Search

BACKGROUND: Surgical options for treating stress urinary incontinence (SUI) are usually explored after conservative interventions have failed. Surgeries fall into two categories: traditional techniques (open surgery) and minimally invasive procedures, such as laparoscopic procedures, midurethral sling and injections with urethral bulking agents. Postsurgery infections, such as infections of the surgical site or urinary tract, are common complications. To minimise the risk of postoperative bacterial infections, prophylactic antibiotics may be given before or during surgery. OBJECTIVES: To assess the effects of prophylactic antibiotics for preventing infection following continence surgery in women with stress urinary incontinence. SEARCH METHODS: We searched the Cochrane Incontinence Specialised Register, which contains trials identified from CENTRAL, MEDLINE, MEDLINE In‐Process, MEDLINE Epub Ahead of Print, CINAHL, ClinicalTrials.gov and WHO ICTRP; and handsearched journals and conference proceedings to 18 March 2021. We also searched the reference lists of relevant articles. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and quasi‐RCTs assessing prophylactic antibiotics in women undergoing continence surgery to treat SUI. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors selected potentially eligible trials, extracted data and assessed risk of bias. We expressed results as risk ratios (RR) for dichotomous outcomes and as mean differences (MD) for continuous outcomes, both with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). We assessed the certainty of evidence using the GRADE approach. MAIN RESULTS: We identified one quasi‐RCT and two RCTs, involving a total of 390 women. One study performed retropubic urethropexy surgery requiring a transverse suprapubic incision, while the other two studies performed midurethral sling surgery. It should be noted that none of the included studies clearly specified the timing of outcome assessment. We are very uncertain whether prophylactic antibiotics (cefazolin) have an effect on surgical site infections (RR 0.56, 95% CI 0.03 to 12.35; 2 studies, 85 women; very low‐certainty evidence) or urinary tract infections or bacteriuria (RR 0.84, 95% CI 0.05 to 13.24; 2 studies, 85 women; very low‐certainty evidence). The effect of prophylactic antibiotics (cefazolin) on febrile morbidity is also uncertain (RR 0.08, 95% CI 0.00 to 1.29; 2 studies, 85 women; very low‐certainty evidence). We are very uncertain whether prophylactic antibiotics (cefazolin) have any effect on mesh exposure (RR 0.32, 95% CI 0.01 to 7.61; 1 study, 59 women; very low‐certainty evidence). None of the three included studies described the assessment of adverse events from antibiotic use, sepsis or bacteraemia in their reports. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Only limited data are available from the three included studies and, overall, the certainty of evidence was very low. Moreover, the three included studies evaluated different surgical procedures and dosages of antibiotic administration. Thus, there is insufficient evidence to support or refute the use of prophylactic antibiotics to prevent infection following anti‐incontinence surgery. In addition, there were no data regarding adverse effects of prophylactic antibiotics. More RCTs are required.

Background As a retained placenta is a potential life-threatening obstetrical complication, effective and timely management is important. The estimated mortality rates from a retained placenta in developing countries range from 3% to 9%. One possible factor contributing to the high mortality rates is a delay in initiating manual removal of the placenta. Effective anaesthesia or analgesia during this procedure will provide adequate uterine relaxation and pain control, enabling it to be carried out effectively. Objectives To assess the effectiveness and safety of general, regional, and local anaesthesia or analgesia during manual removal of a retained placenta. Search methods We searched Cochrane Pregnancy and Childbirth's Trials Register, ClinicalTrials.gov and the World Health Organization's International Clinical Trials Registry Platform to 30 September 2019, and reference lists of retrieved studies. Selection criteria We sought randomised controlled trials (RCTs), quasi-randomised controlled trials, and cluster-randomised trials that compared different methods of preoperative or intraoperative anaesthetic or analgesic, administered during the manual removal of a retained placenta. Data collection and analysis Two review authors independently assessed the study reports for inclusion, and risk of bias, extracted data and checked them for accuracy. We followed standard Cochrane methodology. Main results We identified only one randomised controlled trial (N = 30 women) that evaluated the effect of paracervical block on women undergoing manual removal of a retained placenta compared with intravenous pethidine and diazepam. The study was conducted in a hospital in Papua New Guinea. The study was at high risk of bias of performance bias and detection bias, low risk of attrition bias, and an unclear risk of selection bias, reporting bias, and other bias. The included study did not measure this review's primary outcomes of pain intensity and adverse events. The study reported that there were no women, in either group, who experienced an estimated postpartum blood loss of more than 500 mL. We are uncertain about the providers' satisfaction with the procedure, defined as their perception of achieving good pain relief during the procedure (risk ratio (RR) 1.50, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.71 to 3.16, one study, 30 women; very low quality evidence). We are also uncertain about the women's satisfaction with the procedure, defined as their perception of achieving good pain relief during the procedure (RR 0.82, 95% CI 0.49 to 1.37; one study, 30 women; very low quality evidence). The included study did not report on any of our other outcomes of interest. Authors' conclusions There is insufficient evidence from one small study to evaluate the effectiveness and safety of anaesthesia or analgesia during the manual removal of a retained placenta. The quality of the available evidence was very low. We downgraded based on issues of limitations in study design (risk of bias) and imprecision (single study with small sample size, few or no events, and wide confidence intervals). There is a need for well-designed, multi-centre, randomised, controlled trials to evaluate the effectiveness and safety of different types of anaesthesia and analgesia during manual removal of a retained placenta. These studies could report on the important outcomes outlined in this review.

Protocol withdrawn from Issue 3, 2020. Review could not be completed.

Summary Background Preterm birth is the leading cause of death in children younger than 5 years worldwide. Although preterm survival rates have increased in high-income countries, preterm newborns still die because of a lack of adequate newborn care in many low-income and middle-income countries. We estimated global, regional, and national rates of preterm birth in 2014, with trends over time for some selected countries. Methods We systematically searched for data on preterm birth for 194 WHO Member States from 1990 to 2014 in databases of national civil registration and vital statistics (CRVS). We also searched for population-representative surveys and research studies for countries with no or limited CRVS data. For 38 countries with high-quality data for preterm births in 2014, data are reported directly. For countries with at least three data points between 1990 and 2014, we used a linear mixed regression model to estimate preterm birth rates. We also calculated regional and global estimates of preterm birth for 2014. Findings We identified 1241 data points across 107 countries. The estimated global preterm birth rate for 2014 was 10·6% (uncertainty interval 9·0–12·0), equating to an estimated 14·84 million (12·65 million–16·73 million) live preterm births in 2014. 12· 0 million (81·1%) of these preterm births occurred in Asia and sub-Saharan Africa. Regional preterm birth rates for 2014 ranged from 13·4% (6·3–30·9) in North Africa to 8·7% (6·3–13·3) in Europe. India, China, Nigeria, Bangladesh, and Indonesia accounted for 57·9 million (41×4%) of 139·9 million livebirths and 6·6 million (44×6%) of preterm births globally in 2014. Of the 38 countries with high-quality data, preterm birth rates have increased since 2000 in 26 countries and decreased in 12 countries. Globally, we estimated that the preterm birth rate was 9×8% (8×3–10×9) in 2000, and 10×6% (9×0–12×0) in 2014. Interpretation Preterm birth remains a crucial issue in child mortality and improving quality of maternal and newborn care. To better understand the epidemiology of preterm birth, the quality and volume of data needs to be improved, including standardisation of definitions, measurement, and reporting. Funding WHO and the March of Dimes.

Associations between anaesthetic techniques and pregnancy outcomes were assessed among 129,742 pregnancies delivered by caesarean section (CS) in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) using two WHO databases. Anaesthesia was categorized as general anaesthesia (GA) and neuraxial anaesthesia (NA). Outcomes included maternal death (MD), maternal near miss (MNM), severe maternal outcome (SMO), intensive care unit (ICU) admission, early neonatal death (END), neonatal near miss (NNM), severe neonatal outcome (SNO), Apgar score

Background The World Health Organization (WHO) recommends induction of labour (IOL) for women who have reached 41 completed weeks of pregnancy without spontaneous onset of labour. Many women with prolonged pregnancy and/or their clinicians elect not to induce, and chose either elective caesarean section (ECS) or expectant management (EM). This study intended to assess pregnancy outcomes of IOL, ECS and EM at and beyond 41 completed weeks. Methods This study is a secondary analysis of the WHO Global Survey (WHOGS) and the WHO Multi-country Survey (WHOMCS) conducted in Africa, Asia, Latin America and the Middle East. There were 33,003 women with low risk singleton pregnancies at ≥41 completed weeks from 292 facilities in 21 countries. Multilevel logistic regression model was used to assess associations of different management groups with each pregnancy outcome accounted for hierarchical survey design. The results were presented by adjusted odds ratios (aORs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) after adjusting for age, education, marital status, parity, previous caesarean section (CS), birth weight, and facility capacity index score. Results The prevalence of prolonged pregnancy at facility setting in WHOGS, WHOMCS and combined databases were 7.9%, 7.5% and 7.7% respectively. Regarding to maternal adverse outcomes, EM was significantly associated with decreased risk of CS rate consistently in both databases i.e. (aOR0.76; 95% CI: 0.66–0.87) in WHOGS, (aOR0.67; 95% CI: 0.59–0.76) in WHOMCS and (aOR0.70; 95% CI: 0.64–0.77) in combined database, compared to IOL. Regarding the adverse perinatal outcomes, ECS was significantly associated with increased risks of neonatal intensive care unit admission (aOR1.76; 95% CI: 1.28–2.42) in WHOMCS and (aOR1.51; 95% CI: 1.19–1.92) in combined database compared to IOL but not significant in WHOGS database. Conclusions Compared to IOL, ECS significantly increased risk of NICU admission while EM was significantly associated with decreased risk of CS. ECS should not be recommended for women at 41 completed weeks of pregnancy. However, the choice between IOL and EM should be cautiously considered since the available evidences are still quite limited.

