.93, four trials, 2155 infants) and severity of any neonatal lung disease (RR 0.60, 95% CI 0.48 to 0.75, three trials, 2139 infants) and serious infant morbidity (RR 0.79, 95% CI 0.67 to 0.93, four trials, 2157 infants).Mean birthweight was not significantly different between treatment groups (weighted mean difference (WMD) -62.07 g, 95% CI -129.10 to 4.96, four trials, 2273 infants), although in one trial, treatment with repeat dose(s) of corticosteroid was associated with a reduction in birthweight Z score (WMD) -0.13, 95% CI -26 to 0.00, 1 trial, 1144 infants), and in two trials, with an increased risk of being small for gestational age at birth (RR 1.63, 95% CI 1.12 to 2.37, two trials, 602 infants). No statistically significant differences were seen for any of the other primary outcomes that included other measures of respiratory morbidity, fetal and neonatal mortality, periventricular haemorrhage, periventricular leukomalacia and maternal infectious morbidity. Treatment with repeat dose(s) of corticosteroid was associated with a significantly increased risk of caesarean section (RR 1.11, 95% CI 1.01 to 1.22, four trials, 1523 women). AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Repeat dose(s) of prenatal corticosteroids reduce the occurrence and severity of neonatal lung disease and the risk of serious health problems in the first few weeks of life. These short-term benefits for babies support the use of repeat dose(s) of prenatal corticosteroids for women at risk of preterm birth. However, these benefits are associated with a reduction in some measures of weight, and head circumference at birth, and there is still insufficient evidence on the longer-term benefits and risks.

Specialised antenatal clinics for women with a multiple pregnancy to improve maternal and infant outcomes.

BACKGROUND: Regular antenatal care for women with a multiple pregnancy is accepted practice, and while most women have an increase in the number of antenatal visits, there is no consensus as to what constitutes optimal care. 'Specialised' antenatal clinics have been advocated as a way of improving outcomes for women and their infants. OBJECTIVES: To assess, using the best available evidence, the benefits and harms of 'specialised' antenatal clinics compared with 'standard' antenatal care for women with a multiple pregnancy. SEARCH STRATEGY: We searched the Cochrane Pregnancy and Childbirth Group's Trials Register (October 2006), the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL)(The Cochrane Library 2005, Issue 4), and PubMed (January 1966 to January 2006). SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised controlled trials with reported data that compared outcomes in mothers and babies who received 'specialised' antenatal care with outcomes in mothers and babies who received 'standard' antenatal care. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Both review authors independently assessed trial quality and extracted data. MAIN RESULTS: There are no included studies. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: There is no information available from randomised controlled trials to support the role of 'specialised' antenatal clinics for women with a multiple pregnancy compared with 'standard' antenatal care in improving maternal and infant health outcomes. The value of 'specialised' multiple pregnancy clinics in improving health outcomes for women and their infants requires evaluation in appropriately powered and designed randomised controlled trials.

Magnesium sulphate for women at risk of preterm birth for neuroprotection of the fetus.

BACKGROUND: Epidemiological and basic science evidence suggests that magnesium sulphate before birth may be neuroprotective for the fetus. OBJECTIVES: To assess the effectiveness and safety of magnesium sulphate as a neuroprotective agent when given to women considered at risk of preterm birth. SEARCH STRATEGY: We searched the Cochrane Pregnancy and Childbirth Group's Trials Register (October 2006), CENTRAL (The Cochrane Library 2006, Issue 3), MEDLINE (1966 to October 2006), EMBASE (1980 to October 2006), Current Contents (1992 to October 2006), references of retrieved articles, and abstracts submitted to the Society for Pediatric Research (1996 to 2006). SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised controlled trials of antenatal magnesium sulphate therapy given to women threatening or likely to give birth at less than 37 weeks' gestational age. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: We independently extracted data regarding clinical outcomes including paediatric mortality, neurologic outcome of survivors (including blindness, deafness, cerebral palsy and major neurosensory disability), and maternal complications and side-effects. At least two authors assessed trial eligibility and quality, and extracted data. MAIN RESULTS: Four trials (3701 babies) were eligible for this review. No statistically significant effect of antenatal magnesium sulphate therapy was detected on any major paediatric outcome, including mortality (e.g., paediatric mortality relative risk (RR) 0.97; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.74 to 1.28; four trials; 3701 infants), and neurological outcomes in the first few years of life, including cerebral palsy (RR 0.77; 95% CI 0.56 to 1.06; four trials; 3701 infants), neurological impairments or disabilities. There were also no significant effects of antenatal magnesium therapy on combined rates of mortality with neurologic outcomes. There was a significant reduction in the rate of substantial gross motor dysfunction (RR 0.56; 95% CI 0.33 to 0.97; two trials; 2848 infants). There were higher rates of minor maternal side-effects in the magnesium groups, but no significant effects on major maternal complications. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: The role for antenatal magnesium sulphate therapy as a neuroprotective agent for the preterm fetus is not yet established. Given the possible beneficial effects of magnesium sulphate on gross motor function in early childhood, outcomes later in childhood should be evaluated to determine the presence or absence of later potentially important neurologic effects, particularly on motor or cognitive function. Further information will be available from one of the studies where outcomes are being evaluated again at eight to nine years of age, and from another trial currently in progress.

