Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
A systematic review of models of care for polycystic ovary syndrome highlights the gap in the literature, especially in developing countries.
Melson, Eka; Davitadze, Meri; Malhotra, Kashish; Mousa, Aya; Teede, Helena; Boivin, Jacky; Thondan, Mala; Tay, Chau Thien; Kempegowda, Punith.
Afiliação
  • Melson E; Leicester Diabetes Centre, University of Leicester, Leicester, United Kingdom.
  • Davitadze M; Department of Diabetes and Endocrinology, Clinic NeoLab, Tbilisi, Georgia.
  • Malhotra K; Institute of Applied Health Research, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, United Kingdom.
  • Mousa A; Dayanand Medical College and Hospital, Punjab, India.
  • Boivin J; Monash Centre for Health Research and Implementation, Monash University, Melbourne, VIC, Australia.
  • Thondan M; Monash Centre for Health Research and Implementation, Monash University, Melbourne, VIC, Australia.
  • Tay CT; School of Psychology, Cardiff University, Cardiff, Wales, United Kingdom.
  • Kempegowda P; Primary Care, Harp Family Medical Centre, Melbourne, VIC, Australia.
Front Endocrinol (Lausanne) ; 14: 1217468, 2023.
Article em En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-37614710
ABSTRACT

Introduction:

The aim of the study was to identify available polycystic ovary syndrome (PCOS) models of care (MoCs) and describe their characteristics and alignment with the international PCOS guideline.

Methods:

Ovid MEDLINE, All EBM, PsycINFO, Embase, and CINAHL were searched from inception until 11 July 2022. Any study with a description of a PCOS MoC was included. Non-evidence-based guidelines, abstracts, study protocols, and clinical trial registrations were excluded. We also excluded MoCs delivered in research settings to minimize care bias. Meta-analysis was not performed due to heterogeneity across MoCs. We describe and evaluate each MoC based on the recommendations made by the international evidence-based guideline for assessing and managing PCOS.

Results:

Of 3,671 articles, six articles describing five MoCs were included in our systematic review. All MoCs described a multidisciplinary approach, including an endocrinologist, dietitian, gynecologist, psychologist, dermatologist, etc. Three MoCs described all aspects of PCOS care aligned with the international guideline recommendations. These include providing education on long-term risks, lifestyle interventions, screening and management of emotional well-being, cardiometabolic diseases, and the dermatological and reproductive elements of PCOS. Three MoCs evaluated patients' and healthcare professionals' satisfaction, with generally positive findings. Only one MoC explored the impact of their service on patients' health outcomes and showed improvement in BMI.

Conclusion:

There is limited literature describing PCOS MoCs in routine practice. Future research should explore developing cost-effective co-created multidisciplinary PCOS MoCs globally. This may be facilitated by the exchange of best practices between institutions with an established MoC and those who are interested in setting one up. Systematic review registration https//www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?RecordID=346539, identifier CRD42022346539.
Assuntos
Palavras-chave

Texto completo: 1 Coleções: 01-internacional Base de dados: MEDLINE Assunto principal: Síndrome do Ovário Policístico / Países em Desenvolvimento Tipo de estudo: Guideline / Prognostic_studies / Systematic_reviews Limite: Female / Humans Idioma: En Revista: Front Endocrinol (Lausanne) Ano de publicação: 2023 Tipo de documento: Article País de afiliação: Reino Unido

Texto completo: 1 Coleções: 01-internacional Base de dados: MEDLINE Assunto principal: Síndrome do Ovário Policístico / Países em Desenvolvimento Tipo de estudo: Guideline / Prognostic_studies / Systematic_reviews Limite: Female / Humans Idioma: En Revista: Front Endocrinol (Lausanne) Ano de publicação: 2023 Tipo de documento: Article País de afiliação: Reino Unido