Search

BackgroundVitamin D deficiency is a widespread issue globally, resulting in increased use of vitamin D supplements. However, it is unclear whether intermittent (weekly or monthly) vitamin D supplementation is as effective as daily supplementation in improving circulating 25-hydroxyvitamin D [25(OH)D] levels.MethodsThree databases including Medline, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Library were systematically searched up to 10 November 2020. The risk of bias was evaluated according to Cochrane Collaboration’s tool for rating methodological quality assessment. Direct and indirect comparisons between interventions and controls were performed by a Bayesian network meta-analysis (NMA), where the mean difference (MD) and its 95% confidence interval (CI) were used to indicate the efficacy.ResultsThis NMA analysis included 116 RCTs with a total of 11,376 participants. Generally, we observed that 25(OH)D concentrations were significantly elevated regardless of vitamin D supplementation frequency. Although the findings of SUCRA indicated that daily vitamin D supplementation had a higher rank value than intermittent supplementation when the supplement dosage was similar, no statistically significant pooled mean differences of 25(OH)D concentration were noted between the daily supplementation group and intermittent supplementation group. Additionally, weekly supplementation with a total of 600,000 IU vitamin D supplementation during 3 months had the best efficacy in elevating 25(OH)D concentration (pooled MD = 63 nmol/L, 95%CI: 49–77). To achieve optimal 25(OH)D concentration (>75 nmol/L), we recommend 60,000 IU vitamin D supplementation monthly (~2,000 IU/day).ConclusionThe efficacy of intermittent vitamin D supplementation was similar to daily supplementation. Coupled with its convenience, the frequency and dosage of intermittent vitamin D supplements were recommended to reach the optimal 25(OH)D level.Systematic review registration:https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?RecordID=257257, PROSPERO CRD42021257257.

The main source of vitamin D results from skin sunlight exposure. Vitamin D deficiency (VDD) is linked to several adverse events during pregnancy. While performing a cross-sectional study with 886 pregnant women in Elda (Spain) from September 2019 to July 2020 to determine the association of VDD with gestational diabetes mellitus in relation to body mass index, a strict lockdown (SL) due to the COVID-19 pandemic was declared from 15 March 2020 to 15 May 2020. To determine if VDD prevalence in the local population of pregnant women was influenced by SL, a retrospective cross-sectional study was conducted to estimate the prevalence odds ratio (POR) for the association of VDD and SL. A crude logistic regression model was calculated, and then further adjusted by the biweekly measured vitamin D-specific UVB dose in our geographical area. The POR during SL was 4.0 (95%CI = 2.7–5.7), with a VDD prevalence of 77.8% in the quarantine period. Our results revealed that VDD prevalence in pregnant women was influenced by SL. This valuable information could guide us in future if public officials order the population to stay indoors for any given reason.

A relationship between vitamin D deficiency (VDD) and gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM) has been described. Considering that GDM prevalence depends on body mass index (BMI), our main objective was to determine if VDD is associated with GDM, independent of BMI. A cross-sectional study with 886 pregnant women was conducted in Elda (Spain) from September 2019 to June 2020. To assess the association, Poisson regression models with robust variance were used to estimate the prevalence ratio (PR). The observed GDM prevalence was 10.5%, while the VDD prevalence was 55.5%. In the crude model, both VDD and obesity were associated with GDM, but in the adjusted model, only VDD was statistically significant (PR = 1.635, p = 0.038). A secondary event analysis did not detect differences in VDD, but BMI yielded a higher frequency of births by cesarean section and newborns with a >90 percentile weight in the obesity group. In conclusion, VDD is associated with GDM, independent of BMI. Future longitudinal studies could provide information on causality.

Vitamin D’s function in the development of gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM) is not consistent in the literature. We examined the association between maternal plasma 25(OH)D concentration and GDM risk. A national cross-sectional study (1497 pregnant women) was conducted between 2017 and 2019 across Taiwan. Blood samples were drawn at recruitment to assess 25(OH)D concentrations, including vitamin D deficiency (VDD) (p = 0.144). However, subjects with VDD had a significantly greater risk of GDM (AOR = 2.26, p = 0.041), but not in those with vitamin D insufficiency (AOR = 1.20, p = 0.655). Furthermore, cubic piecewise spline regression was used to explore the relationship between five-unit intervals of 25(OH)D and the predicted probability of GDM. As the proportion of GDM increased for low 25(OH)D concentrations, it decreased at moderate concentrations and increased again at higher concentrations. These findings revealed a nonlinear relationship between 25(OH)D and GDM risk. VDD would be risky for GDM occurrence.