Elective repeat caesarean section versus induction of labour for women with a previous caesarean birth.

BACKGROUND: When a woman has had a previous caesarean birth and requires induction of labour in a subsequent pregnancy, there are two options for her care: elective repeat caesarean or planned induction of labour. While there are risks and benefits for both elective repeat caesarean birth and planned induction of labour, current sources of information are limited to non-randomised cohort studies. Studies designed in this way have significant potential for bias and consequently conclusions based on these results are limited in their reliability and should be interpreted with caution. OBJECTIVES: To assess, using the best available evidence, the benefits and harms of elective repeat caesarean section and planned induction of labour for women with a previous caesarean birth. SEARCH STRATEGY: We searched the Cochrane Pregnancy and Childbirth Group's Trials Register (January 2006), the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (The Cochrane Library 2006, Issue 1) and PubMed (1966 to January 2006). SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised controlled trials with reported data that compared outcomes in mothers and babies who planned a repeat elective caesarean section with outcomes in women who planned induction of labour, where a previous birth had been by caesarean. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: There was no data extraction performed. MAIN RESULTS: There were no randomised controlled trials identified. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Planned elective repeat caesarean section and planned induction of labour for women with a prior caesarean birth are both associated with benefits and harms. Evidence for these care practices is drawn from non-randomised studies, associated with potential bias. Any results and conclusions must therefore be interpreted with caution. Randomised controlled trials are required to provide the most reliable evidence regarding the benefits and harms of both planned elective repeat caesarean section and planned induction of labour for women with a previous caesarean birth.

Induction of labour for improving birth outcomes for women at or beyond term.

BACKGROUND: As a pregnancy continues beyond term the risks of babies dying inside the womb or in the immediate newborn period increase. Whether a policy of labour induction at a predetermined gestational age can reduce this increased risk is the subject of this review. OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the benefits and harms of a policy of labour induction at term or post-term compared to awaiting spontaneous labour or later induction of labour. SEARCH STRATEGY: We searched the Cochrane Pregnancy and Childbirth Group's Trials Register (June 2006). SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomized controlled trials conducted in women at or beyond term. The eligible trials were those comparing a policy of labour induction to a policy of awaiting spontaneous onset of labour. Trials comparing cervical ripening methods, membrane stripping/sweeping or nipple stimulation without any commitment to delivery within a certain time were excluded. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors independently evaluated potentially eligible trials and extracted data. Outcomes are analysed in two main categories: gestational age and cervix status. MAIN RESULTS: We included 19 trials reporting on 7984 women. A policy of labour induction at 41 completed weeks or beyond was associated with fewer (all-cause) perinatal deaths (1/2986 versus 9/2953; relative risk (RR) 0.30; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.09 to 0.99). The risk difference is 0.00 (95% CI 0.01 to 0.00). If deaths due to congenital abnormality are excluded, no deaths remain in the labour induction group and seven deaths remain in the no-induction group. There was no evidence of a statistically significant difference in the risk of caesarean section (RR 0.92; 95% CI 0.76 to 1.12; RR 0.97; 95% CI 0.72 to 1.31) for women induced at 41 and 42 completed weeks respectively. Women induced at 37 to 40 completed weeks were more likely to have a caesarean section with expectant management than those in the labour induction group (RR 0.58; 95% CI 0.34 to 0.99). There were fewer babies with meconium aspiration syndrome (41+: RR 0.29; 95% CI 0.12 to 0.68, four trials, 1325 women; 42+: RR 0.66; 95% CI 0.24 to 1.81, two trials, 388 women). AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: A policy of labour induction after 41 completed weeks or later compared to awaiting spontaneous labour either indefinitely or at least one week is associated with fewer perinatal deaths. However, the absolute risk is extremely small. Women should be appropriately counselled on both the relative and absolute risks.