Secondary analysis of World Health Organization Multicountry Survey on Maternal and Newborn Health (WHOMCS) was undertaken among 173,124 multiparous women to assess the association between previous caesarean sections (CS) and pregnancy outcomes. Maternal outcomes included maternal near miss (MNM), maternal death (MD), severe maternal outcomes (SMO), abnormal placentation, and uterine rupture. Neonatal outcomes were stillbirth, early neonatal death, perinatal death, neonatal near miss (NNM), neonatal intensive care unit (NICU) admission, and preterm birth. Previous CS was associated with increased risks of uterine rupture (adjusted Odds Ratio (aOR); 7.74; 95% confidence interval (CI) 5.48, 10.92); morbidly adherent placenta (aOR 2.60; 95% CI 1.98, 3.40), MNM (aOR 1.91; 95% CI 1.59, 2.28), SMO (aOR 1.80; 95% CI 1.52, 2.13), placenta previa (aOR 1.76; 95% CI 1.49, 2.07). For neonatal outcomes, previous CS was associated with increased risks of NICU admission (aOR 1.31; 95% CI 1.23, 1.39), neonatal near miss (aOR 1.19; 95% CI 1.12, 1.26), preterm birth (aOR 1.07; 95% CI 1.01, 1.14), and decreased risk of macerated stillbirth (aOR 0.80; 95% CI 0.67, 0.95). Previous CS was associated with serious morbidity in future pregnancies. However, these findings should be cautiously interpreted due to lacking data on indications of previous CS.

Background 2500 g has been used worldwide as the definition of low birthweight (LBW) for almost a century. While previous studies have used statistical approaches to define LBW cutoffs, a LBW definition using an outcome-based approach has not been evaluated. We aimed to identify an outcome-based definition of LBW for live births in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs), using data from a WHO cross-sectional survey on maternal and perinatal health outcomes in 23 countries. Methods We performed a secondary analysis of all singleton live births in the WHO Global Survey (WHOGS) on Maternal and Perinatal Health, conducted in African and Latin American countries (2004–2005) and Asian countries (2007–2008). We used a two-level logistic regression model to assess the risk of early neonatal mortality (ENM) associated with subgroups of birthweight (

BACKGROUND: Postpartum mini‐laparotomy tubal ligation (PPTL) is a contraceptive method that works by interrupting the patency of the fallopian tubes. Several methods are used for intraoperative pain relief, such as systemic administration of opioids or intraperitoneal instillation of lidocaine. OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the effectiveness of and adverse effects associated with interventions for pain relief in women undergoing PPTL. SEARCH METHODS: We searched for eligible studies published on or before 31 July 2017 in the CENTRAL Register of Studies Online, MEDLINE, Embase, PsycINFO, and CINAHL. We examined review articles and searched registers of ongoing clinical trials, citation lists of included studies, key textbooks, grey literature, and previous systematic reviews for potentially relevant studies. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included randomised controlled trials (RCT) that compared perioperative pain relief measures during PPTL. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors independently assessed the titles, abstracts, and full‐text articles of potentially relevant studies for inclusion. We extracted the data from the included studies, assessed risk of bias, and calculated and compared results. Discrepancies were resolved by discussion, or by consulting a third review author. We computed the inverse variance risk ratio (RR) with 95% confidence interval (CI) for binary outcomes, and the mean difference (MD) with 95% CI for continuous variables. MAIN RESULTS: We found only three RCTs, in which a total of 230 postpartum women participated. Most of our analyses were based on relatively small numbers of patients and studies. Overall, the certainty of evidence regarding the effectiveness of interventions was low, due to risk of bias and imprecision. We found very low‐certainty evidence regarding the safety of interventions because of risk of bias and imprecision. Two studies had unclear risk of selection bias. One study had unclear risk of reporting bias and a high risk of other bias associated with the study protocol. Women who received an intraperitoneal instillation of lidocaine experienced lower intensity intraperitoneal pain than those given a placebo (pooled MD ‐3.34, 95% CI ‐4.19 to ‐2.49, three studies, 190 participants, low‐certainty evidence), or an intramuscular injection of morphine (MD ‐4.8, 95% CI ‐6.43 to ‐3.17, one study, 40 participants, low‐certainty evidence). We found no clear difference in intraperitoneal pain between women who had an intramuscular injection of morphine added to an intraperitoneal instillation of lidocaine and those who had an intraperitoneal instillation of lidocaine alone (MD ‐0.40, 95% CI ‐1.52 to 0.72, one study, 40 participants, low‐certainty evidence). An intramuscular injection of morphine alone was not effective for intraperitoneal pain relief compared to placebo (MD 0.50, 95% CI ‐1.33 to 2.33, one study, 40 women, low‐certainty evidence). None of the studies reported any serious adverse events but the evidence was very low‐certainty. Intraperitoneal instillation of lidocaine may reduce the number of women requiring additional pain control when compared to placebo (RR 0.27, 95% CI 0.17 to 0.44, three studies, 190 women, low‐certainty evidence). AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: An intraperitoneal instillation of lidocaine during postpartum mini‐laparotomy tubal ligation before fallopian tubes were tied may offer better intraperitoneal pain control, although the evidence regarding adverse effects is uncertain. We found no clear difference in intraperitoneal pain between women who received a combination of an injection of morphine, and intraperitoneal instillation of lidocaine and those who received an intraperitoneal instillation of lidocaine alone. These results must be interpreted with caution, since the evidence overall was low to very low‐certainty.

The percentage of early neonatal mortality by 100 g interval of birthweights. The rates of ENM among 100 g intervals of these birthweights are quite similar of around 0.5% in our analysed database. (PDF 185 kb)

Many studies have been conducted to examine whether Caesarean Section (CS) or vaginal birth (VB) was optimal for better maternal and neonatal outcomes in preterm births. However, findings remain unclear. Therefore, this secondary analysis of World Health Organization Global Survey (GS) and Multi-country Survey (MCS) databases was conducted to investigate outcomes of preterm birth by mode of delivery. Our sample were women with singleton neonates (15,471 of 237 facilities from 21 countries in GS; and 15,053 of 239 facilities from 21 countries in MCS) delivered between 22 and

This is the protocol for a review and there is no abstract. The objectives are as follows: To compare the efficacy and safety of different chemotherapy regimens in children and young adults with high‐grade osteosarcoma when compared to other chemotherapeutic regimens.

BACKGROUND: Postoperative delirium (POD) and postoperative cognitive dysfunction (POCD) may complicate a patient's postoperative recovery in several ways. Monitoring of processed electroencephalogram (EEG) or evoked potential (EP) indices may prevent or minimize POD and POCD, probably through optimization of anaesthetic doses. OBJECTIVES: To assess whether the use of processed EEG or auditory evoked potential (AEP) indices (bispectral index (BIS), narcotrend index, cerebral state index, state entropy and response entropy, patient state index, index of consciousness, A‐line autoregressive index, and auditory evoked potentials (AEP index)) as guides to anaesthetic delivery can reduce the risk of POD and POCD in non‐cardiac surgical or non‐neurosurgical adult patients undergoing general anaesthesia compared with standard practice where only clinical signs are used. SEARCH METHODS: We searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase and clinical trial registry databases up to 28 March 2017. We updated this search in February 2018, but these results have not been incorporated in the review. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included randomized or quasi‐randomized controlled trials comparing any method of processed EEG or evoked potential techniques (entropy, BIS, AEP etc.) against a control group where clinical signs were used to guide doses of anaesthetics in adults aged 18 years or over undergoing general anaesthesia for non‐cardiac or non‐neurosurgical elective operations. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: We used the standard methodological procedures expected by Cochrane. Our primary outcomes were: occurrence of POD; and occurrence of POCD. Secondary outcomes included: all‐cause mortality; any postoperative complications; and postoperative length of stay. We used GRADE to assess the quality of evidence for each outcome. MAIN RESULTS: We included six randomized controlled trials (RCTs) with 2929 participants comparing processed EEG or EP indices‐guided anaesthesia with clinical signs‐guided anaesthesia. There are five ongoing studies and one study awaiting classification. Anaesthesia administration guided by the indices from a processed EEG (bispectral index) probably reduces the risk of POD within seven days after surgery with risk ratio (RR) of 0.71 (95% CI 0.59 to 0.85; number needed to treat for an additional beneficial outcome (NNTB) of 17, 95% CI 11 to 34; 2197 participants; 3 RCTs; moderate quality of evidence). Three trials also showed the lower rate of POCD at 12 weeks after surgery (RR 0.71, 95% CI 0.53 to 0.96; NNTB 38, 95% CI 21 to 289; 2051 participants; moderate‐quality evidence), but it is uncertain whether processed EEG indices reduce POCD at one week (RR 0.84, 95% CI 0.69 to 1.02; 3 trials; 1989 participants; moderate‐quality evidence), and at 52 weeks (RR 0.30, 95% CI 0.05 to 1.80; 1 trial; 59 participants; very low quality of evidence). There may be little or no effect on all‐cause mortality (RR 1.01, 95% CI 0.62 to 1.64; 1 trial; 1155 participants; low‐quality evidence). One trial suggested a lower risk of any postoperative complications with processed EEG (RR 0.51, 95% CI 0.37 to 0.71; 902 participants, moderate‐quality evidence). There may be little or no effect on reduced postoperative length of stay (mean difference −0.2 days, 95% CI −2.02 to 1.62; 1155 participants; low‐quality evidence). AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: There is moderate‐quality evidence that optimized anaesthesia guided by processed EEG indices could reduce the risk of postoperative delirium in patients aged 60 years or over undergoing non‐cardiac surgical and non‐neurosurgical procedures. We found moderate‐quality evidence that postoperative cognitive dysfunction at three months could be reduced in these patients. The effect on POCD at one week and over one year after surgery is uncertain. There are no data available for patients under 60 years. Further blinded randomized controlled trials are needed to elucidate strategies for the amelioration of postoperative delirium and postoperative cognitive dysfunction, and their consequences such as dementia (including Alzheimer's disease (AD)) in both non‐elderly (below 60 years) and elderly (60 years or over) adult patients. The one study awaiting classification and five ongoing studies may alter the conclusions of the review once assessed.

