A systematic review of patient-reported outcome measures used in maternal postpartum anxiety.

OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to conduct a systematic review and to evaluate the psychometric measurement properties of instruments for postpartum anxiety using the Consensus-Based Standards for the Selection of Health Measurement Instruments guidelines to identify the best available patient-reported outcome measure. DATA SOURCES: We searched 4 databases (CINAHL, Embase, PubMed, and Web of Science in July 2022) and included studies that evaluated at least 1 psychometric measurement property of a patient-reported outcome measurement instrument. The protocol was registered with the International Prospective Register for Systematic Reviews under identifier CRD42021260004 and followed the Consensus-Based Standards for the Selection of Health Measurement Instruments guidelines for systematic reviews. STUDY ELIGIBILITY: Studies eligible for inclusion were those that assessed the performance of a patient-reported outcome measure for screening for postpartum anxiety. We included studies in which the instruments were subjected to some form of psychometric property assessment in the postpartum maternal population, consisted of at least 2 questions, and were not subscales. METHODS: This systematic review used the Consensus-Based Standards for the Selection of Health Measurement Instruments and the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses guidelines to identify the best patient-reported outcome measurement instrument for examining postpartum anxiety. A risk of bias assessment was performed, and a modified GRADE approach was used to assess the level of evidence with recommendations being made for the overall quality of each instrument. RESULTS: A total of 28 studies evaluating 13 instruments in 10,570 patients were included. Content validity was sufficient in 9 with 5 instruments receiving a class A recommendation (recommended for use). The Postpartum Specific Anxiety Scale, Postpartum Specific Anxiety Scale Research Short Form, Postpartum Specific Anxiety Scale Research Short Form Covid, Postpartum Specific Anxiety Scale-Persian, and the State-Trait Anxiety Inventory demonstrated adequate content validity and sufficient internal consistency. Nine instruments received a recommendation of class B (further research required). No instrument received a class C recommendation (not recommended for use). CONCLUSION: Five instruments received a class A recommendation, all with limitations, such as not being specific to the postpartum population, not assessing all domains, lacking generalizability, or evaluation of cross-cultural validity. There is currently no freely available instrument that assess all domains of postpartum anxiety. Future studies are needed to determine the optimum current instrument or to develop and validate a more specific measure for maternal postpartum anxiety.

Pharmacological agents for prevention of pruritus in women undergoing Caesarean delivery with neuraxial morphine: a systematic review and Bayesian network meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Neuraxial opioids provide effective analgesia for Caesarean delivery, however, pruritus can be a troubling side-effect. Effective agents to prevent pruritus are needed. Our objective was to perform an updated systematic review and network meta-analysis to provide clinicians with a comparison of relative efficacy of available interventions to reduce the incidence of pruritus, induced by either intrathecal or epidural single-shot morphine, in women undergoing Caesarean delivery. METHODS: Databases systematically searched (up to January 2022) included PubMed MEDLINE, Web of Science, EBSCO CINAHL, Embase, LILACS, and two Cochrane databases. We included randomised, controlled trials involving adult female patients undergoing Caesarean delivery. We pooled trials comparing interventions used for preventing pruritus after Caesarean delivery and performed a Bayesian model network meta-analysis. RESULTS: The final primary network included data from comparisons of 14 distinct interventions (including placebo) used to reduce the incidence of pruritus in 6185 participants. We judged five interventions to be 'definitely superior' to placebo: propofol, opioid agonist-antagonists (neuraxial), opioid antagonists, opioid agonist-antagonists (systemic), and serotonin antagonists. For the network evaluating the incidence of severe pruritus (warranting additional therapeutic treatment of pruritus), data were available for 14 interventions (including placebo) in 4489 patients. For this outcome, we judged three interventions to be 'definitely superior' to placebo: dopamine antagonists (neuraxial) and systemic and neuraxial opioid agonist-antagonists. CONCLUSION: Our analysis found several interventions to be effective in reducing the incidence of pruritus. Although sub-hypnotic doses of propofol appear to have an antipruritic effect, replication of this finding and further investigation of optimal dosing are warranted. SYSTEMATIC REVIEW PROTOCOL: PROSPERO (CRD42022367058).

Comparison of different nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs for cesarean section: a systematic review and network meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Cesarean section is associated with moderate to severe pain and nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) are commonly employed. The optimal NSAID, however, has not been elucidated. In this network meta-analysis and systematic review, we compared the influence of control and individual NSAIDs on the indices of analgesia, side effects, and quality of recovery. METHODS: CDSR, CINAHL, CRCT, Embase, LILACS, PubMed, and Web of Science were searched for randomized controlled trials comparing a specific NSAID to either control or another NSAID in elective or emergency cesarean section under general or neuraxial anesthesia. Network plots and league tables were constructed, and the quality of evidence was evaluated with Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) analysis. RESULTS: We included 47 trials. Cumulative intravenous morphine equivalent consumption at 24 h, the primary outcome, was examined in 1,228 patients and 18 trials, and control was found to be inferior to diclofenac, indomethacin, ketorolac, and tenoxicam (very low quality evidence owing to serious limitations, imprecision, and publication bias). Indomethacin was superior to celecoxib for pain score at rest at 8-12 h and celecoxib + parecoxib, diclofenac, and ketorolac for pain score on movement at 48 h. In regard to the need for and time to rescue analgesia COX-2 inhibitors such as celecoxib were inferior to other NSAIDs. CONCLUSIONS: Our review suggests the presence of minimal differences among the NSAIDs studied. Nonselective NSAIDs may be more effective than selective NSAIDs, and some NSAIDs such as indomethacin might be preferable to other NSAIDs.