Intrapartum interventions for preventing shoulder dystocia.

BACKGROUND: The early management of shoulder dystocia involves the administration of various manoeuvres which aim to relieve the dystocia by manipulating the fetal shoulders and increasing the functional size of the maternal pelvis. OBJECTIVES: To assess the effects of prophylactic manoeuvres in preventing shoulder dystocia. SEARCH STRATEGY: We searched the Cochrane Pregnancy and Childbirth Group's Trials Register (1 June 2006). SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised controlled trials comparing the prophylactic implementation of manoeuvres and maternal positioning with routine or standard care. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors independently applied exclusion criteria, assessed trial quality and extracted data. MAIN RESULTS: Two trials were included; one comparing the McRobert's manoeuvre and suprapubic pressure with no prophylactic manoeuvres in 185 women likely to give birth to a large baby and one trial comparing the use of the McRobert's manoeuvre versus lithotomy positioning in 40 women. We decided not to pool the results of the two trials. One study reported fifteen cases of shoulder dystocia in the therapeutic (control) group compared to five in the prophylactic group (relative risk (RR) 0.44, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.17 to 1.14) and the other study reported one episode of shoulder dystocia in both prophylactic and lithotomy groups. In the first study, there were significantly more caesarean sections in the prophylactic group and when these were included in the results, significantly fewer instances of shoulder dystocia were seen in the prophylactic group (RR 0.33, 95% CI 0.12 to 0.86). In this study, thirteen women in the control group required therapeutic manoeuvres after delivery of the fetal head compared to three in the treatment group (RR 0.31, 95% CI 0.09 to 1.02). One study reported no birth injuries or low Apgar scores recorded. In the other study, one infant in the control group had a brachial plexus injury (RR 0.44, 95% CI 0.02 to 10.61), and one infant had a five-minute Apgar score less than seven (RR 0.44, 95% CI 0.02 to 10.61). AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: There are no clear findings to support or refute the use of prophylactic manoeuvres to prevent shoulder dystocia, although one study showed an increased rate of caesareans in the prophylactic group. Both included studies failed to address important maternal outcomes such as maternal injury, psychological outcomes and satisfaction with birth. Due to the low incidence of shoulder dystocia, trials with larger sample sizes investigating the use of such manoeuvres are required.

Complementary and alternative therapies for pain management in labour.

BACKGROUND: Many women would like to avoid pharmacological or invasive methods of pain management in labour and this may contribute towards the popularity of complementary methods of pain management. This review examined currently available evidence supporting the use of alternative and complementary therapies for pain management in labour. OBJECTIVES: To examine the effects of complementary and alternative therapies for pain management in labour on maternal and perinatal morbidity. SEARCH STRATEGY: We searched the Cochrane Pregnancy and Childbirth Group's Trials Register (February 2006), the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (The Cochrane Library 2006, Issue 1), MEDLINE (1966 to February 2006), EMBASE (1980 to February 2006) and CINAHL (1980 to February 2006). SELECTION CRITERIA: The inclusion criteria included published and unpublished randomised controlled trials comparing complementary and alternative therapies (but not biofeedback) with placebo, no treatment or pharmacological forms of pain management in labour. All women whether primiparous or multiparous, and in spontaneous or induced labour, in the first and second stage of labour were included. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Meta-analysis was performed using relative risks for dichotomous outcomes and mean differences for continuous outcomes. The outcome measures were maternal satisfaction, use of pharmacological pain relief and maternal and neonatal adverse outcomes. MAIN RESULTS: Fourteen trials were included in the review with data reporting on 1537 women using different modalities of pain management; 1448 women were included in the meta-analysis. Three trials involved acupuncture (n = 496), one audio-analgesia (n = 24), two trials acupressure (n = 172), one aromatherapy (n = 22), five trials hypnosis (n = 729), one trial of massage (n = 60), and relaxation (n = 34). The trials of acupuncture showed a decreased need for pain relief (relative risk (RR) 0.70, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.49 to 1.00, two trials 288 women). Women taught self-hypnosis had decreased requirements for pharmacological analgesia (RR 0.53, 95% CI 0.36 to 0.79, five trials 749 women) including epidural analgesia (RR 0.30, 95% CI 0.22 to 0.40) and were more satisfied with their pain management in labour compared with controls (RR 2.33, 95% CI 1.15 to 4.71, one trial). No differences were seen for women receiving aromatherapy, or audio analgesia. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Acupuncture and hypnosis may be beneficial for the management of pain during labour; however, the number of women studied has been small. Few other complementary therapies have been subjected to proper scientific study.

