Respectful Maternity Care : A Systematic Review.

BACKGROUND: Severe maternal morbidity and mortality are worse in the United States than in all similar countries, with the greatest effect on Black women. Emerging research suggests that disrespectful care during childbirth contributes to this problem. PURPOSE: To conduct a systematic review on definitions and valid measurements of respectful maternity care (RMC), its effectiveness for improving maternal and infant health outcomes for those who are pregnant and postpartum, and strategies for implementation. DATA SOURCES: Systematic searches of Ovid Medline, CINAHL, Embase, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, PsycInfo, and SocINDEX for English-language studies (inception to July 2023). STUDY SELECTION: Randomized controlled trials and nonrandomized studies of interventions of RMC versus usual care for effectiveness studies; additional qualitative and noncomparative validation studies for definitions and measurement studies. DATA EXTRACTION: Dual data abstraction and quality assessment using established methods, with resolution of disagreements through consensus. DATA SYNTHESIS: Thirty-seven studies were included across all questions, of which 1 provided insufficient evidence on the effectiveness of RMC to improve maternal outcomes and none studied RMC to improve infant outcomes. To define RMC, authors identified 12 RMC frameworks, from which 2 main concepts were identified: disrespect and abuse and rights-based frameworks. Disrespect and abuse components focused on recognizing birth mistreatment; rights-based frameworks incorporated aspects of reproductive justice, human rights, and antiracism. Five overlapping framework themes include freedom from abuse, consent, privacy, dignity, communication, safety, and justice. Twelve tools to measure RMC were validated in 24 studies on content validity, construct validity, and internal consistency, but lack of a gold standard limited evaluation of criterion validity. Three tools specific for RMC had at least 1 study demonstrating consistency internally and with an intended construct relevant to U.S. settings, but no single tool stands out as the best measure of RMC. LIMITATIONS: No studies evaluated other health outcomes or RMC implementation strategies. The lack of definition and gold standard limit evaluation of RMC tools. CONCLUSION: Frameworks for RMC are well described but vary in their definitions. Tools to measure RMC demonstrate consistency but lack a gold standard, requiring further evaluation before implementation in U.S. settings. Evidence is lacking on the effectiveness of implementing RMC to improve any maternal or infant health outcome. PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE: Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality. (PROSPERO: CRD42023394769).

Screening and Supplementation for Iron Deficiency and Iron Deficiency Anemia During Pregnancy: Updated Evidence Report and Systematic Review for the US Preventive Services Task Force.

Importance: In 2015 the US Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) found insufficient evidence to assess the balance of benefits and harms of routine screening and supplementation for iron deficiency anemia during pregnancy. Objective: To update the 2015 review on screening for iron deficiency anemia, in addition to iron deficiency during pregnancy, to inform the USPSTF. Data Sources: Ovid MEDLINE and Cochrane databases through May 24, 2023; surveillance through May 24, 2024. Study Selection: Randomized clinical trials of iron supplementation, screening effectiveness, treatment, and harms; observational studies of screening. Data Extraction and Synthesis: Dual review of abstracts, full-text articles, study quality, and data abstraction. Data were pooled using a random-effects model. Main Outcomes and Measures: Maternal and infant clinical outcomes, hematologic indices, and harms. Results: Seventeen trials (N = 24 023) on maternal iron supplementation were included. Iron supplementation was associated with decreased risk of maternal iron deficiency anemia at term (4 trials, n = 2230; 8.6% vs 19.8%; relative risk, 0.40 [95% CI, 0.26-0.61]; I2 = 20.5%) and maternal iron deficiency at term (6 trials, n = 2361; 46% vs 70%; relative risk, 0.47 [95% CI, 0.33-0.67]; I2 = 81.9%) compared with placebo or no iron supplement. There were no statistically significant differences in maternal quality of life, rates of gestational diabetes, maternal hemorrhage, hypertensive disorders of pregnancy, cesarean delivery, preterm birth, infant low birth weight, or infants small for gestational age for maternal iron supplementation compared with placebo or no supplementation. Harms of iron supplementation included transient gastrointestinal adverse effects. No studies evaluated the benefits or harms of screening for iron deficiency or iron deficiency anemia during pregnancy. Data on the association between iron status and health outcomes, such as hypertensive disorders of pregnancy and preterm birth, were very limited. Conclusions and Relevance: Routine prenatal iron supplementation reduces the incidence of iron deficiency and iron deficiency anemia during pregnancy, but evidence on health outcomes is limited or indicates no benefit. No studies addressed screening for iron deficiency or iron deficiency anemia during pregnancy. Research is needed to understand the association between changes in maternal iron status measures and health outcomes.

Telehealth for Women's Preventive Services for Reproductive Health and Intimate Partner Violence: a Comparative Effectiveness Review.

BACKGROUND: Telehealth delivery of preventive health services may improve access to care; however, its effectiveness and adverse effects are unknown. We conducted a comparative effectiveness review on the effectiveness and harms of telehealth interventions for women's reproductive health and intimate partner violence (IPV) services. METHODS: We searched MEDLINE, Cochrane Library, CINAHL, and Scopus for English-language studies (July 2016 to May 2022) for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and observational studies of telehealth strategies for women's reproductive health and IPV versus usual care. Two investigators identified studies and abstracted data using a predefined protocol. Study quality was assessed using study design-specific standardized methods; disagreements were resolved through consensus. RESULTS: Eight RCTs, 1 nonrandomized trial, and 7 observational studies (n=10 731) were included (7 studies of contraceptive care and 9 of IPV services). Telehealth interventions to supplement contraceptive care demonstrated similar rates as usual care for contraceptive use, sexually transmitted infections, and pregnancy (low strength of evidence [SOE]); evidence on abortion was insufficient. Outcomes were also similar between telehealth interventions to replace or supplement IPV services and comparators for repeat IPV, depression, posttraumatic stress disorder, fear of partner, coercive control, self-efficacy, and safety behaviors (low SOE). In these studies, telehealth barriers included limited internet access, digital literacy, technical challenges, and confidentiality concerns. Strategies to ensure safety increased telehealth use for IPV services. Evidence on access, health equity, or harms was lacking. DISCUSSION: Telehealth interventions for contraceptive care and IPV services demonstrate equivalent clinical and patient-reported outcomes versus in-person care, although few studies are available. Effective approaches for delivering these services and how to best mobilize telehealth, particularly for women facing barriers to care remain uncertain. TRIAL REGISTRATION: PROSPERO CRD42021282298.