Obstetric services in the UK during the COVID-19 pandemic: A national survey.

BACKGROUND: The management of obstetric patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) due to human-to-human transmission of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) requires unique considerations. Many aspects of labour and delivery practice required adaptation in response to the global pandemic and were supported by guidelines from the Royal College of Obstetrics and Gynaecologists. The adoption and adherence to these guidelines is unknown. METHODS: Participating centres in "Quality of Recovery in Obstetric Anaesthesia study-a multicentre study" (ObsQoR) completed an electronic survey based on the provision of services and care related to COVID-19 in October 2021. The survey was designed against the Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists COVID-19 guidelines. RESULTS: One hundred and five of the 107 participating centres completed the survey (98% response rate representing 54% of all UK obstetric units). The median [IQR] annual number of deliveries among the included sites was 4389 [3000-5325]. Ninety-nine of the 103 (94.3%) sites had guidelines for the management of peripartum women with COVID-19. Sixty-one of 105 (58.1%) sites had specific guidance for venous thromboembolism (VTE) prophylaxis. Thirty-seven of 104 (35.6%) centres restricted parturient birthing plans if a positive diagnosis of COVID-19 was made. A COVID-19 vaccination referral pathway encouraging full vaccination for all pregnant women was present in 63/103 centres (61.2%). CONCLUSION: We found variability in care delivered and adherence to guidelines related to COVID-19. The clinical implications for this related to quality of peripartum care is unclear, however there remains scope to improve pathways for immunisation, birth plans and VTE prophylaxis.

Assessment of Patient-Reported Outcome Measures for Maternal Postpartum Depression Using the Consensus-Based Standards for the Selection of Health Measurement Instruments Guideline: A Systematic Review.

Importance: Maternal depression is frequently reported in the postpartum period, with an estimated prevalence of approximately 15% during the first postpartum year. Despite the high prevalence of postpartum depression, there is no consensus regarding which patient-reported outcome measure (PROM) should be used to screen for this complex, multidimensional construct. Objective: To evaluate psychometric measurement properties of existing PROMs of maternal postpartum depression using the Consensus-Based Standards for the Selection of Health Measurement Instruments (COSMIN) guideline and identify the best available patient-reported screening measure. Evidence Review: This systematic review followed the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses (PRISMA) reporting guideline. PubMed, CINAHL, Embase, and Web of Science were searched on July 1, 2019, for validated PROMs of postpartum depression, and an additional search including a hand search of references from eligible studies was conducted in June 2021. Included studies evaluated 1 or more psychometric measurement properties of the identified PROMs. A risk-of-bias assessment was performed to evaluate methods of each included study. Psychometric measurement properties of each PROM were rated according to COSMIN criteria. A modified Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation approach was used to assess the level of evidence supporting each rating, and a recommendation class (A, recommended for use; B, further research required; or C, not recommended) was given based on the overall quality of each included PROM. Findings: Among 10 264 postpartum recovery studies, 27 PROMs were identified. Ten PROMs (37.0%) met the inclusion criteria and were used in 43 studies (0.4%) involving 22 095 postpartum women. At least 1 psychometric measurement property was assessed for each of the 10 validated PROMs identified. Content validity was sufficient in all PROMs. The Edinburgh Postnatal Depression Scale (EPDS) demonstrated adequate content validity and a moderate level of evidence for sufficient internal consistency (with sufficient structural validity), resulting in a recommendation of class A. The other 9 PROMs evaluated received a recommendation of class B. Conclusions and Relevance: The findings of this systematic review suggest that the EPDS is the best available patient-reported screening measure of maternal postpartum depression. Future studies should focus on evaluating the cross-cultural validity, reliability, and measurement error of the EPDS to improve understanding of its psychometric properties and utility.

Enhancing recovery after cesarean delivery - A narrative review.

Enhanced recovery after cesarean delivery (ERAC) is increasingly being implemented worldwide with the aim to improve patient care for women undergoing this procedure. ERAC is associated with superior maternal outcomes including decreased length of hospital stay, opioid consumption, pain scores, times to mobilization and urinary catheter removal and hospitalization costs, without increasing hospital readmission rates. A number of preoperative, intraoperative, and postoperative interventions have been incorporated into ERAC protocols. The evidence base for each intervention varies, and there is a lack of consensus as to which are the best and most appropriate interventions. The quality of evidence of studies evaluating ERAC is low, and the measurements for reporting its success are varied and disparate. Protocols rarely assess patient-reported outcome measures, patient satisfaction, or patient experience. The best measures of ERAC success are yet to be fully elucidated. Further work is required to evaluate protocols, interventions, and how best to measure the effect of ERAC.