Oral betamimetics for maintenance therapy after threatened preterm labour.

BACKGROUND: Some women who have threatened to give birth prematurely, subsequently settle. They may then take oral tocolytic maintenance therapy to prevent preterm birth and to prolong gestation. OBJECTIVES: To assess the effects of oral betamimetic maintenance therapy after threatened preterm labour for preventing preterm birth. SEARCH STRATEGY: We searched the Cochrane Pregnancy and Childbirth Trials Register (June 2005) and MEDLINE (from 1966 to August 2003). SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised controlled trials comparing oral betamimetic with alternative tocolytic therapy, placebo or no therapy, for maintenance following treatment of threatened preterm labour. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors independently applied the selection criteria and carried out data extraction and quality assessment of studies. MAIN RESULTS: Eleven randomised controlled trials (RCTs) were included. No differences were seen for admission to the neonatal intensive care unit when betamimetics were compared with placebo (relative risk (RR) 1.29, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.64 to 2.60; one RCT of terbutaline with 140 women) or with magnesium (RR 0.80, 95% CI 0.43 to 1.46; one RCT of 137 women). The rate of preterm birth (less than 37 weeks) showed no significant difference in four RCTs, two comparing ritodrine with placebo/no treatment and two comparing terbutaline with placebo/no treatment (RR 1.08, 95% CI 0.88 to 1.32, 384 women). No differences between betamimetics and placebo, no treatment or other tocolytics were seen for perinatal mortality and morbidity outcomes. Some adverse effects such as tachycardia were more frequent in the betamimetics groups than the groups allocated to placebo, no treatment or another type of tocolytic. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Available evidence does not support the use of oral betamimetics for maintenance therapy after threatened preterm labour.

Prenatal administration of progesterone for preventing preterm birth.

BACKGROUND: Preterm birth is the major complication of pregnancy associated with perinatal mortality and morbidity and occurs in up to 6% to 10% of all births. Administration of progesterone for the prevention of preterm labour has been advocated. OBJECTIVES: To assess the benefits and harms of progesterone administration during pregnancy in the prevention of preterm birth. SEARCH STRATEGY: We searched the Cochrane Pregnancy and Childbirth Group's Specialised Register of Controlled Trials (March 2005), the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (The Cochrane Library, Issue 3, 2004), MEDLINE (1965 to January 2005), EMBASE (1988 to August 2004), and Current Contents (1997 to August 2004). SELECTION CRITERIA: All published and unpublished randomised controlled trials, in which progesterone was given by any route for preventing preterm birth. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Standard methods of the Cochrane Collaboration and the Cochrane Pregnancy and Childbirth Group were used. Evaluation of methodological quality and trial data extraction were undertaken independently by two authors. Results are presented using relative risk with 95% confidence intervals. MAIN RESULTS: For all women administered progesterone, there was a reduction in the risk of preterm birth less than 37 weeks (six studies, 988 participants, relative risk (RR) 0.65, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.54 to 0.79) and preterm birth less than 34 weeks (one study, 142 participants, RR 0.15, 95% CI 0.04 to 0.64). Infants born to mothers administered progesterone were less likely to have birthweight less than 2500 grams (four studies, 763 infants, RR 0.63, 95% CI 0.49 to 0.81) or intraventricular haemorrhage (one study, 458 infants, RR 0.25, 95% CI 0.08 to 0.82). There was no difference in perinatal death between women administered progesterone and those administered placebo (five studies, 921 participants, RR 0.66, 95% CI 0.37 to 1.19). There were no other differences reported for maternal or neonatal outcomes. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Intramuscular progesterone is associated with a reduction in the risk of preterm birth less than 37 weeks' gestation, and infant birthweight less than 2500 grams. However, other important maternal and infant outcomes have been poorly reported to date, with most outcomes reported from a single trial only (Meis 2003). It is unclear if the prolongation of gestation translates into improved maternal and longer-term infant health outcomes. Similarly, information regarding the potential harms of progesterone therapy to prevent preterm birth is limited. Further information is required about the use of vaginal progesterone in the prevention of preterm birth.