This is a protocol for a Cochrane Review (Intervention). The objectives are as follows: To assess the effectiveness and safety of general, regional and local anaesthesia in systemic sedation/analgesia for manual removal of retained placenta.

This is a protocol for a Cochrane Review (Intervention). The objectives are as follows: To assess the effects of limb salvage compared to amputation and rotationplasty for treating pathological fracture at diagnosis in children and adolescents with localized high grade osteosarcoma.

The databases and search strategies use in the systematic review. (PDF 134Â kb)

Background: Caesarean section rates are increasing globally. The factors contributing to this increase are complex, and identifying interventions to address them is challenging. Non‐clinical interventions are applied independently of a clinical encounter between a health provider and a patient. Such interventions may target women, health professionals or organisations. They address the determinants of caesarean births and could have a role in reducing unnecessary caesarean sections. This review was first published in 2011. This review update will inform a new WHO guideline, and the scope of the update was informed by WHO’s Guideline Development Group for this guideline. Objectives: To evaluate the effectiveness and safety of non‐clinical interventions intended to reduce unnecessary caesarean section. Search methods: We searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL and two trials registers in March 2018. We also searched websites of relevant organisations and reference lists of related reviews. Selection criteria: Randomised trials, non‐randomised trials, controlled before‐after studies, interrupted time series studies and repeated measures studies were eligible for inclusion. The primary outcome measures were: caesarean section, spontaneous vaginal birth and instrumental birth. Data collection and analysis: We followed standard methodological procedures recommended by Cochrane. We narratively described results of individual studies (drawing summarised evidence from single studies assessing distinct interventions). Main results: We included 29 studies in this review (19 randomised trials, 1 controlled before‐after study and 9 interrupted time series studies). Most of the studies (20 studies) were conducted in high‐income countries and none took place in low‐income countries. The studies enrolled a mixed population of pregnant women, including nulliparous women, multiparous women, women with a fear of childbirth, women with high levels of anxiety and women having undergone a previous caesarean section. Overall, we found low‐, moderate‐ or high‐certainty evidence that the following interventions have a beneficial effect on at least one primary outcome measure and no moderate‐ or high‐certainty evidence of adverse effects. Interventions targeted at women or families. Childbirth training workshops for mothers alone may reduce caesarean section (risk ratio (RR) 0.55, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.33 to 0.89) and may increase spontaneous vaginal birth (RR 2.25, 95% CI 1.16 to 4.36). Childbirth training workshops for couples may reduce caesarean section (RR 0.59, 95% CI 0.37 to 0.94) and may increase spontaneous vaginal birth (RR 2.13, 95% CI 1.09 to 4.16). We judged this one study with 60 participants to have low‐certainty evidence for the outcomes above. Nurse‐led applied relaxation training programmes (RR 0.22, 95% CI 0.11 to 0.43; 104 participants, low‐certainty evidence) and psychosocial couple‐based prevention programmes (RR 0.53, 95% CI 0.32 to 0.90; 147 participants, low‐certainty evidence) may reduce caesarean section. Psychoeducation may increase spontaneous vaginal birth (RR 1.33, 95% CI 1.11 to 1.61; 371 participants, low‐certainty evidence). The control group received routine maternity care in all studies. There were insufficient data on the effect of the four interventions on maternal and neonatal mortality or morbidity. Interventions targeted at healthcare professionals Implementation of clinical practice guidelines combined with mandatory second opinion for caesarean section indication slightly reduces the risk of overall caesarean section (mean difference in rate change ‐1.9%, 95% CI ‐3.8 to ‐0.1; 149,223 participants). Implementation of clinical practice guidelines combined with audit and feedback also slightly reduces the risk of caesarean section (risk difference (RD) ‐1.8%, 95% CI ‐3.8 to ‐0.2; 105,351 participants). Physician education by local opinion leader (obstetrician‐gynaecologist) reduced the risk of elective caesarean section to 53.7% from 66.8% (opinion leader education: 53.7%, 95% CI 46.5 to 61.0%; control: 66.8%, 95% CI 61.7 to 72.0%; 2496 participants). Healthcare professionals in the control groups received routine care in the studies. There was little or no difference in maternal and neonatal mortality or morbidity between study groups. We judged the certainty of evidence to be high. Interventions targeted at healthcare organisations or facilities Collaborative midwifery‐labourist care (in which the obstetrician provides in‐house labour and delivery coverage, 24 hours a day, without competing clinical duties), versus a private practice model of care, may reduce the primary caesarean section rate. In one interrupted time series study, the caesarean section rate decreased by 7% in the year after the intervention, and by 1.7% per year thereafter (1722 participants); the vaginal birth rate after caesarean section increased from 13.3% before to 22.4% after the intervention (684 participants). Maternal and neonatal mortality were not reported. We judged the certainty of evidence to be low. We studied the following interventions, and they either made little or no difference to caesarean section rates or had uncertain effects. Moderate‐certainty evidence suggests little or no difference in caesarean section rates between usual care and: antenatal education programmes for physiologic childbirth; antenatal education on natural childbirth preparation with training in breathing and relaxation techniques; computer‐based decision aids; individualised prenatal education and support programmes (versus written information in pamphlet). Low‐certainty evidence suggests little or no difference in caesarean section rates between usual care and: psychoeducation; pelvic floor muscle training exercises with telephone follow‐up (versus pelvic floor muscle training without telephone follow‐up); intensive group therapy (cognitive behavioural therapy and childbirth psychotherapy); education of public health nurses on childbirth classes; role play (versus standard education using lectures); interactive decision aids (versus educational brochures); labourist model of obstetric care (versus traditional model of obstetric care). We are very uncertain as to the effect of other interventions identified on caesarean section rates as the certainty of the evidence is very low. Authors' conclusions: We evaluated a wide range of non‐clinical interventions to reduce unnecessary caesarean section, mostly in high‐income settings. Few interventions with moderate‐ or high‐certainty evidence, mainly targeting healthcare professionals (implementation of guidelines combined with mandatory second opinion, implementation of guidelines combined with audit and feedback, physician education by local opinion leader) have been shown to safely reduce caesarean section rates. There are uncertainties in existing evidence related to very‐low or low‐certainty evidence, applicability of interventions and lack of studies, particularly around interventions targeted at women or families and healthcare organisations or facilities. Published version

Summary Background Despite the global burden of morbidity and mortality associated with preterm birth, little evidence is available for use of antenatal corticosteroids and tocolytic drugs in preterm births in low-income and middle-income countries. We analysed data from the WHO Multicountry Survey on Maternal and Newborn Health (WHOMCS) to assess coverage for these interventions in preterm deliveries. Methods WHOMCS is a facility-based, cross-sectional survey database of birth outcomes in 359 facilities in 29 countries, with data collected prospectively from May 1, 2010, to Dec 31, 2011. For this analysis, we included deliveries after 22 weeks' gestation and we excluded births that occurred outside a facility or quicker than 3 h after arrival. We calculated use of antenatal corticosteroids in women who gave birth between 26 and 34 weeks' gestation, when antenatal corticosteroids are known to be most beneficial. We also calculated use in women at 22–25 weeks' and 34–36 weeks' gestation. We assessed tocolytic drug use, with and without antenatal corticosteroids, in spontaneous, uncomplicated preterm deliveries at 26–34 weeks' gestation. Findings Of 303 842 recorded deliveries after 22 weeks' gestation, 17 705 (6%) were preterm. 3900 (52%) of 7547 women who gave birth at 26–34 weeks' gestation, 94 (19%) of 497 women who gave birth at 22–25 weeks' gestation, and 2276 (24%) of 9661 women who gave birth at 35–36 weeks' gestation received antenatal corticosteroids. Rates of antenatal corticosteroid use varied between countries (median 54%, range 16–91%; IQR 30–68%). Of 4677 women who were potentially eligible for tocolysis drugs, 1276 (27%) were treated with bed rest or hydration and 2248 (48%) received no treatment. β-agonists alone (n=346, 7%) were the most frequently used tocolytic drug. Only 848 (18%) of potentially eligible women received both a tocolytic drug and antenatal corticosteroids. Interpretation Use of interventions was generally poor, despite evidence for their benefit for newborn babies. A substantial proportion of antenatal corticosteroid use occurred at gestational ages at which benefit is controversial, and use of less effective or potentially harmful tocolytic drugs was common. Implementation research and contextualised health policies are needed to improve drug availability and increase compliance with best obstetric practice. Funding UNDP–UNFPA–UNICEF–WHO–World Bank Special Programme of Research, Development and Research Training in Human Reproduction (HRP); WHO; USAID; Ministry of Health, Labour and Welfare of Japan; Gynuity Health Projects.

