A systematic review of midwives' training needs in perinatal mental health and related interventions.

Background: Midwives may be key stakeholders to improve perinatal mental healthcare (PMHC). Three systematic reviews considered midwives' educational needs in perinatal mental health (PMH) or related interventions with a focus on depression or anxiety. This systematic review aims to review: 1) midwives' educational/training needs in PMH; 2) the training programs in PMH and their effectiveness in improving PMHC. Methods: We searched six electronic databases using a search strategy designed by a biomedical information specialist. Inclusion criteria were: (1) focus on midwives; (2) reporting on training needs in PMH, perinatal mental health problems or related conditions or training programs; (3) using quantitative, qualitative or mixed-methods design. We used the Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool for study quality. Results: Of 4969 articles screened, 66 papers met eligibility criteria (47 on knowledge, skills or attitudes and 19 on training programs). Study quality was low to moderate in most studies. We found that midwives' understanding of their role in PMHC (e.g. finding meaning in opening discussions about PMH; perception that screening, referral and support is part of their routine clinical duties) is determinant. Training programs had positive effects on proximal outcomes (e.g. knowledge) and contrasted effects on distal outcomes (e.g. number of referrals). Conclusions: This review generated novel insights to inform initial and continuous education curriculums on PMH (e.g. focus on midwives' understanding on their role in PMHC or content on person-centered care). Registration details: The protocol is registered on PROSPERO (CRD42021285926).

Mathematical Models for Evaluating Effectiveness and Cost-Effectiveness of Cervical Cancer Control Policies in Populations Including Women Living With Human Immunodeficiency Virus: A Scoping Review.

OBJECTIVES: Mathematical modeling is increasingly used to inform cervical cancer control policies, and model-based evaluations of such policies in women living with human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) are an emerging research area. We did a scoping review of published literature to identify research gaps and inform future work in this field. METHODS: We systematically searched literature up to April 2022 and included mathematical modeling studies evaluating the effectiveness or cost-effectiveness of cervical cancer prevention strategies in populations including women living with HIV. We extracted information on prevention strategies and modeling approaches. RESULTS: We screened 1504 records and included 22 studies, almost half of which focused on South Africa. We found substantial between-study heterogeneity in terms of strategies assessed and modeling approaches used. Fourteen studies evaluated cervical cancer screening strategies, 7 studies assessed human papillomavirus vaccination (with or without screening), and 1 study evaluated the impact of HIV control measures on cervical cancer incidence and mortality. Thirteen conducted cost-effectiveness analyses. Markov cohort state-transition models were used most commonly (n = 12). Most studies (n = 17) modeled the effect of HIV by creating HIV-related health states. Thirteen studies performed model calibration, but 11 did not report the calibration methods used. Only 1 study stated that model code was available upon request. CONCLUSIONS: Few model-based evaluations of cervical cancer control strategies have specifically considered women living with HIV. Improvements in model transparency, by sharing information and making model code publicly available, could facilitate the utility of these evaluations for other high disease-burden countries, where they are needed for assisting policy makers.

Perioperative Mortality in Pediatric Patients: A Systematic Review of Risk Assessment Tools for Use in the Preoperative Setting.

BACKGROUND: There are multiple preoperative risk scores for pediatric mortality. The aim of this study was to systematically describe and compare the existing studies of patient-specific multispecialty risk prediction scores for perioperative mortality in pediatric populations, with the goal of guiding clinicians on which may be most appropriate for use in the preoperative setting. METHODS: This study is a systematic literature review of published journal articles that presented the development, extension/updating, and/or validation of a risk core that predicted all-cause mortality (up to 30 days postoperatively) in pediatric patients undergoing a procedure in which anesthesia was used. Scores needed to be applicable to surgeries in more than one noncardiac surgical specialty and had to be able to be calculated by the anesthesiologist at the time of the preanesthetic assessment. Two investigators independently screened studies for inclusion and assessed study quality in the domains of clinical applicability, feasibility/ease of use in the clinical setting, and risk of bias. RESULTS: A total of 1,681 titles were retrieved. Of these, 10 studies met inclusion criteria: 9 reported the development and validation of scores, and 1 was an external validation of an existing score. Seven studies used varying years of multicenter data from the National Surgical Quality Improvement Program-Pediatric Participant Use File for development and/or validation. The unadjusted rate of mortality in the studies ranged from 0.3 to 3.6%. The preoperative predictors of mortality used in score development included patient demographics, preoperative therapies, and chronic conditions, among others. All models showed good discrimination upon validation (area under the receiver operating characteristics curve greater than 0.8). Most risk scores had high or unclear risks of bias. CONCLUSIONS: There are numerous scores available for the prediction of mortality in pediatric populations, all of which exhibited good performance. However, many have high or unclear risks of bias, and most have not undergone external validation.

