Brief sexuality communication--a behavioural intervention to advance sexually transmitted infection/HIV prevention: a systematic review.

BACKGROUND: Throughout the last decade substantial research has been undertaken to develop evidence-based behaviour change interventions for sexual health promotion. Primary care could provide an opportunistic entry for brief sexual health communication. OBJECTIVES: We conducted a systematic review to explore opportunistic sexual and reproductive health services for sexual health communication delivered at primary health care level. SEARCH STRATEGY: We searched for studies on PubMed, ProQuest, CINAHL, Jstor, Scopus/Science Direct, Cochrane database of systematic reviews, EBSCO, CINAHL, PsychoInfo, and Web of Knowledge. Both published and unpublished articles were reviewed. SELECTION CRITERIA: All randomised controlled trials and controlled clinical trials were included. Participants of all ages, from adolescence onwards were included. Brief (10-60 minutes) interventions including some aspect of communication on sexual health issues were included. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Data were extracted by two reviewers independently using a standardised form. Interventions differed from each other, hence meta-analysis was not performed, and results are presented individually. MAIN RESULTS: A total of 247 articles were selected for full-text evaluation, 31 of which were included. Sexually transmitted infections (STIs)/HIV were less often reported in the intervention group compared with the control group. Condom use was higher in most studies in the intervention group. Numbers of sexual partners and unprotected sexual intercourse were lower in the intervention groups. CONCLUSIONS: There is evidence that brief counselling interventions have some effect in the reduction and prevention of STIs/HIV. Some questions could not be answered, such as the effect over time and in different settings and population groups.

WHO guidelines for the programmatic management of drug-resistant tuberculosis: 2011 update.

The production of guidelines for the management of drug-resistant tuberculosis (TB) fits the mandate of the World Health Organization (WHO) to support countries in the reinforcement of patient care. WHO commissioned external reviews to summarise evidence on priority questions regarding case-finding, treatment regimens for multidrug-resistant TB (MDR-TB), monitoring the response to MDR-TB treatment, and models of care. A multidisciplinary expert panel used the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach to develop recommendations. The recommendations support the wider use of rapid drug susceptibility testing for isoniazid and rifampicin or rifampicin alone using molecular techniques. Monitoring by sputum culture is important for early detection of failure during treatment. Regimens lasting ≥ 20 months and containing pyrazinamide, a fluoroquinolone, a second-line injectable drug, ethionamide (or prothionamide), and either cycloserine or p-aminosalicylic acid are recommended. The guidelines promote the early use of antiretroviral agents for TB patients with HIV on second-line drug regimens. Systems that primarily employ ambulatory models of care are recommended over others based mainly on hospitalisation. Scientific and medical associations should promote the recommendations among practitioners and public health decision makers involved in MDR-TB care. Controlled trials are needed to improve the quality of existing evidence, particularly on the optimal composition and duration of MDR-TB treatment regimens.

Hands and knees posture in late pregnancy or labour for fetal malposition (lateral or posterior).

BACKGROUND: Lateral and posterior position of the baby's head (the back of the baby's head facing to the mother's side or back) may be associated with more painful, prolonged or obstructed labour and difficult delivery. It is possible that certain positions adopted by the mother may influence the baby's position. OBJECTIVES: To assess the effects of adopting a hands and knees maternal posture in late pregnancy or during labour when the presenting part of the fetus is in a lateral or posterior position compared with no intervention. SEARCH STRATEGY: We searched the Cochrane Pregnancy and Childbirth Group's Trials Register (July 2007) and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (The Cochrane Library 2007, Issue 2). SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised trials of hands and knees maternal posture compared to other postures or controls. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors assessed trial eligibility and quality. MAIN RESULTS: Three trials (2794 women) were included. In one trial (100 women), four different postures (four groups of 20 women) were combined for the comparison with the control group of 20 women. Lateral or posterior position of the presenting part of the fetus was less likely to persist following 10 minutes in the hands and knees position compared to a sitting position (one trial, 100 women, relative risk (RR) 0.26, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.18 to 0.38). In a second trial (2547 women), advice to assume the hands and knees posture for 10 minutes twice daily in the last weeks of pregnancy had no effect on the baby's position at delivery or any of the other pregnancy outcomes measured. The third trial studied the use of hands and knees position in labour and involved 147 labouring women at 37 or more weeks gestation. Occipito-posterior position of the baby was confirmed by ultrasound. Seventy women, who were randomised in the intervention group, assumed hands and knees positioning for a period of at least 30 minutes, compared to 77 women in the control group who did not assume hands and knees positioning in labour. The reduction in occipito-posterior or -transverse positions at delivery and operative deliveries were not statistically significant. There was a significant reduction in back pain. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Use of hands and knees position for 10 minutes twice daily to correct occipito-posterior position of the fetus in late pregnancy cannot be recommended as an intervention. This is not to suggest that women should not adopt this position if they find it comfortable. The use of position in labour was associated with reduced backache. Further trials are needed to assess the effects on other labour outcomes.

Copper containing, framed intra-uterine devices for contraception.