Background The spacing of pregnancies has a positive impact on maternal and newborn health. The progestin contraceptive implant, which is a long-acting, reversible method of contraception, has a well-established low failure rate that is compatible with tubal sterilization. The standard provision of contraceptive methods on the first postpartum visit may put some women at risk of unintended pregnancy, either due to loss to follow-up or having sexual intercourse prior to receiving contraception. Therefore, the immediate administration of contraception prior to discharge from the hospital that has high efficacy may improve contraceptive prevalence and prevent unintended pregnancy. Objectives To compare the initiation rate, effectiveness, and side effects of immediate versus delayed postpartum insertion of implant for contraception. Search methods We searched for eligible studies up to 28 October 2016 in the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, Embase, and POPLINE. We examined review articles and contacted investigators. We also checked registers of ongoing clinical trials, citation lists of included studies, key textbooks, grey literature, and previous systematic reviews for potentially relevant studies. Selection criteria We sought randomised controlled trials (RCTs) that compared immediate postpartum versus delayed insertion of contraceptive implant for contraception. Data collection and analysis Two review authors (JS, YW) independently screened titles and abstracts of the search results, and assessed the full-text articles of potentially relevant studies for inclusion. They extracted data from the included studies, assessed risk of bias, compared results, and resolved disagreements by consulting a third review author (PL or SK). We contacted investigators for additional data, where possible. We computed the Mantel-Haenszel risk ratio (RR) with 95% confidence interval (CI) for binary outcomes and the mean difference (MD) with 95% CI for continuous variables. Main results Three studies that included 410 participants met the inclusion criteria of the review. We did not identify any ongoing trials. Two included studies were at low risk of selection, attrition, and reporting biases, but were at high risk of performance and detection biases due to the inability to blind participants to the intervention. One included study was at high risk of attrition bias. The overall quality of the evidence for each comparison ranged from very low to moderate; the main limitations were risk of bias and imprecision. Initiation rate of contraceptive implants at the first postpartum check-up visit was significantly higher in the immediate insertion group than in the delayed insertion group (RR 1.41, 95% CI 1.28 to 1.55; three studies, 410 participants; moderate quality evidence). There appeared to be little or no difference between the groups in the continuation rate of contraceptive implant used at six months after insertion (RR 1.02, 95% CI 0.93 to 1.11; two studies, 125 participants; low quality evidence) or at 12 months after insertion (RR 1.04; 95% CI 0.81 to 1.34; one study, 64 participants;very low quality evidence) Women who received an immediate postpartum contraceptive implant insertion had a higher mean number of days of abnormal vaginal bleeding within six weeks postpartum (MD 5.80 days, 95% CI 3.79 to 7.81; one study, 215 participants; low quality evidence) and a higher rate of other side effects in the first six weeks after birth (RR 2.06, 95% CI 1.38 to 3.06; one study, 215 participants; low quality evidence) than those who received a delayed postpartum insertion. There appeared to be little or no difference between the groups in heavy, irregular vaginal bleeding or associated severe cramping within 12 months (RR 1.01, 95% CI 0.72 to 1.44, one study, 64 participants;very low quality evidence). It was unclear whether there was any difference between the groups in scores for participant satisfaction on a 0-10 scale (MD -0.40, 95% CI -1.26 to 0.46, low quality evidence), or in rates of unintended pregnancy (RR 1.82, 95% CI 0.38 to 8.71, 1 RCT, 64 women, very low quality evidence) at 12 months, or in rate of breastfeeding rate at six months (RR 2.01, 95% CI 0.72 ro 5.63, 1 RCT, 64 women, very low quality evidence) rate did not differ significantly between the groups. Authors' conclusions Evidence from this review indicates that the rate of initiation of contraceptive implant at the first postpartum check-up visit was higher with immediate postpartum insertion than with delayed insertion. There appeared to be little or no difference between the groups in the continuation rate of contraceptive implant use at 6 months. It was unclear whether there was any difference between the groups in continuation of contraceptive use at 12 months or in the unintended pregnancy rate at 12 months.

Early initiation of breastfeeding (EIBF) within 1 hour of birth can decrease neonatal death. However, the prevalence of EIBF is approximately 50% in many developing countries, and data remains unavailable for some countries. We conducted a secondary analysis using the WHO Global Survey on Maternal and Perinatal Health to identify factors hampering EIBF. We described the coverage of EIBF among 373 health facilities for singleton neonates for whom breastfeeding was initiated after birth. Maternal and facility characteristics of EIBF were compared to those of breastfeeding >1 hour after birth, and multiple logistic regression analysis was performed. In total, 244,569 singleton live births without severe adverse outcomes were analysed. The EIBF prevalence varied widely among countries and ranged from 17.7% to 98.4% (average, 57.6%). There was less intra-country variation for BFI

BACKGROUND: Respiratory hazards are common in the workplace. Depending on the hazard and exposure, the health consequences may include: mild to life‐threatening illnesses from infectious agents, acute effects ranging from respiratory irritation to chronic lung conditions, or even cancer from exposure to chemicals or toxins. Use of respiratory protective equipment (RPE) is an important preventive measure in many occupational settings. RPE only offers protection when worn properly, when removed safely and when it is either replaced or maintained regularly. The effectiveness of behavioural interventions either directed at employers or organisations or directed at individual workers to promote RPE use in workers remains an important unanswered question. OBJECTIVES: To assess the effects of any behavioural intervention either directed at organisations or at individual workers on observed or self‐reported RPE use in workers when compared to no intervention or an alternative intervention. SEARCH METHODS: We searched the Cochrane Work Group Specialised Register, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL 2016, Issue 07), MEDLINE (1980 to 12 August 2016), EMBASE (1980 to 20 August 2016) and CINAHL (1980 to 12 August 2016). SELECTION CRITERIA: We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs), controlled before and after (CBA) studies and interrupted time‐series (ITS) comparing behavioural interventions versus no intervention or any other behavioural intervention to promote RPE use in workers. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Four authors independently selected relevant studies, assessed risk of bias and extracted data. We contacted investigators to clarify information. We pooled outcome data from included studies where the studies were sufficiently similar. MAIN RESULTS: We included 14 studies that evaluated the effect of training and education on RPE use, which involved 2052 participants. The included studies had been conducted with farm, healthcare, production line, office and coke oven workers as well as nursing students and people with mixed occupations. All included studies reported the effects of interventions as use of RPE, as correct use of RPE or as indirect measures of RPE use. We did not find any studies where the intervention was delivered and assessed at the whole organization level or in which the main focus was on positive or negative incentives. We rated the quality of the evidence for all comparisons as low to very low. Training versus no training One CBA study in healthcare workers compared training with and without a fit test to no intervention. The study found that the rate of properly fitting respirators was not considerably different in the workers who had received training with a fit test (RR 1.17, 95% Confidence Interval (CI) 0.97 to 1.10) or training without a fit test (RR 1.16, 95% CI 0.95 to 1.42) compared to those who had no training. Two RCTs that evaluated training did not contribute to the analyses because of lack of data. Conventional training plus additions versus conventional training alone One cluster‐randomised trial compared conventional training plus RPE demonstration versus training alone and reported no significant difference in appropriate use of RPE between the two groups (RR 1.41, 95% CI 0.96 to 2.07). One RCT compared interactive training with passive training, with an information screen, and an information book. The mean RPE performance score for the active group was not different from that of the passive group (MD 2.10, 95% CI ‐0.76 to 4.96). However, the active group scored significantly higher than the book group (MD 4.20, 95% CI 0.89 to 7.51) and the screen group (MD 7.00, 95% CI 4.06 to 9.94). One RCT compared computer‐simulation training with conventional personal protective equipment (PPE) training but reported only results for donning and doffing full‐body PPE. Education versus no education One RCT found that a multifaceted educational intervention increased the use of RPE (risk ratio (RR) 1.69, 95% CI 1.10 to 2.58) at three years' follow‐up when compared to no intervention. However, there was no difference between intervention and control at one year's, two years' or four years' follow‐up. Two RCTs did not report enough data to be included in the analysis. Four CBA studies evaluated the effectiveness of education interventions and found no effect on the frequency or correctness of RPE use, except in one study for the use of an N95 mask (RR 4.56, 95% CI 1.84 to 11.33, 1 CBA) in workers. Motivational interviewing versus traditional lectures One CBA study found that participants given motivational group interviewing‐based safety education scored higher on a checklist measuring PPE use (MD 2.95, 95% CI 1.93 to 3.97) than control workers given traditional educational sessions. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: There is very low quality evidence that behavioural interventions, namely education and training, do not have a considerable effect on the frequency or correctness of RPE use in workers. There were no studies on incentives or organisation level interventions. The included studies had methodological limitations and we therefore need further large RCTs with clearer methodology in terms of randomised sequence generation, allocation concealment and assessor blinding, in order to evaluate the effectiveness of behavioural interventions for improving the use of RPE at both organisational and individual levels. In addition, further studies should consider some of the barriers to the successful use of RPE, such as experience of health risk, types of RPE and the employer's attitude to RPE use.