Prediction Models for Future High-Need High-Cost Healthcare Use: a Systematic Review.

BACKGROUND: In an effort to improve both quality of care and cost-effectiveness, various care-management programmes have been developed for high-need high-cost (HNHC) patients. Early identification of patients at risk of becoming HNHC (i.e. case finding) is crucial to a programme's success. We aim to systematically identify prediction models predicting future HNHC healthcare use in adults, to describe their predictive performance and to assess their applicability. METHODS: Ovid MEDLINE® All, EMBASE, CINAHL, Web of Science and Google Scholar were systematically searched from inception through January 31, 2021. Risk of bias and methodological quality assessment was performed through the Prediction model Risk Of Bias Assessment Tool (PROBAST). RESULTS: Of 5890 studies, 60 studies met inclusion criteria. Within these studies, 313 unique models were presented using a median development cohort size of 20,248 patients (IQR 5601-174,242). Predictors were derived from a combination of data sources, most often claims data (n = 37; 62%) and patient survey data (n = 29; 48%). Most studies (n = 36; 60%) estimated patients' risk to become part of some top percentage of the cost distribution (top-1-20%) within a mean time horizon of 16 months (range 12-60). Five studies (8%) predicted HNHC persistence over multiple years. Model validation was performed in 45 studies (76%). Model performance in terms of both calibration and discrimination was reported in 14 studies (23%). Overall risk of bias was rated as 'high' in 40 studies (67%), mostly due to a 'high' risk of bias in the subdomain 'Analysis' (n = 37; 62%). DISCUSSION: This is the first systematic review (PROSPERO CRD42020164734) of non-proprietary prognostic models predicting HNHC healthcare use. Meta-analysis was not possible due to heterogeneity. Most identified models estimated a patient's risk to incur high healthcare expenditure during the subsequent year. However, case-finding strategies for HNHC care-management programmes are best informed by a model predicting HNHC persistence. Therefore, future studies should not only focus on validating and extending existing models, but also concentrate on clinical usefulness.

The global burden of hepatitis E outbreaks: a systematic review.

Hepatitis E virus (HEV) is responsible for repeated water-borne outbreaks since the past century, representing an emerging issue in public health. However, the global burden of HEV outbreak has not been comprehensively described. We performed a systematic review of confirmed HEV outbreaks based on published literatures. HEV outbreaks have mainly been reported from Asian and African countries, and only a few from European and American countries. India represents a country with the highest number of reported HEV outbreaks. HEV genotypes 1 and 2 were responsible for most of the large outbreaks in developing countries. During the outbreaks in developing countries, a significantly higher case fatality rate was observed in pregnant women. In fact, outbreaks have occurred both in open and closed populations. The control measures mainly depend upon improvement of sanitation and hygiene. This study highlights that HEV outbreak is not new, yet it is a continuous global health problem.

Pharmacoepidemiological safety studies in children: a systematic review.