BACKGROUND: Intrauterine devices (IUD) are safe and effective methods of long term reversible contraception. The design, and copper content as well as placement of the copper on IUDs could affect their effectiveness and side-effect profile. OBJECTIVES: We compared different copper IUDs for their effectiveness and side effects. SEARCH STRATEGY: Multiple electronic databases were searched with appropriate key words and names of the IUDs known to be in the market. We searched the reference lists of papers identified and contacted trialists when possible. There was no language restriction. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised controlled trials comparing different IUDs were considered. Trials needed to report on clinical outcomes. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Data on outcomes and trial characteristics were extracted in duplicate and independently by two reviewers. Meta-analysis results are expressed as rate difference (RD) using a fixed-effects model with 95% confidence interval (CI). In the presence of significant heterogeneity a random-effects model was applied. MAIN RESULTS: We included 35 trials, resulting in 18 comparisons of 10 different IUDs in approximately 48,000 women. TCu380A was more effective in preventing pregnancy than MLCu375 (RD 1.70%, 95% CI 0.07% to 2.95% after 4 years of use). TCu380A was also more effective than MLCu250, TCu220 and TCu200. There tended to be fewer pregnancies with TCu380S compared to TCu380A after the first year of use, a difference which was statistically significant in the fourth year (RD -1.62%, 95% CI -3.00% to -0.24%). This occurred despite more expulsions with TCu380S (RD 3.50%, 95% CI 0.36% to 6.63% at 4 years). MLCu375 was no more effective than TCu220 at 1 year of use, or MLCu250 and NovaT up to 3 years. Compared to TCu380A or TCu380S, none of the IUDs showed any benefits in terms of bleeding or pain, or any of the other reasons for early discontinuation. None of the trials that reported events at insertion found one IUD easier to insert than another or caused less pain at insertion. There is no evidence that uterine perforation rates vary by type of device. There are minimal randomised data on IUD use in nulliparous women. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: TCu380A or TCu380S appear to be more effective than other IUDs. No IUD showed consistently lower removal rates for bleeding and pain in comparison to other IUDs. There is no evidence that any particular framed copper device is better suited to women who have not had children.

Copper containing, framed intra-uterine devices for contraception.

BACKGROUND: Intrauterine devices (IUD) are safe and effective methods of long term reversible contraception. Design and copper content of IUDs could affect their effectiveness and side-effect profile. OBJECTIVES: We compared different copper IUDs for their effectiveness and side effects. SEARCH STRATEGY: Multiple electronic databases were searched with appropriate key words and names of the IUDs known to be in the market. We searched the reference lists of papers identified and contacted trialists when possible. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised controlled trials comparing different IUDs were considered. Trials needed to report on clinical outcomes. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Data on outcomes and trial characteristics were extracted in duplicate and independently by two reviewers. Meta-analysis results are expressed as rate difference (RD) using a fixed-effects model with 95% confidence interval (CI). In the presence of significant heterogeneity a random-effects model was applied. MAIN RESULTS: We included 34 trials, resulting in 16 comparisons of different IUDs. TCu380A was more effective than MLCu375, MLCu250, TCu220 and TCu200. Changing the position of the copper on the arm of the IUD for TCu380S did not improve the efficacy of TCu380A. MLCu375 was no more effective than TCu220, at 1 year, MLCu250 to 3 years or NovaT to 3 years Compared to TCu380A, none of the IUDs showed any benefits in terms of bleeding or pain, or any of the other reasons for early discontinuation. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: TCu380A is more effective compared to other IUDs. There is no data available comparing different IUDs in special subgroups, such as nulliparous women.

Contraceptive counselling and social representations: a qualitative study.

BACKGROUND: Contraceptive use is a complex issue and several studies have been conducted in an effort to understand user behaviour. It is of interest to explore the representations of professionals who give advice on contraception, since their views could have an impact on contraceptive use. METHODS: Individual in-depth interviews of 65 healthcare professionals likely to provide contraceptive advice to patients at a Swiss maternity unit. RESULTS: 83% of healthcare professionals interviewed were favourable to contraception in general while being highly critical of its practical efficacy. The methods most often spontaneously cited were oral contraceptive pills, male condom, intrauterine devices and hormonal implants. Theoretically, all methods should be proposed during contraceptive counselling but in practice interviewees have different social representations of user groups and associate them with specific contraceptive methods. Personal experience appears to play a bigger role than scientific knowledge. CONCLUSIONS: The counsellor's social representations probably play an important role in determining user behaviour. These representations should be taken into consideration in the training of healthcare professionals in this field.

Hands and knees posture in late pregnancy or labour for fetal malposition (lateral or posterior).

BACKGROUND: Lateral and posterior position of the baby's head (the back of the baby's head facing to the side or the mother's back) may be associated with more painful, prolonged or obstructed labour and difficult delivery. It is possible that certain positions adopted by the mother may influence the baby's position. OBJECTIVES: The objective of this review is to assess the effects of adopting a hands and knees maternal posture in late pregnancy or during labour when the presenting part of the fetus is in a lateral or posterior position, compared with no intervention. SEARCH STRATEGY: We searched the Cochrane Pregnancy and Childbirth Group Trials Register (November 2004) and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (The Cochrane Library, Issue 4, 2004). SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised trials of hands and knees maternal posture compared to other postures or controls. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Both review authors assessed trial eligibility and quality. MAIN RESULTS: Two trials of hands and knees posture during pregnancy were included. In one trial involving 100 women, four different postures (four groups of 20 women) were combined for the comparison with the control group of 20 women. Lateral or posterior position of the presenting part of the fetus was less likely to persist following 10 minutes in the hands and knees position compared to a sitting position (one trial, 100 women, relative risk (RR) 0.25, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.17 to 0.37). In a second trial including 2547 women, advice to assume the hands and knees posture for 10 minutes twice daily in the last weeks of pregnancy had no effect on the baby's position at delivery or any of the other pregnancy outcomes measured. No trials of hands and knees posture during labour were included. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Use of hands and knees position for 10 minutes twice daily to correct occipitoposterior position of the fetus in late pregnancy cannot be recommended as an intervention. This is not to suggest that women should not adopt this position if they find it comfortable. The use of this position during labour has not been addressed in this review. In view of the promising short-term effects of the technique and its simplicity, further trials are justified to determine whether encouraging the use of hands and knees posture during rather than before labour, has any effect on substantive outcomes.