This is a protocol for a Cochrane Review (Intervention). The objectives are as follows: To determine the effectiveness and adverse effects of prophylactic antibiotics for preventing infections after continence surgery in women with stress urinary incontinence.

Background Functional endoscopic sinus surgery (FESS) is a minimally invasive technique that is used to treat chronic sinusitis. Small bleeding areas can reduce operative visibility and result in destruction of surrounding structures. Deliberate hypotension (lowering the mean arterial blood pressure to between 50 and 65 mm Hg in normotensive patients) using a range of pharmacological agents during general anaesthesia reduces blood loss in many operations. This review was originally published in 2013 and updated in February 2016. Objectives We aimed to compare the use of propofol versus other techniques for achieving deliberate intraoperative hypotension during FESS procedures with regard to blood loss and operative conditions. Search methods We searched the following databases in the updated review: the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL; 2016, Issue 2), MEDLINE (1950 to February 2016), Embase (1980 to February 2016), LILACS (1982 to February 2016), and ISI Web of Science (1946 to February 2016). We also searched the reference lists of relevant articles and conference proceedings and contacted the authors of included trials. Selection criteria We sought all randomized controlled trials comparing propofol with other techniques for deliberate hypotension during FESS with regard to blood loss and operative conditions in both adults and children. Our primary outcome was total blood loss (TBL). Other outcomes included surgical field quality, operation time, mortality within 24 hours, complications, and failure to reach target blood pressure. Data collection and analysis We used standard methodological procedures expected by Cochrane. Two review authors independently extracted details of trial methodology and outcome data from the reports of all trials considered eligible for inclusion. We made all analyses on an intention-to-treat basis where possible. When I2 was less than 40% and the P value from the Chi2 test was higher than 0.10, we pooled data using the fixed-effect model. Otherwise, we pooled data using the random-effects model. Main results We found no new studies. This updated review therefore includes four studies with 278 participants. Most analyses were based on data from few participants and low-quality evidence, so our results should be interpreted with caution. Deliberate hypotension with propofol did not decrease TBL (millilitres) when compared with inhalation anaesthetics in either children (1 study; 70 participants; very low-quality evidence), or adults (1 study; 88 participants; moderate-quality evidence). Propofol improved the quality of the surgical field by less than one category on a scale from 0 (no bleeding) to 5 (severe bleeding) (mean difference -0.64, 95% CI -0.91 to -0.37; 4 studies; 277 participants; low-quality evidence), but no difference in operation time was reported (3 studies; 214 participants; low-quality evidence). Failure to lower blood pressure to target was less common in the propofol group (risk ratio of failure with propofol 0.24, 95% CI 0.09 to 0.66; 1 study; 88 participants; moderate-quality evidence). Authors' conclusions Using propofol to achieve deliberate hypotension probably improves the surgical field, but the effect is small. Deliberate hypotension with propofol did not decrease TBL and the operation time. However, due to the very low quality of the evidence, this conclusion is not definitive. Randomized controlled trials with good-quality methodology and large sample size are required to investigate the effectiveness of deliberate hypotension with propofol for FESS.

This is a protocol for a Cochrane Review (Intervention). The objectives are as follows: To determine the effectiveness and adverse effects of simple hysterectomy, performed with pelvic lymphadenectomy, for women with stage IA2‐IB1 cervical cancer.

Summary Background There has been concern about rising rates of caesarean section worldwide. This Article reports the third phase of the WHO global survey, which aimed to estimate the rate of different methods of delivery and to examine the relation between method of delivery and maternal and perinatal outcomes in selected facilities in Africa and Latin America in 2004–05, and in Asia in 2007–08. Methods Nine countries participated in the Asia global survey: Cambodia, China, India, Japan, Nepal, Philippines, Sri Lanka, Thailand, and Vietnam. In each country, the capital city and two other regions or provinces were randomly selected. We studied all women admitted for delivery during 3 months in institutions with 6000 or fewer expected deliveries per year and during 2 months in those with more than 6000 deliveries. We gathered data for institutions to obtain a detailed description of the health facility and its resources for obstetric care. We obtained data from women's medical records to summarise obstetric and perinatal events. Findings We obtained data for 109 101 of 112 152 deliveries reported in 122 recruited facilities (97% coverage), and analysed 107 950 deliveries. The overall rate of caesarean section was 27·3% (n=29 428) and of operative vaginal delivery was 3·2% (n=3465). Risk of maternal mortality and morbidity index (at least one of: maternal mortality, admission to intensive care unit [ICU], blood transfusion, hysterectomy, or internal iliac artery ligation) was increased for operative vaginal delivery (adjusted odds ratio 2·1, 95% CI 1·7–2·6) and all types of caesarean section (antepartum without indication 2·7, 1·4–5·5; antepartum with indication 10·6, 9·3–12·0; intrapartum without indication 14·2, 9·8–20·7; intrapartum with indication 14·5, 13·2–16·0). For breech presentation, caesarean section, either antepartum (0·2, 0·1–0·3) or intrapartum (0·3, 0·2–0·4), was associated with improved perinatal outcomes, but also with increased risk of stay in neonatal ICU (2·0, 1·1–3·6; and 2·1, 1·2–3·7, respectively). Interpretation To improve maternal and perinatal outcomes, caesarean section should be done only when there is a medical indication. Funding US Agency for International Development (USAID); UNDP/UNFPA/WHO/World Bank Special Programme of Research, Development and Research Training in Human Reproduction (HRP), WHO, Switzerland; Ministry of Health, Labour and Welfare of Japan; Ministry of Public Health, China; and Indian Council of Medical Research.

The official WHO estimates of preterm birth are an essential global resource for assessing the burden of preterm birth and developing public health programmes and policies. This protocol describes the methods that will be used to identify, critically appraise and analyse all eligible preterm birth data, in order to develop global, regional and national level estimates of levels and trends in preterm birth rates for the period 1990 – 2014. We will conduct a systematic review of civil registration and vital statistics (CRVS) data on preterm birth for all WHO Member States, via national Ministries of Health and Statistics Offices. For Member States with absent, limited or lower-quality CRVS data, a systematic review of surveys and/or research studies will be conducted. Modelling will be used to develop country, regional and global rates for 2014, with time trends for Member States where sufficient data are available. Member States will be invited to review the methodology and provide additional eligible data via a country consultation before final estimates are developed and disseminated. This research will be used to generate estimates on the burden of preterm birth globally for 1990 to 2014. We invite feedback on the methodology described, and call on the public health community to submit pertinent data for consideration. Registered at PROSPERO CRD42015027439 Contact: pretermbirth@who.int

Chicken essence (CE) is a popular traditional remedy in Asia, which is believed to improve cognitive functions. CE company claimed that the health benefits were proven with research studies. A systematic review was conducted to determine the cognitive-enhancing effects of CE. We systematically searched a number of databases for randomized controlled trials with human subjects consuming CE and cognitive tests involved. Cochrane's Risk of Bias (ROB) tool was used to assess the quality of trials and meta-analysis was performed. Seven trials were included, where six healthy subjects and one subject with poorer cognitive functions were recruited. One trial had unclear ROB while the rest had high ROB. For executive function tests, there was a significant difference favoring CE (pooled standardized mean difference (SMD) of -0.55 (-1.04, -0.06)) and another with no significant difference (pooled SMD of 0.70 (-0.001, 1.40)). For short-term memory tests, no significant difference was found (pooled SMD of 0.63 (-0.16, 1.42)). Currently, there is a lack of convincing evidence to show a cognitive enhancing effect of CE.

Background Generalised itching is one of the most common dermatological symptoms in pregnant women. Having itchy skin during pregnancy may be very frustrating and can lead to poor sleep, exhaustion and impaired quality of life. There is a need for a systematic review to evaluate the effectiveness and safety of pharmacological interventions for treating itching in pregnancy. Objectives To assess the effectiveness and safety of pharmacological interventions for treating generalised itching (not caused by systemic diseases or skin lesions) in pregnancy. Search methods We searched the Cochrane Pregnancy and Childbirth Group's Trials Register (28 January 2016) and the reference list of the one identified study. Selection criteria All published, unpublished and ongoing randomised controlled trials (RCTs) evaluating interventions for itching in pregnancy. Quasi-RCTs, cluster-RCTs, RCTs using a cross-over design, and studies reported in abstract form (without full text) were not eligible for inclusion. Data collection and analysis Two review authors independently assessed the one trial report that was identified from the search strategy and this was subsequently excluded. Main results There are no included studies as we did not identify any relevant trials. Authors' conclusions Generalised itching (not caused by systemic disease or skin lesions) is quite a common symptom in pregnancy. However, there is no evidence from randomised controlled trials to guide practice in terms of the effectiveness and safety of pharmacological interventions for treating this condition. Well-designed randomised controlled trials are needed in order to evaluate the effectiveness of topical and systemic pharmacological interventions as well as any adverse effects of the interventions. Such studies should consider important outcomes such as relief of itching, women’s satisfaction, sleep disturbance, and adverse effects.

