Evidence for the clinical effectiveness of decongestive lymphoedema treatment for breast cancer-related arm lymphoedema, a systematic review.

PURPOSE: Early treatment is advised for breast cancer-related arm lymphoedema (BCRL), a common sequelae of breast cancer treatment. Expert guidance recommends two-phase decongestive lymphoedema treatment (DLT), although evidence is lacking for current treatment protocols and UK women are routinely offered self-treatment with hosiery. This systematic review considered evidence regarding treatment of early BCRL, that is, within 12 months of developing BCRL. METHODS: A systematic review of evidence for clinical effectiveness of DLT for women with less than 12-month BCRL duration (early BCRL) was undertaken using the Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI) method. Studies included women with < 12-month or mean < 9-month BCRL duration; some studies reported only one eligible group. The original search was conducted in 2016 and updated in 2018 and 2022. Methodological quality of identified studies was assessed using JBI critical appraisal instruments. Outcomes of interest were extracted with eligible results displayed in narrative and tabular format. Strength of evidence was rated using the GRADE system. RESULTS: Seven trials and three descriptive studies provided weak evidence (grade B) for effectiveness of DLT for early BCRL. Heterogeneous protocols limited comparison of findings. There was no evidence for the most effective treatment or treatment combination or optimal frequency or duration of treatment. CONCLUSION: There is no evidence to justify change in current lymphoedema treatment, whether self-treatment with hosiery (UK) or two-phase DLT (other countries). Further research for the early BCRL population is required. IMPLICATIONS FOR CANCER SURVIVORS: Women with early BCRL require early and effective treatment although this updated review shows there is still no evidence for what that treatment should be.

Preconception health among migrant women in England: A cross-sectional analysis of maternity services data 2018-2019.

Background: Perinatal outcomes are poor among migrant women in vulnerable situations, but little is known about their health preconception. We investigated preconception health inequalities between migrant women in vulnerable situations and non-migrant women. Methods: This national cross-sectional study used data from the NHS Maternity Services Data Set (MSDS) version 1.5, incorporating NHS maternity services in England. All 652,880 women with an antenatal booking appointment between 1/4/2018 and 31/3/2019 were included. Migration category data were available for 66.2 % (n = 432,022). Odds ratios were calculated comparing preconception indicators among probable migrants in vulnerable situations (English not their first language with complex social factors (CSF)), probable migrants not in vulnerable situations (English not their first language without CSF), probable non-migrants in vulnerable situations (English their first language with CSF) and probable non-migrants not in vulnerable situations (English their first language without CSF). CSF include recent migrants, asylum seekers, refugees, difficulty reading/speaking English; alcohol and/or drugs misuse; aged under 20; and/or experiencing domestic abuse. Findings: We identified 3.8 % (25,070 women) of the study population as probable migrants in vulnerable situations, 10.2 % (66,783 women) as probable migrants not in vulnerable situations, 5.6 % (36,433 women) as probable non-migrants in vulnerable situations, 46.5 % (303,737 women) as probable non-migrants not in vulnerable situations, and 33.8 % as having missing migration category data. Probable migrants in vulnerable situations (n = 25,070) had over twice the odds of not taking folic acid preconception compared to probable non-migrants not in vulnerable situations (odds ratio 2.15, 95 % confidence interval 2.06-2.25). They had increased odds of previous obstetric complications and being underweight, but lower odds of physical and mental health conditions (apart from diabetes and hepatitis b), smoking and overweight or obesity. Interpretation: Inequalities exist across many preconception indicators, highlighting opportunities to improve preconception health in this population to reduce health inequalities and improve perinatal and neonatal outcomes. Funding: Medical Research Council.

GP's role in supporting women with anal incontinence after childbirth injury: a qualitative study.

BACKGROUND: Obstetric anal sphincter injury is the most common cause of anal incontinence for women, which often has profound impacts on women's lives. GPs offer a first line of contact for many women, but we know that very few women experiencing anal incontinence postnatally report discussing it with their GPs. AIM: To identify key ways in which GPs can support women with anal incontinence caused by childbirth injuries. DESIGN AND SETTING: A qualitative study investigating women's experiences with their GP, and GPs' perspectives about providing such care. METHOD: This qualitative study combined two phases: first, a series of in-depth semi-structured interviews with women experiencing anal incontinence caused by childbirth injuries (n = 41); and second, focus groups with GPs (n = 13) stratified by experience. Thematic analysis was conducted and relevant themes from across the two datasets were examined. RESULTS: Mediating factors in GP care for women with anal incontinence caused by childbirth injuries centred around three key themes: the role of the GP, access and pathways, and communication. CONCLUSION: The findings demonstrate multifactorial challenges in identifying the problem and supporting women experiencing anal incontinence after childbirth injury in primary care settings. Many GPs lacked confidence in their role in supporting women, and women were often reluctant to seek help. Those women who did seek help often experienced frustrations consulting with their GPs. In a context where women are often reluctant to ask for help, their concerns are not always taken seriously, and where GPs do not routinely ask about anal incontinence, potential anal incontinence after childbirth injury appears to be often missed in a primary care setting.

Effectiveness of a home-based peer support programme for Chinese mothers with low breastfeeding self-efficacy to increase the exclusivity and duration of breastfeeding: study protocol of a randomised control trial.