Medical versus surgical methods for first trimester termination of pregnancy.

BACKGROUND: Induced abortions are very commonly practiced interventions worldwide. A variety of medical abortion methods have been introduced during the last decade in addition to existing surgical methods. In this review we systematically searched for and combined all evidence from randomised controlled trials comparing surgical with medical abortion. OBJECTIVES: To evaluate medical methods in comparison to surgical methods for first-trimester abortion with respect to efficacy, side effects and acceptability. SEARCH STRATEGY: The Cochrane Controlled Trials Register, MEDLINE (with the Cochrane 3-stage search strategy)(1966-2000) and Popline (1970-2000) were systematically searched. There were no language preferences in searching. Reference lists of retrieved papers were searched. Experts in WHO/HRP were contacted. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised trials of any surgical abortion method compared with any medical abortion method in the first trimester. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Trial quality was assessed and data extraction was made independently by two reviewers. MAIN RESULTS: Six studies mostly with small sample sizes, comparing 4 different interventions (prostaglandins alone, mifepristone alone, and mifepristone/misoprostol and methotrexate/misoprostol versus vacuum aspiration) were included. Results are sometimes based on one trial only. Prostaglandins vs vacuum aspiration: the rate of abortions not completed with the intended method was statistically significant higher in the prostaglandin group (2.7, 95% CI 1.1 to 6.8) compared to surgery. There are no data on the most commonly medical (mifepristone/misoprostol) and surgical abortion available to be included in the review. Duration of bleeding was longer in the medical abortion groups compared to vacuum aspiration. There was only one major complication (uterine perforation) in one trial in the surgical group. There was no difference between the groups for ongoing pregnancies at the time of follow-up or pelvic infections. No data on acceptability, side effects or women's satisfaction with the procedure were available for inclusion in the review. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: The results are derived from relatively small trials. Prostaglandins used alone seems to be less effective and more painful compared to surgical first-trimester abortion. However, there is inadequate evidence to comment on the acceptability and side effects of medical compared to surgical first-trimester abortions. There is a need for trials to address the efficacy of currently used methods and women's preferences more reliably.

Minilaparotomy and endoscopic techniques for tubal sterilisation.

BACKGROUND: Worldwide, the most commonly used method of fertility regulation is tubal sterilisation. In developed countries sterilisation is generally performed by laparoscopy rather than by minilaparotomy, based on the belief that this approach is both safe and effective. In developing countries, where the resources are limited for the purchase and maintenance of the more sophisticated laparoscopic equipment, minilaparotomy may still be the most common approach. In both resource poor and industrialised countries using the technique with the greatest effectiveness and safety, together with the least costs, is extremely important. Though both methods are widely used, the advantages and disadvantages of laparoscopic sterilisation compared to mini-laparotomy have not been systematically evaluated. The ideal method would be one which is highly effective, economical, able to be performed on an outpatient basis, allowing rapid resumption of normal activity, producing a minimal or invisible scar and having a potential for reversibility. This review considers the methods to enter the abdominal cavity through the abdominal wall, either by minilaparotomy, laparoscopy or culdoscopy regardless of the technique used for tubal sterilisation. OBJECTIVES: To evaluate laparoscopic tubal sterilisation, as compared to minilaparotomy in terms of operative morbidity and mortality. Trials comparing laparoscopy or minilaparotomy with culdoscopy were also included in the review. Different methods used to interrupt tubal patency (excision, occlusion and coagulation) and comparison of different forms of anaesthesia will be considered in different reviews. SEARCH STRATEGY: Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) have been identified by using the search strategy of the Cochrane Collaboration. The Cochrane Controlled Trials Register was last searched in 1999 (Cochrane Library Issue 4, 1999). Reference lists of identified trials have been searched. SELECTION CRITERIA: All randomised controlled trials comparing laparoscopy, minilaparotomy and/or culdoscopy for tubal sterilisation. Except in one trial [Taner 1994] where 4 women underwent curettage at the same time, all women requested tubal sterilisation as an interval procedure. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Trials under consideration were evaluated for methodological quality and appropriateness for inclusion. Data were extracted independently by the reviewers. Results are reported as odds ratio for dichotomous outcomes and weighted mean differences for continuous outcomes. MAIN RESULTS: Minilaparotomy vs laparoscopy: There was no difference in major morbidity between the 2 groups. Minor morbidity was significantly less in the laparoscopy group (Peto OR 1.89; 95% CI 1.38, 2.59). Duration of operation was about 5 minutes shorter in the laparoscopy group (WMD 5.34; 95% CI 4.52, 6.16). Minilaparotomy vs culdoscopy: Women undergoing culdoscopy had more major morbidity than women for whom minilaparotomy was performed (Peto OR 0.14; 95% CI 0.02, 0.98). Duration of operation was about 5 minutes shorter in women undergoing culdoscopy (WMD 4.91; 95% CI 3.82, 6.01). Laparoscopy vs culdoscopy: In the one trial comparing the two interventions there were no significant differences between the groups with regard to major morbidity. Significantly more women suffered from minor morbidities in the culdoscopy group compared to the laparoscopy group (Peto OR 0.20; 95% CI 0.05, 0.77). REVIEWERS' CONCLUSIONS: Major morbidity seems to be a rare outcome for both, laparoscopy and minilaparotomy. The included studies had limited power to demonstrate significant differences especially for the relatively rare but potentially serious outcomes. Personal preference of the woman and/or of the surgeon can guide the choice of technique. Practical aspects (e.g. cost, maintenance, and sterilisation of the instruments) must be taken into account before implementing the more sophisticated endoscopic techniques in settings with limited resources. Culdoscopy is not recommended as it carries a higher complication rate.