Background Ovarian cancer is the third most common gynaecological cancer worldwide, with an age-standardised incidence rate of 6.1 per 10,000 women. Standard therapy for advanced epithelial ovarian cancer (EOC) includes a combination of cytoreductive surgery and platinum-based chemotherapy. Cytoreductive surgery aims to remove as much of the visible tumour as possible. As extensive intraperitoneal metastases are typical of advanced EOC, cytoreductive surgery is usually an extensive procedure with the risk of excessive bleeding. Tranexamic acid given perioperatively is effective in reducing blood loss and allogeneic blood transfusion requirements in a variety of surgical settings. Therefore, tranexamic acid seems to be a promising agent for minimising blood loss and the need for blood transfusion among women with advanced EOC undergoing cytoreductive surgery. Objectives To assess the effects of tranexamic acid for reducing blood loss associated with cytoreductive surgery in women with advanced EOC (stage III to IV). Search methods We searched the Cochrane Gynaecological, Neuro-oncology and Orphan Cancers Trial Register, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (Issue 5, 2015), MEDLINE, EMBASE and conference proceedings to May 2015. We also checked registers of clinical trials, citation lists of included studies, key textbooks and previous systematic reviews for potentially relevant studies. Selection criteria We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing tranexamic acid given during surgery versus placebo or no treatment, in adult women diagnosed with advanced EOC. Data collection and analysis Two review authors (CK, AS) independently selected potentially relevant trials, extracted data, assessed risk of bias, compared results and resolved disagreements by discussion. Main results We found only one study that met our inclusion criteria. This was a randomised double blind, placebo-controlled multicentre study conducted to evaluate the effectiveness of a single dose of intravenous tranexamic acid (15 mg/kg body weight) versus placebo, given immediately before surgery for reducing blood loss and the need for red blood cell transfusion. The mean total estimated blood loss was 668.34 mL and 916.93 mL for participants assigned to tranexamic acid and placebo groups, respectively. The mean difference (MD) of total estimated blood loss between the groups did not show a clinically important effect (MD − 248.59 mL; 95% confidence interval (CI) − 550.9 to 53.79; one study, 100 participants; moderate quality evidence). The mean number of transfused units of blood components was not different between the two groups (low quality evidence). There were no noted differences in the incidence of reoperation, readmission or thromboembolic events (very low quality evidence). We considered the methodology of the included study to be at low risk of selection, detection, and reporting biases. However, we were concerned about an imbalance of some baseline characteristics between the groups, and as there was no protocol for blood transfusion, the rate of blood transfusion may vary depending on the practice of each participating hospital. Authors' conclusions Currently, there is insufficient evidence to recommend the routine use of tranexamic acid for reducing blood loss in women undergoing cytoreductive surgery for advanced EOC, as only limited data are available from a single, low quality RCT at low overall risk of bias.

BACKGROUND: Interval debulking surgery (IDS), following induction or neoadjuvant chemotherapy, may have a role in treating advanced epithelial ovarian cancer (stage III to IV) where primary debulking surgery is not an option. OBJECTIVES: To assess the effectiveness and complications of IDS for women with advanced stage epithelial ovarian cancer. SEARCH METHODS: We searched the Cochrane Gynaecological Cancer Group's Specialised Register, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) 2012, Issue 6, MEDLINE and EMBASE for the original review in to June 2012. We updated the searches in June 2009, 2012 and 2015 for the review updates. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing survival of women with advanced epithelial ovarian cancer, who had IDS performed between cycles of chemotherapy after primary surgery with survival of women who had conventional treatment (primary debulking surgery and adjuvant chemotherapy). DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors independently assessed trial quality and extracted data. Searches for additional information from study authors were attempted. We performed meta‐analysis of overall and progression‐free survival (PFS), using random‐effects models. MAIN RESULTS: Three RCTs randomising 853 women, of whom 781 were evaluated, met the inclusion criteria. Meta‐analysis of three trials for overall survival (OS) found no statistically significant difference between IDS and chemotherapy alone (hazard ratio (HR) = 0.80, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.61 to 1.06, I² = 58%). Subgroup analysis for OS in two trials, where the primary surgery was not performed by gynaecologic oncologists or was less extensive, showed a benefit of IDS (HR = 0.68, 95% CI 0.53 to 0.87, I² = 0%). Meta‐analysis of two trials for PFS found no statistically significant difference between IDS and chemotherapy alone (HR = 0.88, 95% CI 0.57 to 1.33, I² = 83%). Rates of toxic reactions to chemotherapy were similar in both arms (risk ratio = 1.19, 95% CI 0.53 to 2.66, I² = 0%), but little information was available for other adverse events or quality or life (QoL). AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: We found no conclusive evidence to determine whether IDS between cycles of chemotherapy would improve or decrease the survival rates of women with advanced ovarian cancer, compared with conventional treatment of primary surgery followed by adjuvant chemotherapy. IDS appeared to yield benefit only in women whose primary surgery was not performed by gynaecologic oncologists or was less extensive. Data on QoL and adverse events were inconclusive.

Chicken essence (CE) is a popular traditional remedy in Asia, which is believed to improve cognitive functions. CE company claimed that the health benefits were proven with research studies. A systematic review was conducted to determine the cognitive-enhancing effects of CE. We systematically searched a number of databases for randomized controlled trials with human subjects consuming CE and cognitive tests involved. Cochrane’s Risk of Bias (ROB) tool was used to assess the quality of trials and meta-analysis was performed. Seven trials were included, where six healthy subjects and one subject with poorer cognitive functions were recruited. One trial had unclear ROB while the rest had high ROB. For executive function tests, there was a significant difference favoring CE (pooled standardized mean difference (SMD) of −0.55 (−1.04, −0.06)) and another with no significant difference (pooled SMD of 0.70 (−0.001, 1.40)). For short-term memory tests, no significant difference was found (pooled SMD of 0.63 (−0.16, 1.42)). Currently, there is a lack of convincing evidence to show a cognitive enhancing effect of CE.

Background No consensus definition of macrosomia currently exists among researchers and obstetricians. We aimed to identify a definition of macrosomia that is more predictive of maternal and perinatal mortality and morbidity in low- and middle-income countries. Methods We conducted a secondary data analysis using WHO Global Survey on Maternal and Perinatal Health data on Africa and Latin America from 2004 to 2005 and Asia from 2007 to 2008. We compared adverse outcomes, which were assessed by the composite maternal mortality and morbidity index (MMMI) and perinatal mortality and morbidity index (PMMI) in subgroups with birthweight (3000–3499 g [reference group], 3500–3999 g, 4000–4099 g, 4100–4199 g, 4200–4299 g, 4300–4399 g, 4400–4499 g, 4500–4999 g) or country-specific birthweight percentile for gestational age (50th–74th percentile [reference group], 75th–89th, 90th–94th, 95th–96th, and ≥97th percentile). Two-level logistic regression models were used to estimate odds ratios of MMMI and PMMI. Results A total of 246,659 singleton term births from 363 facilities in 23 low- and middle-income countries were included. Adjusted odds ratios (aORs) for intrapartum caesarean sections exceeded 2.0 when birthweight was greater than 4000 g (2 · 00 [95 % CI: 1 · 68, 2 · 39], 2 · 42 [95 % CI: 2 · 02, 2 · 89], 2 · 01 [95 % CI: 1 · 74, 2 · 33] in Africa, Asia and Latin America, respectively). aORs of MMMI reached 2.0 when birthweight was greater than 4000 g, 4500 g in Asia and Africa, respectively. aORs of PMMI approached to 2.0 (1 · 78 [95 % CI: 1 · 16, 2 · 74]) when birthweight was greater than 4500 g in Latin America. When birthweight was at the 90th percentile or higher, aORs of MMMI and PMMI increased, but none exceeded 2.0. Conclusions The population-specific definition of macrosomia using birthweight cut-off points irrespective of gestational age (4500 g in Africa and Latin America, 4000 g in Asia) is more predictive of maternal and perinatal adverse outcomes, and simpler to apply compared to the definition based on birthweight percentile for a given gestational age. Electronic supplementary material The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s12884-015-0765-z) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