Preventing Obesity in Midlife Women: A Systematic Review for the Women's Preventive Services Initiative.

BACKGROUND: Despite high prevalence rates of obesity in the United States, no clinical guidelines exist for obesity prevention in midlife women who commonly experience weight gain. PURPOSE: To evaluate evidence on the effectiveness and harms of behavioral interventions to reduce weight gain and improve health outcomes for women aged 40 to 60 years without obesity. DATA SOURCES: English-language searches of Ovid MEDLINE, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews (inception to 26 October 2021); ClinicalTrials.gov (October 2021); and reference lists of studies and reviews. STUDY SELECTION: Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) enrolling predominantly midlife women comparing behavioral interventions to prevent weight gain with control groups and reporting health outcomes and potential harms. DATA EXTRACTION: Dual extraction and quality assessment of individual studies. DATA SYNTHESIS: Seven RCTs in 12 publications (n = 51 638) were included. Four RCTs showed statistically significant favorable differences in weight change for counseling interventions versus control groups (mean difference of weight change, -0.87 to -2.5 kg), whereas 1 trial of counseling and 2 trials of exercise showed no differences; 1 of 2 RCTs reported improved quality-of-life measures. Interventions did not increase measures of depression or stress in 1 trial; self-reported falls (37% vs. 29%; P < 0.001) and injuries (19% vs. 14%; P = 0.03) were higher with exercise counseling in 1 trial. LIMITATION: Trials were generally small, heterogeneous, and lacked data on harms, long-term health outcomes, and specific patient populations. CONCLUSION: Counseling interventions to prevent weight gain in women during midlife may result in modest differences in weight change without causing important harms. More research is needed to determine optimal content, frequency, length, and number of sessions required and should include additional patient populations. PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE: Health Resources and Services Administration.

Effectiveness and Harms of Contraceptive Counseling and Provision Interventions for Women : A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: The effectiveness and harms of contraceptive counseling and provision interventions are unclear. PURPOSE: To evaluate evidence of the effectiveness of contraceptive counseling and provision interventions for women to increase use of contraceptives and reduce unintended pregnancy, as well as evidence of their potential harms. DATA SOURCES: English-language searches of Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, PsycINFO, SocINDEX, and MEDLINE (1 January 2000 to 3 February 2022) and reference lists of key studies and systematic reviews. STUDY SELECTION: Randomized controlled trials of interventions providing enhanced contraceptive counseling, contraceptives, or both versus usual care or an active control. DATA EXTRACTION: Dual extraction and quality assessment of studies; results combined using a profile likelihood random-effects model. DATA SYNTHESIS: A total of 38 trials (43 articles [25 472 participants]) met inclusion criteria. Contraceptive use was higher with various counseling interventions (risk ratio [RR], 1.39 [95% CI, 1.16 to 1.72]; I 2 = 85.3%; 10 trials), provision of emergency contraception in advance of use (RR, 2.12 [CI, 1.79 to 2.36]; I 2 = 0.0%; 8 trials), and counseling or provision postpartum (RR, 1.15 [CI, 1.01 to 1.52]; I 2 = 6.6%; 5 trials) or at the time of abortion (RR, 1.19 [CI, 1.09 to 1.32]; I 2 = 0.0%; 5 trials) than with usual care or active controls in multiple clinical settings. Pregnancy rates were generally lower with interventions, although most trials were underpowered and did not distinguish pregnancy intention. Interventions did not increase risk for sexually transmitted infections (STIs) (RR, 1.05 [CI, 0.87 to 1.25]; I 2 = 0.0%; 5 trials) or reduce condom use (RR, 1.03 [CI, 0.94 to 1.13]; I 2 = 0.0%; 6 trials). LIMITATION: Interventions varied; few trials were adequately designed to determine unintended pregnancy outcomes. CONCLUSION: Contraceptive counseling and provision interventions that provide services beyond usual care increase contraceptive use without increasing STIs or reducing condom use. Contraceptive care in clinical practice could be improved by implementing enhanced contraceptive counseling, provision, and follow-up; providing emergency contraception in advance; and delivering contraceptive services immediately postpartum or at the time of abortion. PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE: Resources Legacy Fund. (PROSPERO: CRD42020192981).

Telehealth Strategies for the Delivery of Maternal Health Care : A Rapid Review.