PURPOSE: In order to identify challenges in pediatric pharmacoepidemiological safety studies, we assessed the characteristics of such (published) studies. METHODS: Relevant articles from inception to 2013 were retrieved from Embase and Medline. We sequentially screened titles, abstracts and full texts with independent validation. We systematically collected data regarding general information, study methods and results. RESULTS: Out of 4825 unique articles, 268 full texts (5.6%) were retained; 147 (54.9%) pertained to drugs rather than vaccines. Considering the 268 studies, 202 (75.4%) concerned children and adolescents (2 to 11 years) and 14 (5.3%) included preterm newborns. Most studies originated from North America (154 [57.5%]) or Europe (92 [34.3%]). Only 47 studies (17.5%) were privately funded. The majority (174 [64.9%]) were cohort studies. Out of 268 studies, 196 (73.1%) collected data retrospectively; paper medical charts were the most common data source for the exposures (85 [31.7%]) and outcomes (122 [45.5%]). Only 3 (2.0%) drug-only studies investigated rarely used drugs. Considering all 268 studies, only 27 (10.1%) reported sample size or power calculation. Most (75 [51.0%]) drug-only studies corrected confounding by multivariate modeling unlike stratification in 66 (55.9%) vaccine-only studies. Considering 75 child-only studies without any statistically significant result, 41 (54.7%) did not discuss lack of power. CONCLUSIONS: Although the field of pediatric pharmacoepidemiology is steadily developing evaluation seldom includes neonates, is mainly focused on few drug classes and safety outcomes and concerns mainly drug use in developed countries. Small study size is a specific challenge in pediatrics. Reporting should be improved. © 2016 The Authors. Pharmacoepidemiology and Drug Safety Published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.

The global impact of non-communicable diseases on macro-economic productivity: a systematic review.

Non-communicable diseases (NCDs) have large economic impact at multiple levels. To systematically review the literature investigating the economic impact of NCDs [including coronary heart disease (CHD), stroke, type 2 diabetes mellitus (DM), cancer (lung, colon, cervical and breast), chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) and chronic kidney disease (CKD)] on macro-economic productivity. Systematic search, up to November 6th 2014, of medical databases (Medline, Embase and Google Scholar) without language restrictions. To identify additional publications, we searched the reference lists of retrieved studies and contacted authors in the field. Randomized controlled trials, cohort, case-control, cross-sectional, ecological studies and modelling studies carried out in adults (>18 years old) were included. Two independent reviewers performed all abstract and full text selection. Disagreements were resolved through consensus or consulting a third reviewer. Two independent reviewers extracted data using a predesigned data collection form. Main outcome measure was the impact of the selected NCDs on productivity, measured in DALYs, productivity costs, and labor market participation, including unemployment, return to work and sick leave. From 4542 references, 126 studies met the inclusion criteria, many of which focused on the impact of more than one NCD on productivity. Breast cancer was the most common (n = 45), followed by stroke (n = 31), COPD (n = 24), colon cancer (n = 24), DM (n = 22), lung cancer (n = 16), CVD (n = 15), cervical cancer (n = 7) and CKD (n = 2). Four studies were from the WHO African Region, 52 from the European Region, 53 from the Region of the Americas and 16 from the Western Pacific Region, one from the Eastern Mediterranean Region and none from South East Asia. We found large regional differences in DALYs attributable to NCDs but especially for cervical and lung cancer. Productivity losses in the USA ranged from 88 million US dollars (USD) for COPD to 20.9 billion USD for colon cancer. CHD costs the Australian economy 13.2 billion USD per year. People with DM, COPD and survivors of breast and especially lung cancer are at a higher risk of reduced labor market participation. Overall NCDs generate a large impact on macro-economic productivity in most WHO regions irrespective of continent and income. The absolute global impact in terms of dollars and DALYs remains an elusive challenge due to the wide heterogeneity in the included studies as well as limited information from low- and middle-income countries.

The global impact of non-communicable diseases on healthcare spending and national income: a systematic review.