BACKGROUND: Virtual reality simulation uses computer‐generated imagery to present a simulated training environment for learners. This review seeks to examine whether there is evidence to support the introduction of virtual reality surgical simulation into ear, nose and throat surgical training programmes. OBJECTIVES: 1. To assess whether surgeons undertaking virtual reality simulation‐based training achieve surgical ('patient') outcomes that are at least as good as, or better than, those achieved through conventional training methods. 2. To assess whether there is evidence from either the operating theatre, or from controlled (simulation centre‐based) environments, that virtual reality‐based surgical training leads to surgical skills that are comparable to, or better than, those achieved through conventional training. SEARCH METHODS: The Cochrane Ear, Nose and Throat Disorders Group (CENTDG) Trials Search Co‐ordinator searched the CENTDG Trials Register; Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL 2015, Issue 6); PubMed; EMBASE; ERIC; CINAHL; Web of Science; ClinicalTrials.gov; ICTRP and additional sources for published and unpublished trials. The date of the search was 27 July 2015. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included all randomised controlled trials and controlled trials comparing virtual reality training and any other method of training in ear, nose or throat surgery. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: We used the standard methodological procedures expected by The Cochrane Collaboration. We evaluated both technical and non‐technical aspects of skill competency. MAIN RESULTS: We included nine studies involving 210 participants. Out of these, four studies (involving 61 residents) assessed technical skills in the operating theatre (primary outcomes). Five studies (comprising 149 residents and medical students) assessed technical skills in controlled environments (secondary outcomes). The majority of the trials were at high risk of bias. We assessed the GRADE quality of evidence for most outcomes across studies as 'low'. Operating theatre environment (primary outcomes) In the operating theatre, there were no studies that examined two of three primary outcomes: real world patient outcomes and acquisition of non‐technical skills. The third primary outcome (technical skills in the operating theatre) was evaluated in two studies comparing virtual reality endoscopic sinus surgery training with conventional training. In one study, psychomotor skill (which relates to operative technique or the physical co‐ordination associated with instrument handling) was assessed on a 10‐point scale. A second study evaluated the procedural outcome of time‐on‐task. The virtual reality group performance was significantly better, with a better psychomotor score (mean difference (MD) 3.20, 95% CI 2.05 to 4.34; 10‐point scale) and a shorter time taken to complete the operation (MD ‐5.50 minutes, 95% CI ‐9.97 to ‐1.03). Controlled training environments (secondary outcomes) In a controlled environment five studies evaluated the technical skills of surgical trainees (one study) and medical students (three studies). One study was excluded from the analysis. Surgical trainees: One study (80 participants) evaluated the technical performance of surgical trainees during temporal bone surgery, where the outcome was the quality of the final dissection. There was no difference in the end‐product scores between virtual reality and cadaveric temporal bone training. Medical students: Two other studies (40 participants) evaluated technical skills achieved by medical students in the temporal bone laboratory. Learners' knowledge of the flow of the operative procedure (procedural score) was better after virtual reality than conventional training (SMD 1.11, 95% CI 0.44 to 1.79). There was also a significant difference in end‐product score between the virtual reality and conventional training groups (SMD 2.60, 95% CI 1.71 to 3.49). One study (17 participants) revealed that medical students acquired anatomical knowledge (on a scale of 0 to 10) better during virtual reality than during conventional training (MD 4.3, 95% CI 2.05 to 6.55). No studies in a controlled training environment assessed non‐technical skills. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: There is limited evidence to support the inclusion of virtual reality surgical simulation into surgical training programmes, on the basis that it can allow trainees to develop technical skills that are at least as good as those achieved through conventional training. Further investigations are required to determine whether virtual reality training is associated with better real world outcomes for patients and the development of non‐technical skills. Virtual reality simulation may be considered as an additional learning tool for medical students.

Background Constipation is a common symptom experienced during pregnancy. It has a range of consequences from reduced quality of life and perception of physical health to haemorrhoids. An understanding of the effectiveness and safety of treatments for constipation in pregnancy is important for the clinician managing pregnant women. Objectives To assess the effectiveness and safety of interventions (pharmacological and non-pharmacological) for treating constipation in pregnancy. Search methods We searched the Cochrane Pregnancy and Childbirth Group's Trials Register (30 April 2015), ClinicalTrials.gov and the WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP) (30 April 2015) and reference lists of retrieved studies. Selection criteria We considered all published, unpublished and ongoing randomised controlled trials (RCTs), cluster-RCTs and quasi-RCTs, evaluating interventions (pharmacological and non-pharmacological) for constipation in pregnancy. Cross-over studies were not eligible for inclusion in this review. Trials published in abstract form only (without full text publication) were not eligible for inclusion. We compared one intervention (pharmacological or non-pharmacological) against another intervention, placebo or no treatment. Data collection and analysis Two review authors independently assessed trials for inclusion and risk of bias, extracted data and checked them for accuracy. Main results Four studies were included, but only two studies with a total of 180 women contributed data to this review. It was not clear whether they were RCTs or quasi-RCTs because the sequence generation was unclear. We classified the overall risk of bias of three studies as moderate and one study as high risk of bias. No meta-analyses were carried out due to insufficient data. There were no cluster-RCTs identified for inclusion. Comparisons were available for stimulant laxatives versus bulk-forming laxatives, and fibre supplementation versus no intervention. There were no data available for any other comparisons. During the review process we found that studies reported changes in symptoms in different ways. To capture all data available, we added a new primary outcome (improvement in constipation) - this new outcome was not prespecified in our published protocol. Stimulant laxatives versus bulk-forming laxatives No data were identified for any of this review's prespecified primary outcomes: pain on defecation, frequency of stools and consistency of stools. Compared to bulk-forming laxatives, pregnant women who received stimulant laxatives (Senokot or Normax) had an improvement in constipation (risk ratio (RR) 1.59, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.21 to 2.09; 140 women, one study, moderate quality of evidence), but also had more abdominal discomfort (RR 2.33, 95% CI 1.15 to 4.73; 140 women, one study, low quality of evidence), and a borderline difference in diarrhoea (RR 4.50, 95% CI 1.01 to 20.09; 140 women, one study, moderate quality of evidence). In addition, there was no clear difference in women's satisfaction (RR 1.06, 95% CI 0.77 to 1.46; 140 women, one study, moderate quality of evidence). One of the stimulant laxatives, Normax (dioctyl sodium sulphosuccinate and dihydroxy anthraquinone) is no longer used for the treatment of constipation in pregnant women (and the package information advises that it should not be used during pregnancy or breastfeeding). We therefore carried out a non-prespecified sensitivity analysis with the data for Senokot and Normax presented separately. Results for Senokot and Normax were very similar, thus results for the individual drugs largely reflected findings for the combined analysis, although when individual drugs were compared with bulk-forming laxatives there was no longer a clear difference between groups in terms of abdominal discomfort and diarrhoea. No usable data were identified for any of this review's secondary outcomes: quality of life; dehydration; electrolyte imbalance; acute allergic reaction; or asthma. Fibre supplementation versus no intervention Pregnant women who received fibre supplementation had a higher frequency of stools compared to no intervention (mean difference (MD) 2.24 times per week, 95% CI 0.96 to 3.52; 40 women, one study, moderate quality of evidence). Fibre supplementation was associated with improved stool consistency as defined by trialists (hard stool decreased by 11% to 14%, normal stool increased by 5% to 10%, and loose stool increased by 0% to 6%). No usable data were reported for either the primary outcomes of pain on defecation and improvement in constipation or any of this review's secondary outcomes as listed above. Quality Five outcomes were assessed with the GRADE software: improvement in constipation, frequency of stools, abdominal discomfort, diarrhoea and women's satisfaction. These were assessed to be of moderate quality except for abdominal discomfort which was assessed to be of low quality. The results should therefore be interpreted with caution. There were no data available for evaluation of pain on defecation or consistency of stools. Authors' conclusions There is insufficient evidence to comprehensively assess the effectiveness and safety of interventions (pharmacological and non-pharmacological) for treating constipation in pregnancy, due to limited data (few studies with small sample size and no meta-analyses). Compared with bulk-forming laxatives, stimulant laxatives appear to be more effective in improvement of constipation (moderate quality evidence), but are accompanied by an increase in diarrhoea (moderate quality evidence) and abdominal discomfort (low quality evidence) and no difference in women's satisfaction (moderate quality evidence). Additionally, fibre supplementation may increase frequency of stools compared with no intervention (moderate quality evidence), although these results were of moderate risk of bias. There were no data for a comparison of other types of interventions, such as osmotic laxatives, stool softeners, lubricant laxatives and enemas and suppositories. More RCTs evaluating interventions for treating constipation in pregnancy are needed. These should cover different settings and evaluate the effectiveness of various interventions (including fibre, osmotic, and stimulant laxatives) on improvement in constipation, pain on defecation, frequency of stools and consistency of stools.