Progestogens in combined oral contraceptives for contraception.

BACKGROUND: The progestogen component of oral contraceptives (OC) has undergone changes since it was first recognised that their chemical structures could influence the spectrum of minor adverse and beneficial effects. The major determinants of OCs are effectiveness, cycle control and common side effects. The rationale of this review is to provide a systematic comparison of OCs containing the progestogens currently in use worldwide. OBJECTIVES: The objective of this review is to compare currently available low-dose OCs containing ethinyl estradiol and different progestogens in terms of contraceptive effectiveness, cycle control, side effects and continuation rates. SEARCH STRATEGY: The Cochrane Controlled Trials Register, MEDLINE and EMBASE databases have been searched systematically. Relevant pharmaceutical companies and the authors of articles included in this review have been contacted for clarification. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised trials reporting clinical outcomes were considered for inclusion. We excluded studies comparing mono- with multiphasic pills, and crossover trials with trials in which the difference in total content of ethinyl estradiol between preparations exceeded 105 micro g. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: The methodological quality and validity of studies were assessed based on the above-mentioned inclusion criteria. Both application of inclusion criteria and data extraction were performed independently by the reviewers. Results are expressed as relative risk (RR) with 95% confidence interval (CI) using a random-effects model. MAIN RESULTS: Twenty-two trials have been included in this review, thus generating 14 comparisons. Eighteen trials were sponsored by pharmaceutical companies and in only 5 cases had a blind trial been attempted. Most comparisons between different interventions included 1-3 trials. There was less discontinuation with second- compared to first-generation progestogens (RR: 0.79, 95% CI: 0.69-0.91). Cycle control appears to be better when using second- compared to first-generation progestogens for both mono- (RR: 0.69; 95% CI: 0.52-0.91) and triphasic (RR: 0.61; 95% CI: 0.43-0.85) preparations.Contraceptive effectiveness, spotting, breakthrough bleeding and the absence of withdrawal bleeding was similar when using GSD compared to LNG, although there was less intermenstrual bleeding in the GSD group (RR: 0.71, 95% CI: 0.55, 0.91). Drospirenone (DRSP) appeared to be similar to DSG. REVIEWERS' CONCLUSIONS: Based on data from one trial, compared to pills containing LNG, those containing GSD may be associated with less intermenstrual bleeding although they show similar patterns of spotting, breakthrough bleeding and the absence of withdrawal bleeds. GSD is also comparable to DSG. Regarding acceptability, all the indices show that third- and second-generation progestogens are preferred over first-generation preparations. Future research should focus on independently conducted, well-designed randomised trials that compare third- and second-generation progestogens in particular.

Medical methods for first trimester abortion.

BACKGROUND: Surgical abortion up to 63 days by vacuum aspiration or dilatation and curettage has been the method of choice since the 1960s. Medical abortion became an alternative method of first trimester pregnancy termination with the availability of prostaglandins in the early 1970s and anti-progesterones in the 1980s. The most widely researched drugs are prostaglandins (PGs) alone, mifepristone alone, methotrexate alone, mifepristone with prostaglandins and methotrexate with prostaglandins. OBJECTIVES: To compare different medical methods for first trimester abortion. SEARCH STRATEGY: The Cochrane Controlled Trials Register, MEDLINE and Popline were systematically searched. Reference lists of retrieved papers were also searched. Experts in WHO/HRP were contacted. SELECTION CRITERIA: Types of studies. Randomised controlled trials comparing different medical methods (e.g. single drug, combination), ways of application, or different dose regimens, single or combined, for medical abortion, were considered. Trials were assessed and included if they had adequate concealment of allocation, randomisation procedure and follow-up. Women, pregnant in the first trimester, undergoing medical abortion were the participants. Different medical methods used for first trimester abortion, compared with each other or placebo were included. The outcomes sought include mortality, failure to achieve complete abortion, surgical evacuation (as emergency procedure, non-emergency procedure, or undefined), ongoing pregnancy at follow-up, time until passing of conceptus (> 3-6 hours), blood transfusion, blood loss (measured or clinically relevant drop in haemoglobin), days of bleeding, pain resulting from the procedure (reported by the women or measured by use of analgesics), additional uterotonics used, women's dissatisfaction with the procedure, nausea, vomiting, diarrhoea. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two reviewers independently selected trials for inclusion from the results of the search strategy described previously. The selection of trials for inclusion in the review was performed independently by two reviewers after employing the search strategy described previously. Trials under consideration were evaluated for appropriateness for inclusion and methodological quality without consideration of their results. A form was designed to facilitate the data extraction. Data were processed using Revman software. MAIN RESULTS: Thirty-nine trials were included in the review. The effectiveness outcomes below refer to 'failure to achieve complete abortion' with the intended method unless otherwise stated. 1) Combined regimen mifepristone/prostaglandin: Mifepristone 600 mg compared to 200 mg shows similar effectiveness in achieving complete abortion (4 trials, RR 1.07, 95% CI 0.87 to 1.32). Misoprostol administered orally is less effective (more failures) than the vaginal route (RR 3.00, 95% CI 1.44 to 6.24) and may be associated with more frequent side effects such as nausea and diarrhoea. 2) Mifepristone alone is less effective compared to the combined regimen mifepristone/prostaglandin (RR 3.76 95% CI 2.30 to 6.15). 3) Similarly, the 5 trials included in the comparison of prostaglandin compared to the combined regimen reported in all but one higher effectiveness with the combined regime compared to prostaglandin. The results of these studies were not pooled but the RR of failure with prostaglandin alone is between 1.4 to 3.75 and the 95% confidence intervals indicate statistical significance. 4) In one trial comparing gemeprost 0.5 mg with misoprostol 800 mcg, misoprostol was more effective (failure with gemeprost: RR 2.86, 95% CI 1.14 to 7.18). 5) There was no difference when using split dose compared to single dose of prostaglandin. 6) Combined regimen methotrexate/prostaglandin: there was no statistically significant difference in failure to achieve complete abortion comparing methotrexate administered intramuscular to oral (RR 2.04, 95% CI 0.51 to 8.07). Similarly, early (day 3) vs late (day 5) administration of prostaglandin showed no significant of prostaglandin showed no significant difference (RR 0.72, 95% CI 0.36 to 1.43). One trial compared the effect of tamoxifen vs methotrexate and no statistically significant differences were observed in effectiveness between the groups. REVIEWERS' CONCLUSIONS: Safe and effective medical abortion methods are available. Combined regimens are more effective than single agents. In the combined regimen, the dose of mifepristone can be lowered to 200 mg without significantly decreasing the method effectiveness. Misoprostol vaginally is more effective than orally. Some of the results are based on small studies only and therefore carry some uncertainty. Almost all trials were conducted in hospital settings with good access to support and emergency services. It is therefore not clear if the results are readily applicable to under-resourced settings where such services are lacking even if the agents used are available.