BACKGROUND: Telehealth strategies to supplement or replace in-person maternity care may affect maternal health outcomes. PURPOSE: To conduct a rapid review of the effectiveness and harms of telehealth strategies for maternal health care given the recent expansion of telehealth arising from the COVID-19 pandemic, and to produce an evidence map. DATA SOURCES: Systematic searches of MEDLINE, the Cochrane Library, CINAHL, Embase, and Scopus for English-language studies (January 2015 to April 2022). STUDY SELECTION: Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and observational studies of maternal care telehealth strategies versus usual care. DATA EXTRACTION: Dual data extraction and risk-of-bias assessment of studies, with disagreements resolved through consensus. DATA SYNTHESIS: 28 RCTs and 14 observational studies (n = 44 894) were included. Maternal telehealth interventions supplemented in-person care for most studies of mental health and diabetes during pregnancy, primarily resulting in similar, and sometimes better, clinical and patient-reported outcomes versus usual care. Supplementing in-person mental health care with phone- or web-based platforms or mobile applications resulted in similar or better mental health outcomes versus in-person care. A reduced-visit prenatal care schedule using telehealth to replace in-person general maternity care for low-risk pregnancies resulted in similar clinical outcomes and higher patient satisfaction versus usual care. Overall, telehealth strategies were heterogeneous and resulted in similar obstetric and patient satisfaction outcomes. Few studies addressed disparities, health equity, or harms. LIMITATIONS: Interventions varied, and evidence was inadequate for some clinical outcomes. CONCLUSION: Replacing or supplementing in-person maternal care with telehealth generally results in similar, and sometimes better, clinical outcomes and patient satisfaction compared with in-person care. The effect on access to care, health equity, and harms is unclear. PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE: Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Institute. (PROSPERO: CRD42021276347).

Preventing Obesity in Midlife Women: A Recommendation From the Women's Preventive Services Initiative.

DESCRIPTION: The Women's Preventive Services Initiative (WPSI), a national coalition of women's health professional organizations and patient advocacy representatives, developed a recommendation for counseling midlife women aged 40 to 60 years with normal or overweight body mass index (BMI; 18.5 to 29.9 kg/m2) to maintain weight or limit weight gain to prevent obesity with the long-term goals of optimizing health, function, and well-being. This recommendation is intended to guide clinical practice and coverage of clinical preventive health services for the Health Resources and Services Administration and other stakeholders. Clinicians providing preventive health care to women in primary care settings are the target audience for this recommendation. METHODS: The WPSI developed this recommendation after evaluating results of a systematic review of the effectiveness and harms of interventions to prevent weight gain and obesity in women aged 40 to 60 years without obesity. Seven randomized clinical trials including 51 638 participants and using various counseling and behavioral interventions were included. Trials indicated favorable weight changes with interventions that were statistically significantly different from control groups in 4 of 5 trials of counseling, but not in 2 trials of exercise. Few harms were reported. RECOMMENDATION: The WPSI recommends counseling midlife women aged 40 to 60 years with normal or overweight BMI (18.5 to 29.9 kg/m2) to maintain weight or limit weight gain to prevent obesity. Counseling may include individualized discussion of healthy eating and physical activity.

Statin Use for the Primary Prevention of Cardiovascular Disease in Adults: Updated Evidence Report and Systematic Review for the US Preventive Services Task Force.

Importance: A 2016 review for the US Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) found use of statins for primary prevention of cardiovascular disease (CVD) was associated with reduced mortality and cardiovascular outcomes. Objective: To update the 2016 review on statins for primary prevention of CVD to inform the USPSTF. Data Sources: Ovid MEDLINE, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews (to November 2021); surveillance through May 20, 2022. Study Selection: Randomized clinical trials on statins vs placebo or no statin and statin intensity in adults without prior cardiovascular events; large cohort studies on harms. Data Extraction and Synthesis: One investigator abstracted data; a second checked accuracy. Two investigators independently rated study quality. Main Outcomes and Measures: All-cause and cardiovascular mortality, myocardial infarction, stroke, composite cardiovascular outcomes, and adverse events. Results: Twenty-six studies were included: 22 trials (N = 90 624) with 6 months to 6 years of follow-up compared statins vs placebo or no statin, 1 trial (n = 5144) compared statin intensities, and 3 observational studies (n = 417 523) reported harms. Statins were significantly associated with decreased risk of all-cause mortality (risk ratio [RR], 0.92 [95% CI, 0.87 to 0.98]; absolute risk difference [ARD], -0.35% [95% CI, -0.57% to -0.14%]), stroke (RR, 0.78 [95% CI, 0.68 to 0.90]; ARD, -0.39% [95% CI, -0.54% to -0.25%]), myocardial infarction (RR, 0.67 [95% CI, 0.60 to 0.75]; ARD, -0.85% [95% CI, -1.22% to -0.47%]), and composite cardiovascular outcomes (RR, 0.72 [95% CI, 0.64 to 0.81]; ARD, -1.28% [95% CI, -1.61% to -0.95%]); the association with cardiovascular mortality was not statistically significant (RR, 0.91 [95% CI, 0.81 to 1.02]; ARD, -0.13%). Relative benefits were consistent in groups defined by demographic and clinical characteristics, although data for persons older than 75 years were sparse. Statin therapy was not significantly associated with increased risk of serious adverse events (RR, 0.97 [95% CI, 0.93 to 1.01]), myalgias (RR, 0.98 [95% CI, 0.86 to 1.11]), or elevated alanine aminotransferase level (RR, 0.94 [95% CI, 0.78 to 1.13]). Statin therapy was not significantly associated with increased diabetes risk overall (RR, 1.04 [95% CI, 0.92 to 1.19]), although 1 trial found high-intensity statin therapy was significantly associated with increased risk (RR, 1.25 [95% CI, 1.05 to 1.49]). Otherwise, there were no clear differences in outcomes based on statin intensity. Conclusions and Relevance: In adults at increased CVD risk but without prior CVD events, statin therapy for primary prevention of CVD was associated with reduced risk of all-cause mortality and CVD events. Benefits of statin therapy appear to be present across diverse demographic and clinical populations, with consistent relative benefits in groups defined by demographic and clinical characteristics.

Associations of Unintended Pregnancy With Maternal and Infant Health Outcomes: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.