Planned early birth versus expectant management (waiting) for prelabour rupture of membranes at term (37 weeks or more).

BACKGROUND: Prelabour rupture of membranes at term is managed expectantly or by elective birth, but it is not clear if waiting for birth to occur spontaneously is better than intervening. OBJECTIVES: To assess the effects of planned early birth versus expectant management for women with term prelabour rupture of membranes on fetal, infant and maternal wellbeing. SEARCH STRATEGY: We searched the Cochrane Pregnancy and Childbirth Group Trials Register (November 2004), the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (The Cochrane Library, Issue 4, 2004), MEDLINE (1966 to November 2004) and EMBASE (1974 to November 2004). SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised or quasi-randomised trials of planned early birth compared with expectant management in women with prelabour rupture of membranes at 37 weeks' gestation or more. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors independently applied eligibility criteria, assessed trial quality and extracted data. A random-effects model was used. MAIN RESULTS: Twelve trials (total of 6814 women) were included. Planned management was generally induction with oxytocin or prostaglandin, with one trial using homoeopathic caulophyllum. Overall, no differences were detected for mode of birth between planned and expectant groups: relative risk (RR) of caesarean section 0.94, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.82 to 1.08 (12 trials, 6814 women); RR of operative vaginal birth 0.98, 95% 0.84 to 1.16 (7 trials, 5511 women). Significantly fewer women in the planned compared with expectant management groups had chorioamnionitis (RR 0.74, 95% CI 0.56 to 0.97; 9 trials, 6611 women) or endometritis (RR 0.30, 95% CI 0.12 to 0.74; 4 trials, 445 women). No difference was seen for neonatal infection (RR 0.83, 95% CI 0.61 to 1.12; 9 trials, 6406 infants). However, fewer infants under planned management went to neonatal intensive or special care compared with expectant management (RR 0.72, 95% CI 0.57 to 0.92, number needed to treat 20; 5 trials, 5679 infants). In a single trial, significantly more women with planned management viewed their care more positively than those expectantly managed (RR of "nothing liked" 0.45, 95% CI 0.37 to 0.54; 5031 women). AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Planned management (with methods such as oxytocin or prostaglandin) reduces the risk of some maternal infectious morbidity without increasing caesarean sections and operative vaginal births. Fewer infants went to neonatal intensive care under planned management although no differences were seen in neonatal infection rates. Since planned and expectant management may not be very different, women need to have appropriate information to make informed choices.

Women's views on postpartum testing for type 2 diabetes after gestational diabetes: Six month follow-up to the DIAMIND randomised controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: This study assessed the views of the women who participated in the DIAMIND randomised trial of postpartum SMS reminders to test for type 2 diabetes after gestational diabetes (GDM) on their preferred type of postpartum reminder system and barriers and facilitators to completion of postpartum diabetes testing. METHOD: A written questionnaire was sent to women with recent GDM who participated in the DIAMIND trial (n=276) via post or email at six months after the birth of their baby. RESULTS: 208 women (75%) returned the study questionnaires. Preferred postpartum reminder types were: SMS (67%), email (17%), postal (12%) and voice call (1%). Women who had not yet completed an OGTT indicated that they planned to undertake one in the future (61%). Common barriers to postpartum OGTT completion included: not having enough time (73%), inadequate childcare (30%), and a need to focus on the health of the baby (30%). The most common facilitator was having a shorter test (33%). CONCLUSIONS: Improved childcare quality and access as well as more research into a shorter, more convenient test procedure for type 2 diabetes screening are needed. Reminder systems for postpartum diabetes screening should be electronic where possible.