Medical methods for first trimester abortion.

BACKGROUND: Surgical abortion up to 63 days by vacuum aspiration or dilatation and curettage has been the method of choice since the 1960s. Medical abortion became an alternative method of first trimester pregnancy termination with the availability of prostaglandins in the early 1970s and anti-progesterones in the 1980s. The most widely researched drugs are prostaglandins (PGs) alone, mifepristone alone, methotrexate alone, mifepristone with prostaglandins and methotrexate with prostaglandins. OBJECTIVES: To compare different medical methods for first trimester abortion. SEARCH STRATEGY: The Cochrane Controlled Trials Register, MEDLINE and Popline were systematically searched. Reference lists of retrieved papers were also searched. Experts in WHO/HRP were contacted. SELECTION CRITERIA: Types of studies. Randomised controlled trials comparing different medical methods (e.g. single drug, combination), ways of application, or different dose regimens, single or combined, for medical abortion, were considered. Trials were assessed and included if they had adequate concealment of allocation, randomisation procedure and follow-up. Women, pregnant in the first trimester, undergoing medical abortion were the participants. Different medical methods used for first trimester abortion, compared with each other or placebo were included. The outcomes sought include mortality, failure to achieve complete abortion, surgical evacuation (as emergency procedure, non-emergency procedure, or undefined), ongoing pregnancy at follow-up, time until passing of conceptus (> 3-6 hours), blood transfusion, blood loss (measured or clinically relevant drop in haemoglobin), days of bleeding, pain resulting from the procedure (reported by the women or measured by use of analgesics), additional uterotonics used, women's dissatisfaction with the procedure, nausea, vomiting, diarrhoea. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two reviewers independently selected trials for inclusion from the results of the search strategy described previously. The selection of trials for inclusion in the review was performed independently by two reviewers after employing the search strategy described previously. Trials under consideration were evaluated for appropriateness for inclusion and methodological quality without consideration of their results. A form was designed to facilitate the data extraction. Data were processed using Revman software. MAIN RESULTS: Thirty-nine trials were included in the review. The effectiveness outcomes below refer to 'failure to achieve complete abortion' with the intended method unless otherwise stated. 1) Combined regimen mifepristone/prostaglandin: Mifepristone 600 mg compared to 200 mg shows similar effectiveness in achieving complete abortion (4 trials, RR 1.07, 95% CI 0.87 to 1.32). Misoprostol administered orally is less effective (more failures) than the vaginal route (RR 3.00, 95% CI 1.44 to 6.24) and may be associated with more frequent side effects such as nausea and diarrhoea. 2) Mifepristone alone is less effective compared to the combined regimen mifepristone/prostaglandin (RR 3.76 95% CI 2.30 to 6.15). 3) Similarly, the 5 trials included in the comparison of prostaglandin compared to the combined regimen reported in all but one higher effectiveness with the combined regime compared to prostaglandin. The results of these studies were not pooled but the RR of failure with prostaglandin alone is between 1.4 to 3.75 and the 95% confidence intervals indicate statistical significance. 4) In one trial comparing gemeprost 0.5 mg with misoprostol 800 mcg, misoprostol was more effective (failure with gemeprost: RR 2.86, 95% CI 1.14 to 7.18). 5) There was no difference when using split dose compared to single dose of prostaglandin. 6) Combined regimen methotrexate/prostaglandin: there was no statistically significant difference in failure to achieve complete abortion comparing methotrexate administered intramuscular to oral (RR 2.04, 95% CI 0.51 to 8.07). Similarly, early (day 3) vs late (day 5) administration of prostaglandin showed no significant of prostaglandin showed no significant difference (RR 0.72, 95% CI 0.36 to 1.43). One trial compared the effect of tamoxifen vs methotrexate and no statistically significant differences were observed in effectiveness between the groups. REVIEWER'S CONCLUSIONS: Safe and effective medical abortion methods are available. Combined regimens are more effective than single agents. In the combined regimen, the dose of mifepristone can be lowered to 200 mg without significantly decreasing the method effectiveness. Misoprostol vaginally is more effective than orally. Some of the results are based on small studies only and therefore carry some uncertainty. Almost all trials were conducted in hospital settings with good access to support and emergency services. It is therefore not clear if the results are readily applicable to under-resourced settings where such services are lacking even if the agents used are available.