Importance: Unintended pregnancy is common in the US and is associated with adverse maternal and infant health outcomes; however, estimates of these associations specific to current US populations are lacking. Objective: To evaluate associations of unintended pregnancy with maternal and infant health outcomes during pregnancy and post partum with studies relevant to current clinical practice and public health in the US. Data Sources: Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials and Database of Systematic Reviews, PsycINFO, SocINDEX, and MEDLINE databases (January 1, 2000, to June 15, 2022) and manual review of reference lists. Study Selection: Epidemiologic studies relevant to US populations that compared key maternal and infant health outcomes for unintended vs intended pregnancies and met prespecified eligibility criteria were included after investigators' independent dual review of abstracts and full-text articles. Data Extraction and Synthesis: Investigators abstracted data from publications on study methods, participant characteristics, settings, pregnancy intention, comparators, confounders, and outcomes; data were validated by a second investigator. Risk of bias was independently dual rated by investigators using criteria developed by the US Preventive Services Task Force. Results of studies controlling for confounders were combined by using a profile likelihood random-effects model. Main Outcomes and Measures: Prenatal depression, postpartum depression, maternal experience of interpersonal violence, preterm birth, and infant low birth weight. Results: Thirty-six studies (N = 524 522 participants) were included (14 cohort studies rated good or fair quality; 22 cross-sectional studies); 12 studies used large population-based data sources. Compared with intended pregnancy, unintended pregnancy was significantly associated with higher odds of depression during pregnancy (23.3% vs 13.9%; adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 1.59 [95% CI, 1.35-1.92]; I2 = 85.0%; 15 studies [n = 41 054]) and post partum (15.7% vs 9.6%; aOR, 1.51 [95% CI, 1.40-1.70]; I2 = 7.1%; 10 studies [n = 82 673]), interpersonal violence (14.6% vs 5.5%; aOR, 2.22 [95% CI, 1.41-2.91]; I2 = 64.1%; 5 studies [n = 42 306]), preterm birth (9.4% vs 7.7%; aOR, 1.21 [95% CI, 1.12-1.31]; I2 = 1.7%; 10 studies [n = 94 351]), and infant low birth weight (7.3% vs 5.2%; aOR, 1.09 [95% CI, 1.02-1.21]; I2 = 0.0%; 8 studies [n = 87 547]). Results were similar in sensitivity analyses based on controlling for history of depression for prenatal and postpartum depression and on study design and definition of unintended pregnancy for relevant outcomes. Studies provided limited sociodemographic data and measurement of confounders and outcomes varied. Conclusions and Relevance: In this systematic review and meta-analysis of epidemiologic observational studies relevant to US populations, unintended pregnancy, compared with intended pregnancy, was significantly associated with adverse maternal and infant outcomes. Trial Registration: PROSPERO Identifier: CRD42020192981.

Screening for Anxiety in Adolescent and Adult Women: A Systematic Review for the Women's Preventive Services Initiative.

BACKGROUND: Anxiety disorders are infrequently recognized during routine health care even though they are common in adolescent girls and adult women. PURPOSE: To evaluate evidence on the effectiveness of screening for anxiety disorders in primary care in improving symptoms, function, and quality of life; harms of screening; accuracy of screening instruments; and effectiveness and harms of treatments. DATA SOURCES: English-language searches of Ovid MEDLINE, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, and Health and Psychosocial Instruments (1 January 1996 to 4 November 2019); ClinicalTrials.gov (November 2019); and reference lists of studies and reviews. STUDY SELECTION: Studies that enrolled adolescent girls and adult women not currently diagnosed with anxiety disorders, including pregnant or postpartum women, and compared clinical outcomes and harms between women who were and were not screened; diagnostic accuracy studies of screening instruments; and systematic reviews of randomized trials of behavioral and pharmacologic treatments. DATA EXTRACTION: Dual extraction and quality assessment of individual studies. DATA SYNTHESIS: No studies evaluated the overall effectiveness or harms of screening. Thirty-three studies and 2 systematic reviews (171 studies; 112 574 participants) evaluated the diagnostic accuracy of 27 screening instruments and their variations against a clinical diagnosis or other instruments. Most demonstrated moderate to high accuracy for adults (Generalized Anxiety Disorder scale: sensitivity, 70% to 97%; specificity, 50% to 89%), pregnant and postpartum women (Edinburgh Postnatal Depression Scale: sensitivity, 74%; specificity, 64%), and adolescents (Screen for Child Anxiety Related Emotional Disorders: sensitivity, 64% to 74%; specificity, 64% to 73%). Anxiety symptoms improved with cognitive behavioral therapy (246 randomized controlled trials; 17 209 participants) and antianxiety medications (126 randomized controlled trials; 8225 participants). LIMITATION: Limited data on long-term harms of treatment and no treatment trials in pregnant or postpartum women. CONCLUSION: Evidence on the overall effectiveness and harms of screening for anxiety is insufficient. Most screening instruments are moderately to highly accurate. Behavioral therapies and antianxiety medications effectively improve anxiety symptoms. PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE: Health Resources and Services Administration.

Achieving Health Equity in Preventive Services: A Systematic Review for a National Institutes of Health Pathways to Prevention Workshop.

Background: Disadvantaged populations in the United States experience disparities in the use of preventive health services. Purpose: To examine effects of barriers that create health disparities in 10 recommended preventive services for adults, and to evaluate the effectiveness of interventions to reduce them. Data Sources: English-language searches of Ovid MEDLINE, PsycINFO, SocINDEX, and the Veterans Affairs Health Services database (1 January 1996 to 5 July 2019); reference lists. Study Selection: Trials, observational studies with comparison groups, and systematic reviews of populations adversely affected by disparities that reported effects of barriers on use of any of the 10 selected preventive services or that reported the effectiveness of interventions to reduce disparities in use of a preventive service by improving intermediate or clinical outcomes. Data Extraction: Dual extraction and assessment of study quality, strength of evidence, and evidence applicability. Data Synthesis: No studies reported effects of provider-specific barriers on preventive service use. Eighteen studies reporting effects of patient barriers, such as insurance coverage or lack of a regular provider, on preventive service use had mixed and inconclusive findings. Studies of patient-provider interventions (n = 12), health information technologies (n = 11), and health system interventions (n = 88) indicated higher cancer screening rates with patient navigation; telephone calls, prompts, and other outreach methods; reminders involving lay health workers; patient education; risk assessment, counseling, and decision aids; screening checklists; community engagement; and provider training. Single studies showed that clinician-delivered and technology-assisted interventions improved rates of smoking cessation and weight loss, respectively. Limitation: Insufficient or low strength of evidence and applicability for most interventions except patient navigation, telephone calls and prompts, and reminders involving lay health workers. Conclusion: In populations adversely affected by disparities, patient navigation, telephone calls and prompts, and reminders involving lay health workers increase cancer screening. Primary Funding Source: National Institutes of Health Office of Disease Prevention through an interagency agreement with the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality. (PROSPERO: CRD42018109263).