INTRODUCTION: Breastfeeding is associated with many health benefits for both women and their newborns. Exclusive breastfeeding has been recommended for at least 6 months to optimise infant growth, development and health. In addition to standard care, community-based peer support is recommended to help mothers improve breastfeeding. A recent survey reveals that the rate of exclusive breastfeeding at 6 months post partum in Hong Kong is low, and half of all breastfeeding mothers never exclusively breastfeed. Taking into account the local practice for women to stay home during the first month post partum and social isolation during and post-COVID-19 pandemic, a home-based peer support programme with the aid of Zoom or Facetime is proposed. This study aims to evaluate the effectiveness of a home-based breastfeeding peer support programme in improving breastfeeding practices and achieving exclusive breastfeeding rate among women with low breastfeeding self-efficacy. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: The study is a two-armed randomised control trial and will include a total of 442 participants. Potential cases will be recruited and screened at four postnatal wards in Hong Kong public hospital. Eligible and consented cases will be randomly allocated into intervention or control groups at a 1:1 ratio. Control group (n=221) will receive standard care, while the intervention group (n=221) will receive home-based peer support as well as standard care. Trained peer counsellors will provide breastfeeding-related support through Zoom or Facetime at 10 days and 1 month post partum. Telephone follow-ups will be conducted at 1 month, 2 months, 3 months and 6 months post partum. Breastfeeding status, mother's breastfeeding self-efficacy and postpartum depression will be assessed and compared between the two arms. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: The study has been reviewed and approved by the Institutional Review Board of the University of Hong Kong and Hospital Authority Hong Kong West Cluster (UW 20-564). The findings will be updated in trial registries and disseminated in peer-reviewed journals and academic conferences. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT04621266.

Randomised placebo-controlled trial of antenatal corticosteroids for planned birth in twins (STOPPIT-3): study protocol.

INTRODUCTION: The aim of the STOPPIT-3 study is to determine the clinical and cost effectiveness of antenatal corticosteroids (ACS) prior to planned birth of twins in a multicentre placebo-controlled trial with internal pilot. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: This study will comprise a multicentre, double-blinded, randomised, placebo-controlled trial in at least 50 UK obstetric units. The target population is 1552 women with a twin pregnancy and a planned birth between 35 and 38+6 weeks' gestation recruited from antenatal clinics. Women will be randomised to Dexamethasone Phosphate (24 mg) or saline administered via two intramuscular injections 24 hours apart, 24-120 hours prior to scheduled birth. OUTCOMES: The primary outcome is need for respiratory support within 72 hours of birth. Secondary and safety outcomes will be included. Cognitive and language development at age 2 years will be assessed in a subset of participants using the Parent report of Children's Abilities-Revised questionnaire. We will also determine the cost effectiveness of the treatment with ACS compared with placebo. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: STOPPIT-3 has been funded and approved by the National Institute of Healthcare Research. It has been approved by the West Midlands Research Ethics Committee (22/WM/0018). The results will be disseminated via publication in peer-reviewed journals and conference presentation and will also be communicated to the public via links with charity partners and social media. TRIAL SPONSOR: The University of Edinburgh and Lothian Health Board ACCORD, The Queen's Medical Research Institute, 47 Little France Crescent, Edinburgh, EH16 4TJ. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ISRCTN59959611.

Lived experience of recurrent miscarriage: women and their partners' experience of subsequent pregnancy and support within an NHS specialist clinic - a qualitative study.

OBJECTIVE: This study aims to describe the lived experiences of couples with a history of recurrent miscarriage in subsequent pregnancies and their perception of clinic support and cytogenetic investigations. DESIGN: A qualitative interview study with a phenomenological approach. Semistructured interviews were conducted using video conferencing software. Two researchers coded the transcripts and developed themes. SETTING: A National Health Service (NHS) hospital in central England between May 2021 and July 2021, during the COVID-19 pandemic. PARTICIPANTS: Patients attending a specialist recurrent miscarriage clinic and their partners. This clinic accepts referrals from all over the UK for couples who have suffered two or more miscarriages. RESULTS: Seventeen participants were interviewed: 14 women and 3 male partners. Six main themes were identified from the data. Three related to the women's lived experience of recurrent miscarriage (emotions in pregnancy, confidence in their bodies, expectations and coping strategies) and three related to the clinical support offered by the NHS service (impact of early pregnancy scanning, effect of the COVID-19 pandemic and cytogenetic investigations). CONCLUSIONS: Pregnancy following recurrent miscarriage is extremely difficult. Recurrent miscarriage specialist services can provide couples with support and access to early pregnancy scanning, which can make the first trimester of pregnancy manageable. Partners should not be excluded from the clinic as it can result in a feeling of disconnect. Cytogenetic testing of pregnancy tissue can offer couples with recurrent miscarriage closure after pregnancy loss and is a desired investigation.

Caesarean birth rates in public and privately funded hospitals: a cross-sectional study

ABSTRACT OBJECTIVE To examine maternal and obstetric factors influencing births by cesarean section according to health care funding. METHODS A cross-sectional study with data from Southeastern Brazil. Caesarean section births from February 2011 to July 2012 were included. Data were obtained from interviews with women whose care was publicly or privately funded, and from their obstetric and neonatal records. Univariate and multivariate analyses were conducted to generate crude and adjusted odds ratios (OR) with 95% confidence intervals (95%CI) for caesarean section births. RESULTS The overall caesarean section rate was 53% among 9,828 women for whom data were available, with the highest rates among women whose maternity care was privately funded. Reasons for performing a c-section were infrequently documented in women's maternity records. The variables that increased the likelihood of c-section regardless of health care funding were the following: paid employment, previous c-section, primiparity, antenatal and labor complications. Older maternal age, university education, and higher socioeconomic status were only associated with c-section in the public system. CONCLUSIONS Higher maternal socioeconomic status was associated with greater likelihood of a caesarean section birth in publicly funded settings, but not in the private sector, where funding source alone determined the mode of birth rather than maternal or obstetric characteristics. Maternal socioeconomic status and private healthcare funding continue to drive high rates of caesarean section births in Brazil, with women who have a higher socioeconomic status more likely to have a caesarean section birth in all birth settings.