Techniques for the interruption of tubal patency for female sterilisation.

BACKGROUND: Female sterilization is the most popular contraceptive method worldwide. Several techniques are described in the literature, however only few of them are commonly used and properly evaluated. OBJECTIVES: To compare the different tubal occlusion techniques in terms of major and minor morbidity, failure rates (pregnancies), technical failures and difficulties and women's and surgeons' views. SEARCH STRATEGY: The Cochrane Controlled Trials Register has been searched. A search of the reference lists of identified trials was performed. An additional MEDLINE search was done using an Internet search service Pub Med. SELECTION CRITERIA: All randomized controlled trials comparing different techniques for tubal sterilization, regardless of the way of entry in the abdominal cavity or the method of anesthesia. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Trials under consideration were evaluated for methodological quality and appropriateness for inclusion. Nine relevant studies were included and the results were stratified in five groups: tubal ring versus clip, modified Pomeroy versus electrocoagulation, tubal ring versus electrocoagulation, modified Pomeroy versus Filshie clip and Hulka versus Filshie clip. Results are reported as odds ratio for dichotomous outcomes and weighted mean differences for continuous outcomes. MAIN RESULTS: Tubal ring versus clip: Minor morbidity was higher in the ring group (Peto OR 2.15; 95% CI 1.22, 3.78). Technical difficulties were found less frequent in the clip group ( Peto OR 3.87; 95% CI 1.90, 7.89). There was no difference in failure rates between the two groups (Peto OR 0.70; 95% CI 0.28, 1.76). Pomeroy versus electrocoagulation: Women undergoing modified Pomeroy technique had higher major morbidity than with electrocoagulation technique (Peto OR 2.87; 95% CI 1.13, 7.25). Postoperative pain was more frequent in the Pomeroy group (Peto OR 3.85; 95% CI 2.91, 5.10). Tubal ring versus electrocoagulation: Post operative pain was more frequently reported in the tubal ring group. No pregnancies were reported. Pomeroy versus Filshie clip: In the trial comparing the two interventions only one pregnancy was reported in the Pomeroy group after follow-up for 24 months. No differences were found when comparing Hulka versus Filshie clip in the only study that compared these two devices (Toplis 1988). REVIEWER'S CONCLUSIONS: Electrocoagulation was associated with less morbidity when compared with tubal ring and other methods. However the risk of burns to the small bowel might be a serious criticism of the approach. The small sample size and the relative short period of follow-up in these studies limited the power to show clinical or statistical differences for rare outcomes such as failure rates. Aspects such as training, costs and maintenance of the equipment may be important factors in deciding which method to choose.

Minilaparotomy and endoscopic techniques for tubal sterilisation.

BACKGROUND: Worldwide, the most commonly used method of fertility regulation is tubal sterilisation. In developed countries sterilisation is generally performed by laparoscopy rather than by minilaparotomy, based on the belief that this approach is both safe and effective. In developing countries, where the resources are limited for the purchase and maintenance of the more sophisticated laparoscopic equipment, minilaparotomy may still be the most common approach. In both resource poor and industrialised countries using the technique with the greatest effectiveness and safety, together with the least costs, is extremely important. Though both methods are widely used, the advantages and disadvantages of laparoscopic sterilisation compared to mini-laparotomy have not been systematically evaluated. The ideal method would be one which is highly effective, economical, able to be performed on an outpatient basis, allowing rapid resumption of normal activity, producing a minimal or invisible scar and having a potential for reversibility. This review considers the methods to enter the abdominal cavity through the abdominal wall, either by minilaparotomy, laparoscopy or culdoscopy regardless of the technique used for tubal sterilisation. OBJECTIVES: To evaluate laparoscopic tubal sterilisation, as compared to minilaparotomy in terms of operative morbidity and mortality. Trials comparing laparoscopy or minilaparotomy with culdoscopy were also included in the review. Different methods used to interrupt tubal patency (excision, occlusion and coagulation) and comparison of different forms of anaesthesia will be considered in different reviews. SEARCH STRATEGY: Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) have been identified by using the search strategy of the Cochrane Collaboration. The Cochrane Controlled Trials Register was last searched in 1999 (Cochrane Library Issue 4, 1999). Reference lists of identified trials have been searched. SELECTION CRITERIA: All randomised controlled trials comparing laparoscopy, minilaparotomy and/or culdoscopy for tubal sterilisation. Except in one trial [Taner 1994] where 4 women underwent curettage at the same time, all women requested tubal sterilisation as an interval procedure. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Trials under consideration were evaluated for methodological quality and appropriateness for inclusion. Data were extracted independently by the reviewers. Results are reported as odds ratio for dichotomous outcomes and weighted mean differences for continuous outcomes. MAIN RESULTS: Minilaparotomy vs laparoscopy: There was no difference in major morbidity between the 2 groups. Minor morbidity was significantly less in the laparoscopy group (Peto OR 1.89; 95% CI 1.38, 2.59). Duration of operation was about 5 minutes shorter in the laparoscopy group (WMD 5.34; 95% CI 4.52, 6.16). Minilaparotomy vs culdoscopy: Women undergoing culdoscopy had more major morbidity than women for whom minilaparotomy was performed (Peto OR 0.14; 95% CI 0.02, 0.98). Duration of operation was about 5 minutes shorter in women undergoing culdoscopy (WMD 4.91; 95% CI 3.82, 6.01). Laparoscopy vs culdoscopy: In the one trial comparing the two interventions there were no significant differences between the groups with regard to major morbidity. Significantly more women suffered from minor morbidities in the culdoscopy group compared to the laparoscopy group (Peto OR 0.20; 95% CI 0.05, 0.77). REVIEWER'S CONCLUSIONS: Major morbidity seems to be a rare outcome for both, laparoscopy and minilaparotomy. The included studies had limited power to demonstrate significant differences especially for the relatively rare but potentially serious outcomes. Personal preference of the woman and/or of the surgeon can guide the choice of technique. Practical aspects (e.g. cost, maintenance, and sterilisation of the instruments) must be taken into account before implementing the more sophisticated endoscopic techniques in settings with limited resources. Culdoscopy is not recommended as it carries a higher complication rate.