Counseling and Behavioral Interventions for Healthy Weight and Weight Gain in Pregnancy: Evidence Report and Systematic Review for the US Preventive Services Task Force.

Importance: Counseling and active behavioral interventions to limit excess gestational weight gain (GWG) during pregnancy may improve health outcomes for women and infants. The 2009 National Academy of Medicine (NAM; formerly the Institute of Medicine) recommendations for healthy GWG vary according to prepregnancy weight category. Objective: To review and synthesize the evidence on benefits and harms of behavioral interventions to promote healthy weight gain during pregnancy to inform the US Preventive Services Task Force recommendation. Data Sources: Ovid MEDLINE and the Cochrane Library to March 2020, with surveillance through February 2021. Study Selection: Randomized clinical trials and nonrandomized controlled intervention studies focused on diet, exercise, and/or behavioral counseling interventions on GWG. Data Extraction and Synthesis: Independent data abstraction and study quality rating with dual review. Main Outcomes and Measures: Gestational weight-related outcomes; maternal and infant morbidity and mortality; harms. Results: Sixty-eight studies (N = 25 789) were included. Sixty-seven studies evaluated interventions during pregnancy, and 1 evaluated an intervention prior to pregnancy. GWG interventions were associated with reductions in risk of gestational diabetes (43 trials, n = 19 752; relative risk [RR], 0.87 [95% CI, 0.79 to 0.95]; absolute risk difference [ARD], -1.6%) and emergency cesarean delivery (14 trials, n = 7520; RR, 0.85 [95% CI, 0.74 to 0.96]; ARD, -2.4%). There was no significant association between GWG interventions and risk of gestational hypertension, cesarean delivery, or preeclampsia. GWG interventions were associated with decreased risk of macrosomia (25 trials, n = 13 990; RR, 0.77 [95% CI, 0.65 to 0.92]; ARD, -1.9%) and large for gestational age (26 trials, n = 13 000; RR, 0.89 [95% CI, 0.80 to 0.99]; ARD, -1.3%) but were not associated with preterm birth. Intervention participants experienced reduced weight gain across all prepregnancy weight categories (55 trials, n = 20 090; pooled mean difference, -1.02 kg [95% CI, -1.30 to -0.75]) and demonstrated lower likelihood of GWG in excess of NAM recommendations (39 trials, n = 14 271; RR, 0.83 [95% CI, 0.77 to 0.89]; ARD, -7.6%). GWG interventions were associated with reduced postpartum weight retention at 12 months (10 trials, n = 3957; mean difference, -0.63 kg [95% CI, -1.44 to -0.01]). Data on harms were limited. Conclusions and Relevance: Counseling and active behavioral interventions to limit GWG were associated with decreased risk of gestational diabetes, emergency cesarean delivery, macrosomia, and large for gestational age. GWG interventions were also associated with modest reductions in mean GWG and decreased likelihood of exceeding NAM recommendations for GWG.

Screening for Chlamydial and Gonococcal Infections: Updated Evidence Report and Systematic Review for the US Preventive Services Task Force.

Importance: The 2014 US Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) recommendation statement supported the effectiveness of screening for chlamydia and gonorrhea in asymptomatic, sexually active women 24 years or younger and in older women at increased risk for infection, although evidence for screening in men was insufficient. Objective: To update the 2014 USPSTF review on screening for chlamydial and gonococcal infection in adults and adolescents, including those who are pregnant. Data Sources: Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, and Ovid MEDLINE (January 1, 2014, through May 28, 2020) with surveillance through May 21, 2021. Study Selection: Randomized clinical trials and observational studies of screening effectiveness, accuracy of risk stratification and alternative screening methods, accuracy of tests, and screening harms. Data Extraction and Synthesis: One investigator abstracted data; a second checked accuracy. Two investigators independently assessed study quality. Main Outcomes and Measures: Complications of infection; infection transmission or acquisition; diagnostic accuracy of anatomical site-specific testing and collection methods; screening harms. Results: Twenty-seven studies were included (N = 179 515). Chlamydia screening compared with no screening was significantly associated with reduced risk of pelvic inflammatory disease (PID) in 2 of 4 trials and with reduced hospital-diagnosed PID (0.24% vs 0.38%); relative risk, 0.6 [95% CI, 0.4-1.0]), but not clinic-diagnosed PID or epididymitis, in the largest trial. In studies of risk prediction instruments in asymptomatic women, age younger than 22 years demonstrated comparable accuracy to extensive criteria. Sensitivity of chlamydial testing was similar at endocervical (89%-100%) and self- and clinician-collected vaginal (90%-100%) sites for women and at meatal (100%), urethral (99%), and rectal (92%) sites for men but lower at pharyngeal sites (69.2%) for men who have sex with men. Sensitivity of gonococcal testing was 89% or greater for all anatomical samples. False-positive and false-negative testing rates were low across anatomical sites and collection methods. Conclusions and Relevance: Screening for chlamydial infection was significantly associated with a lower risk of PID in young women. Risk prediction criteria demonstrated limited accuracy beyond age. Testing for asymptomatic chlamydial and gonococcal infections was highly accurate at most anatomical sites, including urine and self-collected specimens. Effectiveness of screening in men and during pregnancy, optimal screening intervals, and adverse effects of screening require further evaluation.

