Search

Introduction: Climate change increases not only the frequency, intensity and duration of extreme heat events but also annual temperatures globally, resulting in many negative health effects, including harmful effects on pregnancy and pregnancy outcomes. As temperatures continue to increase precipitously, there is a growing need to understand the underlying biological pathways of this association. This systematic review will focus on maternal, placental and fetal changes that occur in pregnancy due to environmental heat stress exposure, in order to identify the evidence-based pathways that play a role in this association., Methods and Analysis: We will follow the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines. We will search PubMed and Ovid Embase databases from inception using tested and validated search algorithms. Inclusion of any studies that involve pregnant women and have measured environmental heat stress exposure and either maternal, placental or fetal physiological or biochemical changes and are available in English. Modelling studies or those with only animals will be excluded. The risk of bias will be assessed using the Office of Health Assessment and Translation tool. Abstract screening, data extraction and risk of bias assessment will be conducted by two independent reviewers.Environmental parameters will be reported for each study and where possible these will be combined to calculate a heat stress indicator to allow comparison of exposure between studies. A narrative synthesis will be presented following standard guidelines. Where outcome measures have at least two levels of exposure, we will conduct a dose-response meta-analysis should there be at least three studies with the same outcome. A random effects meta-analysis will be conducted where at least three studies give the same outcome., Ethics and Dissemination: This systematic review and meta-analysis does not require ethical approval. Dissemination will be through peer-reviewed journal publication and presentation at international conferences/interest groups., Prospero Registration Number: CRD42024511153., Competing Interests: Competing interests: None declared., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2024. Re-use permitted under CC BY. Published by BMJ.)

Objective: Accurate reporting of birth outcomes in low-income and middle-income countries (LMICs) is essential. Mobile health (mHealth) tools have been proposed as a replacement for conventional paper-based registers. mHealth could provide timely data for individual facilities and health departments, as well as capture deliveries outside facilities. This scoping review evaluates which mHealth tools have been reported to birth outcomes in the delivering room in LMICs and documents their reported advantages and drawbacks., Design: A scoping review following Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses and Joanna Briggs Institute guidelines for scoping reviews and the mHealth evidence reporting and assessment checklist for evaluating mHealth interventions., Data Sources: PubMed, CINAHL and Global Health were searched for records until 3 February 2022 with no earliest date limit., Eligibility Criteria: Studies were included where healthcare workers used mHealth tools in LMICs to record birth outcomes. Exclusion criteria included mHealth not being used at the point of delivery, non-peer reviewed literature and studies not written in English., Data Extraction and Synthesis: Two independent reviewers screened studies and extracted data. Common themes among studies were identified., Results: 640 records were screened, 21 of which met the inclusion criteria, describing 15 different mHealth tools. We identified six themes: (1) digital tools for labour monitoring (8 studies); (2) digital data collection of specific birth outcomes (3 studies); (3) digital technologies used in community settings (6 studies); (4) attitudes of healthcare workers (10 studies); (5) paper versus electronic data collection (3 studies) and (6) infrastructure, interoperability and sustainability (8 studies)., Conclusion: Several mHealth technologies are reported to have the capability to record birth outcomes at delivery, but none were identified that were designed solely for that purpose. Use of digital delivery registers appears feasible and acceptable to healthcare workers, but definitive evaluations are lacking. Further assessment of the sustainability of technologies and their ability to integrate with existing health information systems is needed., Competing Interests: Competing interests: None declared., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2022. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)

Introduction: Physical activity (PA) interventions have a promising role in the management of gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM). Digital technologies can support PA at scale and remotely. The protocol describes a study designed to determine the feasibility and acceptability of a complex intervention; known as +Stay Active. +Stay Active combines motivational interviewing with a bespoke behaviour change informed smartphone application (Stay-Active) to augment PA levels in women with GDM., Methods and Analysis: This is a non-randomised feasibility study using a mixed methods approach. Participants will be recruited from the GDM antenatal clinic at the Women Centre, John Radcliffe Hospital, Oxford. Following baseline assessments (visit 1) including self-reported and device determined PA assessment (wearing a wrist accelerometer), women will be invited to participate in an online motivational interview, then download and use the Stay-Active app (Android or iOS) (visit 2). Women will have access to Stay-Active until 36 weeks gestation, when engagement and PA levels will be reassessed (visit 3). The target sample size is 60 women. Primary outcomes are recruitment and retention rates, compliance and assessment of participant engagement and acceptability with the intervention. Secondary outcomes are assessment of blood glucose control, self-reported and device determined assessment of PA, usage and structured feedback of participant's attitudes to +Stay Active, assessment of health costs and description of maternal and neonatal outcomes. This study will provide key insights into this complex intervention regarding engagement in smartphone technology and the wearing of accelerometers. These data will inform the development of a randomised controlled trial with refinements to intervention implementation., Ethics and Dissemination: The study has received a favourable opinion from South Central-Hampshire B Research Ethics Committee; REC reference: 20/SC/0342. Written informed consent will be obtained from all participants. Findings will be disseminated through peer-reviewed journals, conferences and seminar presentations., Trial Registration Number: ISRCTN11366562., Competing Interests: Competing interests: LHM, JEH, MM, YK, RS, NW and JB are supported by the NIHR Oxford Biomedical Research Centre. LHM is a part-time employee of EMIS Group plc. LT is a Non-Executive Director, part-time employee and shareholder of Sensyne Health plc. JEH is funded by a UKRI Future Leaders fellowship. The remaining authors have no disclosures of interest and there are no other conflicts to declare., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2022. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)

