Incidence of vasa praevia: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

OBJECTIVES: To derive accurate estimates of the incidence of vasa praevia (VP) in a routine population of unselected pregnancies. DESIGN: Systematic review and meta-analysis. DATA SOURCES: A search of MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL and the Cochrane database was performed to review relevant citations reporting outcomes in pregnancies with VP from January 2000 until 5 April 2023. ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA FOR SELECTION OF STUDIES: Prospective or retrospective cohort or population studies that provided data regarding VP cases in routine unselected pregnancies during the study period. We included studies published in the English language after the year 2000 to reflect contemporary obstetric and neonatal practice. DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS: Two reviewers independently screened the retrieved citations and extracted data. The methodological quality of studies was assessed using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale, and Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses was used to ensure standardised reporting of studies. RESULTS: A total of 3847 citations were screened and 82 full-text manuscripts were retrieved for analysis. There were 24 studies that met the inclusion criteria, of which 12 studies reported prenatal diagnosis with a systematic protocol of screening. There were 1320 pregnancies with VP in a total population of 2 278 561 pregnancies; the weighted pooled incidence of VP was 0.79 (95% CI: 0.59 to 1.01) per 1000 pregnancies, corresponding to 1 case of VP per 1271 (95% CI: 990 to 1692) pregnancies. Nested subanalysis of studies reporting screening for VP based on a specific protocol identified 395 pregnancies with VP in a population of 732 654 pregnancies with weighted pooled incidence of 0.82 (95% CI: 0.53 to 1.18) per 1000 pregnancies (1 case of VP per 1218 (95% CI: 847 to 1901) pregnancies). CONCLUSION: The incidence of VP in unselected pregnancies is 1 in 1218 pregnancies. This is higher than is previously reported and can be used as a basis to assess whether screening for this condition should be part of routine clinical practice. Incorporation of strategies to screen for VP in routine clinical practice is likely to prevent 5% of stillbirths. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42020125495.

Tools for assessing child and adolescent stunting: Lookup tables, growth charts and a novel appropriate-technology "MEIRU" wallchart - a diagnostic accuracy study.

Stunting affects 149 million children worldwide and is a form of chronic malnutrition defined by low height-for-age. Surveys and intervention programmes depend on effective assessment and identification of affected individuals. Gold standard assessment is based on height-for-age Z-score (HAZ): HAZ <-2 defines stunting; HAZ <-3 defines severe stunting. However, a major problem for field-based programmes is that Z-scores can be time-intensive and challenging to calculate. We thus developed a novel wallchart that we have coined 'MEIRU wallchart' to easily and accurately identify stunted children and adolescents. Our study aim was to evaluate its performance and acceptability against other methods used in current clinical/field practice. We undertook a non-interventional diagnostic accuracy study in Malawi. We recruited 244 participants aged 8-19 years and determined each individual's stunting status using, in varying order: the MEIRU wallchart, traditional lookup tables, and traditional growth charts. All were compared against 'gold standard' HAZ, calculated using AnthroPlus WHO software. Local community healthcare workers performed all the assessments. The wallchart method was strongly preferred by both participants and staff. It had an overall accuracy of 95.5%(kappa = 0.91) and was faster than lookup tables by an average of 62.5%(41.4sec; p<0.001) per measurement. Lookup tables and growth charts had overall agreements of 59.4%(kappa = 0.36) and 61.9%(kappa = 0.31) respectively. At the HAZ-2 cut-off, the wallchart had a sensitivity of 97.6%(95%CI: 91.5-99.7) and specificity of 96.3%(95%CI: 92.1-98.6). We conclude that the MEIRU wallchart performs well and is acceptable for screening and identification of stunted children/adolescents by community-level health workers. It fulfils key criteria that justify a role in future screening programmes: easy to perform and interpret; acceptable; accurate; sensitive and specific. Potential future uses include: conducting rapid stunting prevalence surveys; identifying affected individuals for interventions. Current field methods, lookup tables and growth charts performed poorly and should be used with caution.