Effectiveness of Patient Navigation to Increase Cancer Screening in Populations Adversely Affected by Health Disparities: a Meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: This study evaluates the effectiveness of patient navigation to increase screening for colorectal, breast, and cervical cancer in populations adversely affected by health care disparities. METHODS: Eligible studies were identified through English-language searches of Ovid® MEDLINE®, PsycINFO®, SocINDEX, and Veterans Affairs Health Services database (January 1, 1996, to July 5, 2019) and manual review of reference lists. Randomized trials and observational studies of relevant populations that evaluated the effectiveness of patient navigation on screening rates for colorectal, breast, or cervical cancer compared with usual or alternative care comparison groups were included. Two investigators independently abstracted study data and assessed study quality and applicability using criteria adapted from the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force. Discrepancies were resolved by consensus with a third reviewer. Results were combined using profile likelihood random effects models. RESULTS: Thirty-seven studies met inclusion criteria (28 colorectal, 11 breast, 4 cervical cancers including 3 trials with multiple cancer types). Screening rates were higher with patient navigation for colorectal cancer overall (risk ratio [RR] 1.64; 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.42 to 1.92; I2 = 93.7%; 22 trials) and by type of test (fecal occult blood or immunohistochemistry testing [RR 1.69; 95% CI 1.33 to 2.15; I2 = 80.5%; 6 trials]; colonoscopy/endoscopy [RR 2.08; 95% CI 1.08 to 4.56; I2 = 94.6%; 6 trials]). Screening was also higher with navigation for breast cancer (RR 1.50; 95% CI 1.22 to 1.91; I2 = 98.6%; 10 trials) and cervical cancer (RR 1.11; 95% CI 1.05 to 1.19; based on the largest trial). The high heterogeneity of cervical cancer studies prohibited meta-analysis. Results were similar for colorectal and breast cancer regardless of prior adherence to screening guidelines, follow-up time, and study quality. CONCLUSIONS: In populations adversely affected by disparities, colorectal, breast, and cervical cancer screening rates were higher in patients provided navigation services. Registration: PROSPERO: CRD42018109263.

Screening for Urinary Incontinence in Women: A Systematic Review for the Women's Preventive Services Initiative.

Background: Urinary incontinence is infrequently addressed during routine health care despite its high prevalence and adverse effects on health. Purpose: To evaluate whether screening for urinary incontinence in women not previously diagnosed improves outcomes (symptoms, quality of life, and function) and to evaluate the accuracy of screening methods and potential harms of screening. Data Sources: English-language searches of Ovid MEDLINE, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews (1 January 1996 to 30 March 2018); ClinicalTrials.gov (April 2018); and reference lists of studies and reviews. Study Selection: Randomized trials, cohort studies, systematic reviews of studies that enrolled nonpregnant women without previously diagnosed urinary incontinence and compared clinical outcomes and adverse effects between women who were and were not screened, and diagnostic accuracy studies that reported performance measures of screening tests. Data Extraction: Dual extraction and quality assessment of individual studies. Data Synthesis: No studies evaluated the overall effectiveness or harms of screening. Seventeen studies evaluated the diagnostic accuracy of 18 screening questionnaires against a clinical diagnosis or results of diagnostic tests. Of these, 14 poor-quality studies were based in referral clinics, enrolled only symptomatic women, or had other limitations. One good-quality and 2 fair-quality studies (evaluating 4 methods) enrolled women not recruited on the basis of symptoms. Areas under the receiver-operating characteristic curve for stress, urge, and any type of incontinence in these studies were 0.79, 0.88, and 0.88 for the Michigan Incontinence Symptom Index; 0.85, 0.83, and 0.87 for the Bladder Control Self-Assessment Questionnaire; and 0.68, 0.82, and 0.75 for the Overactive Bladder Awareness Tool. The Incontinence Screening Questionnaire had a sensitivity of 66% and specificity of 80% for any type of incontinence. Limitation: Studies enrolled few participants, often from symptomatic referral populations; used various reference standards; and infrequently reported CIs. Conclusion: Evidence is insufficient on the overall effectiveness and harms of screening for urinary incontinence in women. Limited evidence in general populations suggests fairly high accuracy for some screening methods. Primary Funding Source: Health Resources and Services Administration.

Risk Assessment, Genetic Counseling, and Genetic Testing for BRCA-Related Cancer in Women: Updated Evidence Report and Systematic Review for the US Preventive Services Task Force.