Piracetam for fetal distress in labour.

BACKGROUND: Piracetam is thought to promote the metabolism of brain cells when they are hypoxic. It has been used to prevent adverse effects of fetal distress. OBJECTIVES: The objective of this review was to assess the effects of piracetam for suspected fetal distress in labour on method of delivery and perinatal morbidity. SEARCH STRATEGY: The Cochrane Pregnancy and Childbirth Group trials register and the Cochrane Controlled Trials Register (The Cochrane Library Issue 3, 2001) were searched. Date of last search: September 2001. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised trials of piracetam compared with placebo or no treatment for suspected fetal distress in labour. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Both reviewers assessed eligibility and trial quality. MAIN RESULTS: One study of 96 women was included. Piracetam compared with placebo was associated with a trend to reduced need for caesarean section (relative risk 0.57, 95% confidence interval 0.32 to 1.03). There were no statistically significant differences in relative risk between the piracetam and placebo group for neonatal morbidity (measured by neonatal respiratory distress) or Apgar score. REVIEWER'S CONCLUSIONS: There is not enough evidence to evaluate the use of piracetam for fetal distress in labour.

Vitamin A supplementation during pregnancy.

BACKGROUND: Vitamin A supplements have been recommended in pregnancy to improve outcomes that include maternal mortality and morbidity. OBJECTIVES: To review the effectiveness of vitamin A supplementation during pregnancy, alone or in combination with other supplements, on maternal and newborn clinical and laboratory outcomes. SEARCH STRATEGY: We searched the Cochrane Pregnancy and Childbirth Group's specialised register of controlled trials (April 2002) and the Cochrane Controlled Trials Register (The Cochrane Library Issue 1, 2002). SELECTION CRITERIA: All randomised or quasi-randomised trials evaluating the effect of vitamin A supplementation in pregnant women. The types of intervention included vitamin A supplementation alone or in combination with other micro-nutrients. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: We assessed trials for methodological quality using the standard Cochrane criteria of adequacy of concealment. At least two reviewers independently assessed the trials for inclusion and extracted data. We collected information on blinding, loss to follow-up, setting, number of women, exclusion after randomisation and follow-up as well as supplementation type, dose and frequency. The outcomes we sought included maternal and neonatal clinical and laboratory outcomes. MAIN RESULTS: Five trials involving 23,426 women were included. Because the trials were heterogeneous with regard to type of supplement given, duration of supplement use and outcomes measured, pooled results using meta analysis could not be performed. One large population based trial in Nepal showed a possible beneficial effect on maternal mortality after weekly vitamin A supplements. In this study a reduction was noted in all cause maternal mortality up to 12 weeks postpartum with Vitamin A supplementation (RR 0.60, 95% CI 0.37-0.97). Night-blindness was assessed in a nested case-control study within this trial and found to be reduced but not eliminated. Three trials examined the effect of vitamin A supplementation on haemoglobin levels. The trial from Indonesia showed a beneficial effect in women who were anaemic ([Hb] <11.0 g/dl). After supplementation, the proportion of women who became non-anaemic was 35% in the Vitamin A supplemented group, 68% in the iron-supplemented group, 97% in the group supplemented with both Vitamin A and iron and 16% in the placebo group. The two trials from Malawi did not corroborate these positive findings. REVIEWER'S CONCLUSIONS: Although the two trials from Nepal and Indonesia suggested beneficial effects of vitamin A supplementation, further trials are needed to determine whether vitamin A supplements can reduce maternal mortality and morbidity and by what mechanism.

Techniques for the interruption of tubal patency for female sterilisation.

BACKGROUND: Female sterilization is the most popular contraceptive method worldwide. Several techniques are described in the literature, however only few of them are commonly used and properly evaluated. OBJECTIVES: To compare the different tubal occlusion techniques in terms of major and minor morbidity, failure rates (pregnancies), technical failures and difficulties and women's and surgeons' views. SEARCH STRATEGY: The Cochrane Controlled Trials Register has been searched. A search of the reference lists of identified trials was performed. An additional MEDLINE search was done using an Internet search service Pub Med. SELECTION CRITERIA: All randomized controlled trials comparing different techniques for tubal sterilization, regardless of the way of entry in the abdominal cavity or the method of anesthesia. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Trials under consideration were evaluated for methodological quality and appropriateness for inclusion. Nine relevant studies were included and the results were stratified in five groups: tubal ring versus clip, modified Pomeroy versus electrocoagulation, tubal ring versus electrocoagulation, modified Pomeroy versus Filshie clip and Hulka versus Filshie clip. Results are reported as odds ratio for dichotomous outcomes and weighted mean differences for continuous outcomes. MAIN RESULTS: Tubal ring versus clip: Minor morbidity was higher in the ring group (Peto OR 2.15; 95% CI 1.22, 3.78). Technical difficulties were found less frequent in the clip group ( Peto OR 3.87; 95% CI 1.90, 7.89). There was no difference in failure rates between the two groups (Peto OR 0.70; 95% CI 0.28, 1.76). Pomeroy versus electrocoagulation: Women undergoing modified Pomeroy technique had higher major morbidity than with electrocoagulation technique (Peto OR 2.87; 95% CI 1.13, 7.25). Postoperative pain was more frequent in the Pomeroy group (Peto OR 3.85; 95% CI 2.91, 5.10). Tubal ring versus electrocoagulation: Post operative pain was more frequently reported in the tubal ring group. No pregnancies were reported. Pomeroy versus Filshie clip: In the trial comparing the two interventions only one pregnancy was reported in the Pomeroy group after follow-up for 24 months. No differences were found when comparing Hulka versus Filshie clip in the only study that compared these two devices (Toplis 1988). REVIEWER'S CONCLUSIONS: Electrocoagulation was associated with less morbidity when compared with tubal ring and other methods. However the risk of burns to the small bowel might be a serious criticism of the approach. The small sample size and the relative short period of follow-up in these studies limited the power to show clinical or statistical differences for rare outcomes such as failure rates. Aspects such as training, costs and maintenance of the equipment may be important factors in deciding which method to choose.