Maternal nutrition during pregnancy is known to have an effect on fetal growth and development. It is recommended that women increase their calcium intake during pregnancy and lactation, although the recommended dosage varies among professionals. Currently, there is no consensus on the role of routine calcium supplementation for pregnant women other than for preventing or treating hypertension.To determine the effect of calcium supplementation on maternal, fetal and neonatal outcomes (other than for preventing or treating hypertension) as well as any possible side effects.We searched the Cochrane Pregnancy and Childbirth Group's Trials Register (30th September 2014).We considered all published, unpublished and ongoing randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing maternal, fetal and neonatal outcomes in pregnant women who received calcium supplementation versus placebo or no treatment. Cluster-RCTs were eligible for inclusion but none were identified. Quasi-RCTs and cross-over studies were not eligible for inclusion.Two review authors independently assessed trials for inclusion and risk of bias, extracted data and checked them for accuracy.Twenty-five studies met the inclusion criteria, but only 23 studies contributed data to the review. These 23 trials recruited 18,587 women, with 17,842 women included in final analyses. There were no statistically significant differences between women who received calcium supplementation and those who did not in terms of reducing preterm births less than 37 weeks' gestation (risk ratio (RR) 0.86, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.70 to 1.05; 13 studies, 16,139 women; random-effects model) or less than 34 weeks' gestation (RR 1.04, 95% CI 0.80 to 1.36; four trials, 5669). Most studies were of low risk of bias. We conducted sensitivity analysis for the outcome of preterm birth less than 37 weeks by removing two trials with unclear risk of bias for allocation concealment; the results then favoured treatment with calcium supplementation (RR 0.80, 95% CI 0.65 to 0.99; 11 trials, 15,379 women). There was no significant difference in infant low birthweight between the two treatment groups (RR 0.93, 95% CI 0.81 to 1.07; six trials, 14,162 infants; random-effects model). However, when compared to the control group, women in the calcium supplementation group gave birth to slightly heavier birthweight infants (mean difference 56.40, 95% CI 13.55 to 99.25; 21 trials, 9202 women; random-effects model).Three outcomes were chosen for assessment with the GRADE software: preterm birth less than 37 weeks; preterm birth less than 34 weeks; and low birthweight less than 2500 g. Evidence for these outcomes was assessed as of moderate quality.This review indicates that there are no clear additional benefits to calcium supplementation in prevention of preterm birth or low infant birthweight. While there was a statistically significant difference of 56 g identified in mean infant birthweight, there was significant heterogeneity identified, and the clinical significance of this difference is uncertain.

Background Genital tract infection is associated with preterm birth (before 37 weeks' gestation). Screening for infections during pregnancy may therefore reduce the numbers of babies being born prematurely. However, screening for infections may have some adverse effects, such as increased antibiotic drug resistance and increased cost of treatment. Objectives To assess the effectiveness of antenatal lower genital tract infection screening and treatment programs for reducing preterm birth and subsequent morbidity. Search methods We searched the Cochrane Pregnancy and Childbirth Group's Trials Register (30 November 2014), the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (The Cochrane Library 2014, Issue 7) and reference lists of retrieved reports. Selection criteria We included all published and unpublished randomised controlled trials in any language that evaluated any described methods of antenatal lower genital tract infection screening compared with no screening. Data collection and analysis Two review authors independently assessed trials for inclusion and risk of bias, extracted data and checked for accuracy. Main results One study (4155 women at less than 20 weeks' gestation) met the inclusion criteria. The intervention group (2058 women) received infection screening and treatment for bacterial vaginosis, trichomonas vaginalis and candidiasis; the control group (2097 women) also received screening, but the results of the screening program were not revealed and women received routine antenatal care. The rate of preterm birth before 37 weeks' gestation was significantly lower in the intervention group (3% versus 5% in the control group) with a risk ratio (RR) of 0.55 (95% confidence interval (CI) 0.41 to 0.75; the evidence for this outcome was graded as of moderate quality). The incidence of preterm birth for infants with a weight equal to or below 2500 g (low birthweight) and infants with a weight equal to or below 1500 g (very low birthweight) were significantly lower in the intervention group than in the control group (RR 0.48, 95% CI 0.34 to 0.66 and RR 0.34; 95% CI 0.15 to 0.75, respectively; both graded as moderate quality evidence). Based on a subset of costs for preterm births of < 1900 g, the authors reported that for each of those preterm births averted, EUR 60,262 would be saved. Authors' conclusions There is evidence from one trial that infection screening and treatment programs for pregnant women before 20 weeks' gestation reduce preterm birth and preterm low birthweight. Infection screening and treatment programs are associated with cost savings when used for the prevention of preterm birth. Future trials should evaluate the effects of different types of infection screening programs.

NICHD NIH HHS World Health Organization ObjectiveTo generate a global reference for caesarean section (CS) rates at health facilities. DesignCross-sectional study. SettingHealth facilities from 43 countries. Population/SampleThirty eight thousand three hundred and twenty-four women giving birth from 22 countries for model building and 10045875 women giving birth from 43 countries for model testing. MethodsWe hypothesised that mathematical models could determine the relationship between clinical-obstetric characteristics and CS. These models generated probabilities of CS that could be compared with the observed CS rates. We devised a three-step approach to generate the global benchmark of CS rates at health facilities: creation of a multi-country reference population, building mathematical models, and testing these models. Main outcome measuresArea under the ROC curves, diagnostic odds ratio, expected CS rate, observed CS rate. ResultsAccording to the different versions of the model, areas under the ROC curves suggested a good discriminatory capacity of C-Model, with summary estimates ranging from 0.832 to 0.844. The C-Model was able to generate expected CS rates adjusted for the case-mix of the obstetric population. We have also prepared an e-calculator to facilitate use of C-Model (). ConclusionsThis article describes the development of a global reference for CS rates. Based on maternal characteristics, this tool was able to generate an individualised expected CS rate for health facilities or groups of health facilities. With C-Model, obstetric teams, health system managers, health facilities, health insurance companies, and governments can produce a customised reference CS rate for assessing use (and overuse) of CS. Tweetable abstractThe C-Model provides a customized benchmark for caesarean section rates in health facilities and systems. Tweetable abstract The C-Model provides a customized benchmark for caesarean section rates in health facilities and systems. Univ Sao Paulo, Ribeirao Preto Med Sch, Dept Social Med, Av Bandeirantes, BR-3900 Ribeirao Preto, Brazil WHO, World Bank Special Programme Res Dev & Res Traini, UNDP UNFPA UNICEF WHO, Dept Reprod Hlth & Res, CH-1211 Geneva, Switzerland Univ Paris 05, Sorbonne Paris Cite, UMR 216, Inst Dev Res, Paris, France WHO Reg Off Amer, Women & Reprod Hlth CLAP WR, Latin Amer Ctr Perinatol, Montevideo, Uruguay Emory Univ, Rollins Sch Publ Hlth, Dept Epidemiol, Atlanta, GA 30322 USA Paris Descartes Univ, Ctr Epidemiol & Biostat, Obstetr Perinatal & Pediat Epidemiol Res Team, Inserm U1153, Paris, France Natl Inst Publ Hlth, Ctr Populat Hlth Res, Cuernavaca, Morelos, Mexico Univ Technol, Fac Hlth, Sydney, NSW, Australia Natl Ctr Child Hlth & Dev, Dept Hlth Policy, Tokyo, Japan Ctr Rosarino Estudios Perinat, Rosario, Argentina Lindsay Stewart R&D Ctr, Off Res & Clin Audit, Royal Coll Obstetricians & Gynaecologists, London, England London Sch Hyg & Trop Med, Dept Hlth Serv Res & Policy, London WC1, England Shanghai Jiao Tong Univ, Sch Med, Xinhua Hosp, Shanghai Key Lab Childrens Environ Hlth,Minist Ed, Shanghai 200030, Peoples R China Univ Estadual Campinas, Sch Med Sci, Dept Obstet & Gynaecol, Campinas, SP, Brazil Family Hlth Bur, Minist Hlth, Colombo, Sri Lanka Fiocruz MS, ENSP, BR-21045900 Rio De Janeiro, Brazil Natl Inst Hlth & Welf, Helsinki, Finland Univ Tokyo, Grad Sch Med, Dept Paediat, Tokyo, Japan Bayer Krankenhausgesellschaft, Bayer Arbeitsgemeinschaft Qualitatssicherun Stati, Munich, Germany Khon Kaen Univ, Fac Med, Dept Obstet & Gynecol, Khon, Kaen, Thailand Univ Sao Paulo, Ribeirao Preto Med Sch, Dept Obstet & Gynaecol, BR-14049 Ribeirao Preto, Brazil Minist Sante, Direct Sante Famille, Ouagadougou, Burkina Faso Univ Washington, Inst Hlth Metr & Evaluat, Seattle, WA 98195 USA Univ Mongolia, Hlth Sci, Sch Publ Hlth, Ulaanbaatar, Mongol Peo Rep GLIDE Tech Cooperat & Res, Ribeirao Preto, SP, Brazil Univ Sao Paulo, Ribeirao Preto Med Sch, Dept Paediat, BR-14049 Ribeirao Preto, SP, Brazil Univ Calif San Francisco, Dept Obstet & Gynaecol & Global Hlth Sci, San Francisco, CA 94143 USA Khon Kaen Univ, Fac Publ Hlth, Dept Biostat & Demog, Khon Kaen, Thailand Univ Fed Sao Paulo, Sch Med Sao Paulo, Dept Obstet, Sao Paulo, Brazil Inter Amer Dev Bank, Social Protect & Hlth Div, Mexico City, DF, Mexico Fortis Mem Res Inst, Gurgaon, Haryana, India Hosp Nacl Itaugua, Itaugua, Paraguay Univ Fed Sao Paulo, Sch Med Sao Paulo, Dept Obstet, Sao Paulo, Brazil NICHD NIH HHS: T32 HD052460 World Health Organization: 001 Web of Science

Indications for caesarean section in suspected macrosomic infants. (PDF 187Â kb)

Results of sensitivity analyses. (PDF 577 kb)