Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 4 de 4
Filtrar
Más filtros

Banco de datos
País/Región como asunto
Tipo del documento
País de afiliación
Intervalo de año de publicación
1.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38943364

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: During the COVID-19 pandemic, mitigation measures were associated with a reduction in preterm birth rates; while not clearly proven, this observation has sparked significant interest. AIM: To understand the cause of this reduction by exploring the characteristics of preterm birth cohorts. MATERIAL AND METHODS: We performed a retrospective cohort study where we compared women who delivered preterm in three Melbourne maternity hospitals and conceived between November 2019 and February 2020 (mitigation measures-exposed cohort) to women who delivered preterm and conceived between November 2018 and February 2019 (non-exposed cohort). We compared maternal characteristics, pregnancy complications, antenatal interventions, intrapartum care, and indications for delivery. RESULTS: In the exposed cohort, 252/3129 women delivered preterm (8.1%), vs 298/3154 (9.4%) in the non-exposed cohort (odds ratio (OR) 0.84, 95% CI 0.70-1.00, P = 0.051). The baseline characteristic of two cohorts were comparable. Rates of spontaneous preterm labour (sPTL) without preterm pre-labour rupture of membranes (PPROM) were lower in the exposed cohort (13.1% vs 24.2%, OR 0.47, P = 0.001) while PPROM occurred more often (48.0% vs 35.6%, OR 1.67, P = 0.003). With a non-statistically significant prolongation of pregnancy in the cohort exposed to mitigation measures for both sPTL without PPROM (35.4 vs 34.9 weeks, P = 0.703) and PPROM (35.6 vs 34.9 weeks, P = 0.184). The rate of spontaneous labour after PPROM was higher in the exposed cohort compared to the non-exposed cohort (40.1% vs 24.1%, OR 2.09, P < 0.001). CONCLUSION: The reduction in preterm delivery during mitigation measures may have been driven by a reduction in spontaneous labour without PPROM, which seemed to result in more PPROM later in pregnancy.

2.
Aust N Z J Obstet Gynaecol ; 57(2): 139-145, 2017 Apr.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-28299777

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: Recurrent vulvovaginal candidiasis (VVC) is a difficult-to-manage condition that affects 5-8% of women of reproductive age. Current treatment regimes have high relapse rates, resulting in poor quality of life for the women affected. AIM: To compare the quality and content of current guidelines concerned with recurrent VVC and to develop a summary of recommendations to assist in the management of women with this condition. METHODS: Relevant clinical guidelines were identified through a search of several databases (MEDLINE, SCOPUS and The Cochrane Library) and relevant websites. Five guidelines were identified. Each guideline was assessed for quality using the AGREE II instrument. Guideline recommendations were extracted, compared and contrasted. RESULTS: The identified guidelines were of mixed quality. This is not related to the level of evidence supporting them but is because of poor stakeholder involvement, applicability and lack of clarity concerning editorial independence. Current international guidelines for recurrent VVC are consistent in terms of their definition of the condition, diagnostic techniques and utilising induction and maintenance therapy as the treatment of choice. However, the regimen suggested by most guidelines (fluconazole weekly for six months) is not particularly effective; only 42.9% of patients are disease free after 12 months. An alternative regimen put forward by one of the guidelines cites a 77% cure rate after 12 months. Most guidelines lacked specific recommendations for the induction part of induction and maintenance treatment. CONCLUSION: The current most recommended treatment of recurrent VVC is sub-optimal. Studies performed on a larger scale are required to identify more effective treatments.


Asunto(s)
Antifúngicos/uso terapéutico , Candidiasis Vulvovaginal/diagnóstico , Candidiasis Vulvovaginal/tratamiento farmacológico , Guías de Práctica Clínica como Asunto/normas , Femenino , Humanos , Quimioterapia de Mantención , Recurrencia , Inducción de Remisión
3.
Children (Basel) ; 8(12)2021 Dec 10.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-34943366

RESUMEN

Background Community lockdowns during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic may influence preterm birth rates, but mechanisms are unclear. Methods We compared neonatal outcomes of preterm infants born to mothers exposed to community lockdowns in 2020 (exposed group) to those born in 2019 (control group). Main outcome studied was composite of significant neonatal morbidity or death. Results Median gestational age was 35 + 4 weeks (295 infants, exposed group) vs. 35 + 0 weeks (347 infants, control group) (p = 0.108). The main outcome occurred in 36/295 (12.2%) infants in exposed group vs. 46/347 (13.3%) in control group (p = 0.69). Continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP) use, jaundice requiring phototherapy, hypoglycaemia requiring treatment, early neonatal white cell and neutrophil counts were significantly reduced in the exposed group. Conclusions COVID-19 community lockdowns did not alter composite neonatal outcomes in preterm infants, but reduced rates of some common outcomes as well as early neonatal inflammatory markers.

SELECCIÓN DE REFERENCIAS
DETALLE DE LA BÚSQUEDA