The impact of non-communicable diseases (NCDs) in populations extends beyond ill-health and mortality with large financial consequences. To systematically review and meta-analyze studies evaluating the impact of NCDs (including coronary heart disease, stroke, type 2 diabetes mellitus, cancer (lung, colon, cervical and breast), chronic obstructive pulmonary disease and chronic kidney disease) at the macro-economic level: healthcare spending and national income. Medical databases (Medline, Embase and Google Scholar) up to November 6th 2014. For further identification of suitable studies, we searched reference lists of included studies and contacted experts in the field. We included randomized controlled trials, systematic reviews, cohorts, case-control, cross-sectional, modeling and ecological studies carried out in adults assessing the economic consequences of NCDs on healthcare spending and national income without language restrictions. All abstracts and full text selection was done by two independent reviewers. Any disagreements were resolved through consensus or consultation of a third reviewer. Data were extracted by two independent reviewers using a pre-designed data collection form. Studies evaluating the impact of at least one of the selected NCDs on at least one of the following outcome measures: healthcare expenditure, national income, hospital spending, gross domestic product (GDP), gross national product, net national income, adjusted national income, total costs, direct costs, indirect costs, inpatient costs, outpatient costs, per capita healthcare spending, aggregate economic outcome, capital loss in production levels in a country, economic growth, GDP per capita (per capita income), percentage change in GDP, intensive growth, extensive growth, employment, direct governmental expenditure and non-governmental expenditure. From 4,364 references, 153 studies met our inclusion criteria. Most of the studies were focused on healthcare related costs of NCDs. 30 studies reported the economic impact of NCDs on healthcare budgets and 13 on national income. Healthcare expenditure for cardiovascular disease (12-16.5 %) was the highest; other NCDs ranged between 0.7 and 7.4 %. NCD-related health costs vary across the countries, regions, and according to type of NCD. Additionally, there is an increase in costs with increased severity and years lived with the disease. Low- and middle-income (LMI) countries were the focus of just 16 papers, which suggests an information shortage concerning the true economic burden of NCDs in these countries. NCDs pose a significant financial burden on healthcare budgets and nations' welfare, which is likely to increase over time. However further work is required to standardize more consistently the methods available to assess the economic impact of NCDs and to involve (hitherto under-addressed) LMI populations across the globe.

The global impact of non-communicable diseases on households and impoverishment: a systematic review.

The global economic impact of non-communicable diseases (NCDs) on household expenditures and poverty indicators remains less well understood. To conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis of the literature evaluating the global economic impact of six NCDs [including coronary heart disease, stroke, type 2 diabetes mellitus (DM), cancer (lung, colon, cervical and breast), chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) and chronic kidney disease (CKD)] on households and impoverishment. Medline, Embase and Google Scholar databases were searched from inception to November 6th 2014. To identify additional publications, reference lists of retrieved studies were searched. Randomized controlled trials, systematic reviews, cohorts, case-control, cross-sectional, modeling and ecological studies carried out in adults and assessing the economic consequences of NCDs on households and impoverishment. No language restrictions. All abstract and full text selection was done by two independent reviewers. Data were extracted by two independent reviewers and checked by a third independent reviewer. Studies were included evaluating the impact of at least one of the selected NCDs and on at least one of the following measures: expenditure on medication, transport, co-morbidities, out-of-pocket (OOP) payments or other indirect costs; impoverishment, poverty line and catastrophic spending; household or individual financial cost. From 3,241 references, 64 studies met the inclusion criteria, 75% of which originated from the Americas and Western Pacific WHO region. Breast cancer and DM were the most studied NCDs (42 in total); CKD and COPD were the least represented (five and three studies respectively). OOP payments and financial catastrophe, mostly defined as OOP exceeding a certain proportion of household income, were the most studied outcomes. OOP expenditure as a proportion of family income, ranged between 2 and 158% across the different NCDs and countries. Financial catastrophe due to the selected NCDs was seen in all countries and at all income levels, and occurred in 6-84% of the households depending on the chosen catastrophe threshold. In 16 low- and middle-income countries (LMIC), 6-11% of the total population would be impoverished at a 1.25 US dollar/day poverty line if they would have to purchase lowest price generic diabetes medication. NCDs impose a large and growing global impact on households and impoverishment, in all continents and levels of income. The true extent, however, remains difficult to determine due to the heterogeneity across existing studies in terms of populations studied, outcomes reported and measures employed. The impact that NCDs exert on households and impoverishment is likely to be underestimated since important economic domains, such as coping strategies and the inclusion of marginalized and vulnerable people who do not seek health care due to financial reasons, are overlooked in literature. Given the scarcity of information on specific regions, further research to estimate impact of NCDs on households and impoverishment in LMIC, especially the Middle Eastern, African and Latin American regions is required.