Clinical Obesity Services in Public Hospitals in Australia: a position statement based on expert consensus.

We aimed to describe the current state of specialist obesity services for adults with clinically severe obesity in public hospitals in Australia, and to analyse the gap in resources based on expert consensus. We conducted two surveys to collect information about current and required specialist obesity services and resources using open-ended questionnaires. Organizational level data were sought from clinician expert representatives of specialist obesity services across Australia in 2017. Fifteen of 16 representatives of current services in New South Wales (n = 8), Queensland (n = 1), Victoria (n = 2), South Australia (n = 3), and the Australian Capital Territory (n = 1) provided data. The composition of services varied substantially between hospitals, and patient access to services and effective treatments were limited by strict entry criteria (e.g. body mass index 40 kg/m2 or higher with specific complication/s), prolonged wait times, geographical location (major cities only) and out-of-pocket costs. Of these services, 47% had a multidisciplinary team (MDT), 53% had an exercise physiologist/physiotherapist, 53% had a bariatric surgeon and 33% had pharmacotherapy resources. Key gaps included staffing components of the MDT (psychologist, exercise physiologist/physiotherapist) and access to publicly funded weight loss pharmacotherapy and bariatric surgery. There was consensus on the need for significant improvements in staff, physical infrastructure, access to services, education/training in obesity medicine and targeted research funding. Based on the small number of existing, often under-resourced specialist obesity services that are located only in a few major cities, the vast majority of Australians with clinically severe obesity cannot access the specialist evidence based treatments needed.

Outcomes of twin pregnancies complicated by gestational diabetes: a meta-analysis of observational studies.

OBJECTIVE: Gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM) in singleton pregnancy is associated with large for gestational age neonates and adverse perinatal outcomes; however, the impact of GDM in twin pregnancy is unclear. Thus, the aim of this study is to assess the perinatal outcomes of twin pregnancies complicated by GDM by performing a meta-analysis of observational studies. STUDY DESIGN: Studies investigating GDM in twin pregnancy were identified through an online search of three databases: Medline, Embase and Web of Science. Selection criteria comprised full paper observational studies (retrospective or prospective) published in English that examined GDM in twin pregnancy compared with non-GDM twin pregnancy and reported on birth weight and/or adverse perinatal outcomes. Random-effects models with inverse-variance weighting were used to calculate standardized mean differences and unadjusted odds ratios. Sensitivity analyses were carried out to determine the impact of possible maternal confounders (body mass index and age) and GDM diagnostic criteria on perinatal outcomes. RESULTS: Thirteen observational studies were included. GDM twins were born at the same gestation as non-GDM twins, with marginally lower birth weight. There was no difference in the incidence of large or small for gestational age neonates. Although there was no correlation between GDM in twin pregnancy and respiratory distress, neonatal hypoglycemic or low Apgar score, GDM twins had a higher rate of neonatal intensive care unit admission (OR 1.49; 95% confidence interval: 1.10, 2.02; P<0.01). CONCLUSION: Identification and subsequent treatment of GDM in twin pregnancy demonstrates a similar risk of adverse perinatal outcomes compared with non-GDM twin pregnancies.