Introduction: Previous trials of dietary interventions to prevent gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM) have yielded only limited success. Low-carbohydrate diets have shown promise for the treatment of type 2 diabetes, but there is no evidence to support their use in pregnancy. The aim of this study is to explore the feasibility of a moderately reduced-carbohydrate dietary intervention delivered from mid-pregnancy alongside routine antenatal care., Methods and Analysis: This is a feasibility randomised controlled trial (RCT) with embedded qualitative study. Sixty women who are pregnant <20 weeks' gestation, with body mass index ≥30 kg/m 2 at their antenatal booking appointment, will be randomised 2:1 intervention or control (usual care) and followed up until delivery. The intervention is a moderately reduced-carbohydrate diet (~130-150 g total carbohydrate/day), designed to be delivered alongside routine antenatal appointments. Primary outcomes are measures of adoption of the diet and retention of participants. Secondary outcomes include incidence of GDM, change in markers of glycaemic control, gestational weight gain, total carbohydrate and energy intake. Process outcomes will examine resources and management issues. Exploratory outcomes include further dietary changes, quality of life, maternal and neonatal outcomes, and qualitative measures., Ethics and Dissemination: This trial was reviewed and approved by the South-Central Oxford B Research Ethics Committee NHS National Research Ethics Committee and the Health Research Authority (Reference: 20/SC/0442). The study results will inform whether to progress to a full-scale RCT to test the clinical effectiveness of the RECORD programme to prevent GDM in women at high risk. The findings will be published in peer-reviewed journals and presented at conferences., Trial Registration Number: ISRCTN16235884., Competing Interests: Competing interests: LM is a part-time employee of EMIS Group plc., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2022. Re-use permitted under CC BY. Published by BMJ.)

Introduction: The prevalence of gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM) is rising in the UK. Good glycaemic control improves maternal and neonatal outcomes. Frequent clinical review of patients with GDM by healthcare professionals is required owing to the rapidly changing physiology of pregnancy and its unpredictable course. Novel technologies that allow home blood glucose (BG) monitoring with results transmitted in real time to a healthcare professional have the potential to deliver good-quality healthcare to women more conveniently and at a lower cost to the patient and the healthcare provider compared to the conventional face-to-face or telephone-based consultation. We have developed an integrated GDm-health management system and aim to test the impact of using this system on maternal glycaemic control, costs, patient satisfaction and maternal and neonatal outcomes compared to standard clinic care in a single large publicly funded (National Health Service (NHS)) maternity unit., Methods and Analysis: Women with confirmed gestational diabetes in a current pregnancy are individually randomised to either the GDm-health system and half the normal clinic visits or normal clinic care. Primary outcome is mean BG in each group from recruitment to delivery calculated, with adjustments made for number of BG measurements, proportion of preprandial and postprandial readings and length of time in study, and compared between the groups. The secondary objective will be to compare the two groups for compliance to the allocated BG monitoring regime, maternal and neonatal outcomes, glycaemic control using glycated haemoglobin (HbA1c) and other BG metrics, and patient attitudes to care assessed using a questionnaire and resource use., Ethics and Dissemination: Thresholds for treatment, dietary advice and clinical management are the same in both groups. The results of the study will be published in a peer-reviewed journal and disseminated electronically and in print., Trial Registration Number: NCT01916694; Pre-results., (Published by the BMJ Publishing Group Limited. For permission to use (where not already granted under a licence) please go to http://www.bmj.com/company/products-services/rights-and-licensing/)