RESUMO
BACKGROUND: Use of timely antenatal care has been identified as key to facilitating healthy pregnancies worldwide. Although considerable investment has been made to enhance maternal health services in Nepal, approximately one-third of women do not attend antenatal care until after the first trimester (late). These women miss out on the benefits of screening and interventions that are most effective in the first trimester. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to identify the missed opportunities of women who do not attend antenatal care in the first trimester, and to explore some of the factors underlying late attendance and consider potential solutions for minimizing these missed opportunities in the future. STUDY DESIGN: This study was conducted in 3 hospitals in Nepal. Focus groups (n=18) with a total of 48 postnatal women and 49 staff members, and 10 individual interviews with stakeholders were conducted. Purposive sampling facilitated the obtainment of a full range of maternity experiences, staff categories, and stakeholder positions. Data were qualitative and analyzed using a thematic approach. RESULTS: Limited awareness among women of the importance of early antenatal care was reported as a key factor behind attendance only after the first trimester. The family and community were described as significant influencers in women's decision-making regarding the timing of antenatal care. The benefits of early ultrasound scanning and effective supplementation in pregnancy were the major missed opportunities. Increasing awareness, reducing cost, and enhancing interprofessional collaboration were suggested as potential methods for improving timely initiation of antenatal care. CONCLUSION: Limited awareness continues to drive late attendance to antenatal care after the first trimester. Investment in services in the first trimester and community health education campaigns are needed to improve this issue and enhance maternal and neonatal outcomes.
RESUMO
BACKGROUND: Maternal and neonatal mortality rates remain high in many economically underdeveloped countries, including Nepal, and good quality antenatal care can reduce adverse pregnancy outcomes. However, identifying how to best improve antenatal care can be challenging. OBJECTIVE: To identify the interventions that have been investigated in the antenatal period in Nepal for maternal or neonatal benefit. We wanted to understand their scale, location, cost, and effectiveness. STUDY DESIGN: Online bibliographic databases (Cochrane Central, MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL Plus, British Nursing Index, PsycInfo, Allied and Complementary Medicine) and trial registries (ClinicalTrials.gov and the World Health Organization Clinical Trials Registry Platform) were searched from their inception till May 24, 2020. We included all studies reporting any maternal or neonatal outcome after an intervention in the antenatal period. We screened the studies and extracted the data in duplicate. A meta-analysis was not possible because of the heterogeneity of the interventions and outcomes, so we performed a narrative synthesis of the included studies. RESULTS: A total of 25 studies met our inclusion criteria. These studies showed a variety of approaches toward improving antenatal care (eg, educational programs, incentive schemes, micronutrient supplementation) in different settings (home, community, or hospital-based) and with a wide variety of outcomes. Less than a quarter of the studies were randomized controlled trials, and many were single-site or reported only short-term outcomes. All studies reported having made a positive impact on antenatal care in some way, but only 3 provided a cost-benefit analysis to support implementation. None of these studies focused on the most remote communities in Nepal. CONCLUSION: Our systematic review found good quality evidence that micronutrient supplementation and educational interventions can bring important clinical benefits. Iron and folic acid supplementation significantly reduces neonatal mortality and maternal anemia, whereas birth preparedness classes increase the uptake of antenatal and postnatal care, compliance with micronutrient supplementation, and awareness of the danger signs in pregnancy.
RESUMO
INTRODUCTION: Patellofemoral pain (PFP) affects 1 in every 14 adults. Many treatments for PFP have been evaluated, but the comparative effectiveness of all available treatments has never been examined. Network meta-analysis is the only design to study the comparative effectiveness of all available treatments in one synthesis. This protocol describes the methods for a systematic review including network meta-analysis to assess which treatment is most likely to be effective for patients with PFP. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: The primary outcome measures of this network meta-analysis are the global rating of change scale at 6-12 weeks, 13-52 weeks and >52 weeks. The secondary outcome measures are patient-rated pain scales at 6-12 weeks, 13-52 weeks and >52 weeks. Completed published and unpublished randomised controlled trials with full-text reports are eligible for inclusion. We will search Embase, PubMed (including MEDLINE), CENTRAL, Scopus, Web of Science, and CINAHL, SPORTDiscus, OpenGrey, WorldCat, conference Proceedings and multiple trial registers for relevant reports. Two researchers will appraise the study eligibility and perform data extraction. Risk of bias will be assessed with the Cochrane Risk of Bias Tool V.2.0.Bayesian network meta-analyses will be constructed for global rating of change scale and patient-rated pain. Consistency between direct and indirect comparisons will be assessed. Between study variability will be explored, and a threshold analysis for the credibility of the network meta-analyses' conclusions will be performed. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Ethical approval is not required, as this study will be based on published data. The study commenced at 1 February 2018, and its expected completion date is 15 January 2019. Full publication of the work will be sought in an international peer-reviewed journal, as well as translational articles to disseminate the work to clinical practitioners. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42018079502.