Medical versus surgical methods for first trimester termination of pregnancy.

BACKGROUND: Induced abortions are very commonly practiced interventions worldwide. A variety of medical abortion methods have been introduced during the last decade in addition to existing surgical methods. In this review we systematically searched for and combined all evidence from randomised controlled trials comparing surgical with medical abortion. OBJECTIVES: To evaluate medical methods in comparison to surgical methods for first-trimester abortion with respect to efficacy, side effects and acceptability. SEARCH STRATEGY: The Cochrane Controlled Trials Register, MEDLINE (with the Cochrane 3-stage search strategy)(1966-2000) and Popline (1970-2000) were systematically searched. There were no language preferences in searching. Reference lists of retrieved papers were searched. Experts in WHO/HRP were contacted. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised trials of any surgical abortion method compared with any medical abortion method in the first trimester. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Trial quality was assessed and data extraction was made independently by two reviewers. MAIN RESULTS: Five studies mostly with small sample sizes, comparing 4 different interventions (prostaglandins alone, mifepristone alone, and mifepristone/misoprostol and methotrexate/misoprostol versus vacuum aspiration) were included. Results are sometimes based on one trial only. Prostaglandins vs vacuum aspiration: the rate of abortions not completed with the intended method was statistically significant higher in the prostaglandin group (2.7, 95% CI 1.1 to 6.8) compared to surgery. There are no data on the most commonly medical (mifepristone/misoprostol) and surgical abortion available to be included in the review. Duration of bleeding was longer in the medical abortion groups compared to vacuum aspiration. There was only one major complication (uterine perforation) in one trial in the surgical group. There was no difference between the groups for ongoing pregnancies at the time of follow-up or pelvic infections. No data on acceptability, side effects or women's satisfaction with the procedure were available for inclusion in the review. REVIEWER'S CONCLUSIONS: The results are derived from small trials. Prostaglandins used alone seems to be less effective and more painful compared to surgical first-trimester abortion. However, there is inadequate evidence to comment on the acceptability and side effects of medical compared to surgical first-trimester abortions. There is a need for trials to address the efficacy of currently used methods and women's preferences more reliably.

Surgical methods for first trimester termination of pregnancy.

BACKGROUND: Different surgical methods for termination of pregnancy have evolved over the years: Dilatation and curettage, power operated vacuum aspiration, manual vacuum aspiration (MVA) or hysterotomy. Local or general anaesthesia is used for all methods. Preabortion medical or mechanical cervical preparation may reduce the incidence of cervical or uterine injuries. OBJECTIVES: To compare the safety and efficacy of different surgical methods for first trimester abortion. SEARCH STRATEGY: The Cochrane Controlled Trials Register has been searched. A search of the reference lists of identified trials was performed. An additional MEDLINE search was done using the Internet search service Pub Med. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised controlled trials comparing different surgical methods for first trimester abortion were eligible. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Trials under consideration were evaluated for methodological quality and appropriateness for inclusion. Three trials were included, resulting in 2 comparisons: vacuum aspiration versus dilatation and curettage and flexible versus rigid vacuum aspiration cannula. Results are reported as odds ratio for dichotomous data and weighted mean differences for continuous data. MAIN RESULTS: There were no reports of maternal deaths and cases of uterine perforation in the trials identified. Vacuum aspiration versus dilatation and curettage: There were no statistically significant differences for excessive blood loss, blood transfusion, febrile morbidity, incomplete or repeat uterine evacuation procedure, re-hospitalisation, post operative abdominal pain or therapeutic antibiotic use. Duration of operation was statistically significantly shorter with vacuum aspiration compared to D&C in both gestational age subgroups : < 9 weeks: weighted mean difference (WMD) -1.84 minutes, 95% confidence interval (CI) [-2.542,-1.138]; =/> 9 weeks: WMD -0.600 minutes, 95% CI [-1.166,-0.034]). Flexible versus rigid vacuum aspiration cannula: There were no statistically significant differences with regard to cervical injuries, febrile morbidity, blood transfusion, therapeutic antibiotic use, or incomplete or repeat uterine evacuation procedure. REVIEWER'S CONCLUSIONS: The included studies do not indicate a preference of providers for one or the other method. The trials included are small and lack power to to present meaningful differences for rare outcomes between the groups. outcomes such as women's satisfaction, the need for pain relief or surgeons preference for the instrument have been inadequately addressed. No data outcomes, such as fertility after surgical abortion, are available.