Importance: Pathogenic mutations in breast cancer susceptibility genes BRCA1 and BRCA2 increase risks for breast, ovarian, fallopian tube, and peritoneal cancer in women; interventions reduce risk in mutation carriers. Objective: To update the 2013 US Preventive Services Task Force review on benefits and harms of risk assessment, genetic counseling, and genetic testing for BRCA1/2-related cancer in women. Data Sources: Cochrane libraries; MEDLINE, PsycINFO, EMBASE (January 1, 2013, to March 6, 2019, for updates; January 1, 1994, to March 6, 2019, for new key questions and populations); reference lists. Study Selection: Discriminatory accuracy studies, randomized clinical trials (RCTs), and observational studies of women without recently diagnosed BRCA1/2-related cancer. Data Extraction and Synthesis: Data on study methods, setting, population characteristics, eligibility criteria, interventions, numbers enrolled and lost to follow-up, outcome ascertainment, and results were abstracted. Two reviewers independently assessed study quality. Main Outcomes and Measures: Cancer incidence and mortality; discriminatory accuracy of risk assessment tools for BRCA1/2 mutations; benefits and harms of risk assessment, genetic counseling, genetic testing, and risk-reducing interventions. Results: For this review, 103 studies (110 articles; N = 92 712) were included. No studies evaluated the effectiveness of risk assessment, genetic counseling, and genetic testing in reducing incidence and mortality of BRCA1/2-related cancer. Fourteen studies (n = 43 813) of 8 risk assessment tools to guide referrals to genetic counseling demonstrated moderate to high accuracy (area under the receiver operating characteristic curve, 0.68-0.96). Twenty-eight studies (n = 8060) indicated that genetic counseling was associated with reduced breast cancer worry, anxiety, and depression; increased understanding of risk; and decreased intention for testing. Twenty studies (n = 4322) showed that breast cancer worry and anxiety were higher after testing for women with positive results and lower for others; understanding of risk was higher after testing. In 8 RCTs (n = 54 651), tamoxifen (relative risk [RR], 0.69 [95% CI, 0.59-0.84]; 4 trials), raloxifene (RR, 0.44 [95% CI, 0.24-0.80]; 2 trials), and aromatase inhibitors (RR, 0.45 [95% CI, 0.26-0.70]; 2 trials) were associated with lower risks of invasive breast cancer compared with placebo; results were not specific to mutation carriers. Mastectomy was associated with 90% to 100% reduction in breast cancer incidence (6 studies; n = 2546) and 81% to 100% reduction in breast cancer mortality (1 study; n = 639); oophorectomy was associated with 69% to 100% reduction in ovarian cancer (2 studies; n = 2108); complications were common with mastectomy. Conclusions and Relevance: Among women without recently diagnosed BRCA1/2-related cancer, the benefits and harms of risk assessment, genetic counseling, and genetic testing to reduce cancer incidence and mortality have not been directly evaluated by current research.

Screening for Elevated Blood Lead Levels in Childhood and Pregnancy: Updated Evidence Report and Systematic Review for the US Preventive Services Task Force.

Importance: Elevated blood lead level is associated with serious, often irreversible, health consequences. Objective: To synthesize evidence on the effects of screening, testing, and treatment for elevated blood lead level in pregnant women and children aged 5 years and younger in the primary care setting to inform the US Preventive Services Task Force. Data Sources: Cochrane CENTRAL and Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews (through June 2018) and Ovid MEDLINE (1946 to June 2018); surveillance through December 5, 2018. Study Selection: English-language trials and observational studies of screening for and treating elevated lead levels in asymptomatic children and pregnant women. Data Extraction and Synthesis: Independent critical appraisal and data abstraction by 2 reviewers using predefined criteria. Main Outcomes and Measures: Elevated blood lead level, morbidity, mortality, clinical prediction tools, test accuracy, adverse events. Results: A total of 24 studies (N = 11 433) were included in this review. No studies evaluated the benefits or harms of screening vs no screening in children. More than 1 positive answer on the 5-item 1991 Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) screening questionnaire was associated with a pooled sensitivity of 48% (95% CI, 31.4% to 65.6%) and specificity of 58% (95% CI, 39.9% to 74.0%) for identifying children with a venous blood lead level greater than 10 µg/dL (5 studies [n = 2265]). Adapted versions of the CDC questionnaire did not demonstrate improved accuracy. Capillary blood lead testing demonstrated sensitivity of 87% to 91% and specificity greater than 90%, compared with venous measurement (4 studies [n = 1431]). Counseling and nutritional interventions or residential lead hazard control techniques did not reduce blood lead concentrations in asymptomatic children, but studies were few and had methodological limitations (7 studies [n = 1419]). One trial (n = 780) of dimercaptosuccinic acid (DMSA) chelation therapy found reduced blood lead levels in children at 1 week to 1 year but not at 4.5 to 6 years, while another trial (n = 39) found no effect at 1 and 6 months. Seven-year follow-up assessments showed no effect on neuropsychological development, a small deficit in linear growth (height difference, 1.17 cm [95% CI, 0.41 to 1.93]), and poorer cognitive outcomes reported as the Attention and Executive Functions subscore of the Developmental Neuropsychological Assessment (unadjusted difference, -1.8 [95% CI, -4.5 to 1.0]; adjusted P = .045) in children treated with DMSA chelation. Evidence was too limited to determine the accuracy of screening questionnaires or benefits and harms of treatment in pregnant women. Conclusions and Relevance: Screening questionnaires were not accurate for identifying children with elevated blood lead levels. Chelating agents in children were not significantly associated with sustained effects on blood level levels but were associated with harms.

Effectiveness of Breast Cancer Screening: Systematic Review and Meta-analysis to Update the 2009 U.S. Preventive Services Task Force Recommendation.

BACKGROUND: In 2009, the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force recommended biennial mammography screening for women aged 50 to 74 years and selective screening for those aged 40 to 49 years. PURPOSE: To review studies of the effectiveness of breast cancer screening in average-risk women. DATA SOURCES: MEDLINE and Cochrane databases to 4 June 2015. STUDY SELECTION: English-language randomized, controlled trials and observational studies of screening with mammography, magnetic resonance imaging, and ultrasonography that reported breast cancer mortality, all-cause mortality, or advanced breast cancer outcomes. DATA EXTRACTION: Investigators extracted and confirmed data and dual rated study quality; discrepancies were resolved through consensus. DATA SYNTHESIS: Fair-quality evidence from a meta-analysis of mammography trials indicated relative risks (RRs) for breast cancer mortality of 0.92 for women aged 39 to 49 years (95% CI, 0.75 to 1.02) (9 trials; 3 deaths prevented per 10,000 women over 10 years); 0.86 for those aged 50 to 59 years (CI, 0.68 to 0.97) (7 trials; 8 deaths prevented per 10,000 women over 10 years); 0.67 for those aged 60 to 69 years (CI, 0.54 to 0.83) (5 trials; 21 deaths prevented per 10,000 women over 10 years); and 0.80 for those aged 70 to 74 years (CI, 0.51 to 1.28) (3 trials; 13 deaths prevented per 10,000 women over 10 years). Risk reduction was 25% to 31% for women aged 50 to 69 years in observational studies of mammography screening. All-cause mortality was not reduced with screening. Advanced breast cancer was reduced for women aged 50 years or older (RR, 0.62 [CI, 0.46 to 0.83]) (3 trials) but not those aged 39 to 49 years (RR, 0.98 [CI, 0.74 to 1.37]) (4 trials); less evidence supported this outcome. LIMITATIONS: Most trials used imaging technologies and treatments that are now outdated, and definitions of advanced breast cancer were heterogeneous. Studies of effectiveness based on risk factors, intervals, or other modalities were unavailable or methodologically limited. CONCLUSION: Breast cancer mortality is generally reduced with mammography screening, although estimates are not statistically significant at all ages and the magnitudes of effect are small. Advanced cancer is reduced with screening for women aged 50 years or older. PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE: Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality.

Harms of Breast Cancer Screening: Systematic Review to Update the 2009 U.S. Preventive Services Task Force Recommendation.

BACKGROUND: In 2009, the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force recommended biennial mammography screening for women aged 50 to 74 years and selective screening for those aged 40 to 49 years. PURPOSE: To review studies of screening in average-risk women with mammography, magnetic resonance imaging, or ultrasonography that reported on false-positive results, overdiagnosis, anxiety, pain, and radiation exposure. DATA SOURCES: MEDLINE and Cochrane databases through December 2014. STUDY SELECTION: English-language systematic reviews, randomized trials, and observational studies of screening. DATA EXTRACTION: Investigators extracted and confirmed data from studies and dual-rated study quality. Discrepancies were resolved through consensus. DATA SYNTHESIS: Based on 2 studies of U.S. data, 10-year cumulative rates of false-positive mammography results and biopsies were higher with annual than biennial screening (61% vs. 42% and 7% vs. 5%, respectively) and for women aged 40 to 49 years, those with dense breasts, and those using combination hormone therapy. Twenty-nine studies using different methods reported overdiagnosis rates of 0% to 54%; rates from randomized trials were 11% to 22%. Women with false-positive results reported more anxiety, distress, and breast cancer-specific worry, although results varied across 80 observational studies. Thirty-nine observational studies indicated that some women reported pain during mammography (1% to 77%); of these, 11% to 46% declined future screening. Models estimated 2 to 11 screening-related deaths from radiation-induced cancer per 100,000 women using digital mammography, depending on age and screening interval. Five observational studies of tomosynthesis and mammography indicated increased biopsies but reduced recalls compared with mammography alone. LIMITATIONS: Studies of overdiagnosis were highly heterogeneous, and estimates varied depending on the analytic approach. Studies of anxiety and pain used different outcome measures. Radiation exposure was based on models. CONCLUSION: False-positive results are common and are higher for annual screening, younger women, and women with dense breasts. Although overdiagnosis, anxiety, pain, and radiation exposure may cause harm, their effects on individual women are difficult to estimate and vary widely. PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE: Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality.

Preeclampsia Screening: Evidence Report and Systematic Review for the US Preventive Services Task Force.

IMPORTANCE: Preeclampsia is a complex disease of pregnancy with sometimes serious effects on maternal and infant morbidity and mortality. It is defined by hypertension after 20 weeks' gestation and proteinuria or other evidence of multisystem involvement. OBJECTIVE: To systematically review the benefits and harms of preeclampsia screening and risk assessment for the US Preventive Services Task Force. DATA SOURCES: MEDLINE, PubMed, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials databases from 1990 through September 1, 2015. Surveillance for new evidence in targeted publications was conducted through October 5, 2016. STUDY SELECTION: English-language trials and observational studies, including externally validated prediction models, of screening effectiveness, benefits, and harms from routine preeclampsia screening during pregnancy. DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS: Independent dual review of article abstracts and full texts against a priori inclusion criteria. Meta-analysis was not performed because of clinical and statistical heterogeneity of included studies. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: Maternal and infant health outcomes, including eclampsia, stroke, stillbirth, preterm birth, and low birth weight; screening and risk prediction test performance; harms of screening and risk assessment. RESULTS: Twenty-one studies (13 982 participants) were included. No studies directly compared the effectiveness of preeclampsia screening in a screened population vs an unscreened population; 1 US trial (n = 2764) found no difference in benefits or harms with fewer prenatal visits but was underpowered for rare, serious outcomes. For harms, a before-after comparison cohort noninferiority study of urine protein screening for specific indications compared with routine screening (n = 1952) did not identify harms with fewer urine screening tests. Four studies (n = 7123) reported external validation performance of 16 risk prediction models, 5 of which had good or better discrimination (c statistic >0.80) for prediction of preeclampsia, and positive predictive values of 4% in the largest, most applicable validation cohorts. Calibration was not reported despite being a key model performance measure. There were no studies of urine screening test performance conducted in asymptomatic primary care populations; 14 studies of protein urine test performance among women being evaluated for suspected preeclampsia (n = 1888) had wide-ranging test accuracy (sensitivity, 22%-100%; specificity, 36%-100%) and high statistical and clinical heterogeneity in tests used, eligibility criteria, and proteinuria prevalence (8.7%-93.8%). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: Evidence to estimate benefits and harms of preeclampsia screening and the test performance of different screening approaches over the course of pregnancy was limited. Externally validated risk prediction models had limited applicability and lacked calibration and clinical implementation data needed to support routine use. Further research is needed to better inform risk-based screening approaches and improve screening strategies, given the complex pathophysiology and clinical unpredictability of preeclampsia.