Search

Although the expected benefits of the Mediterranean diet (MD) are comprehensive, its implementation is hampered by poor adherence. Several factors can affect adherence to MD guidelines. The current study aimed to explore sociodemographic and pregnancy-related determinants of MD adherence among Saudi women. A correlational cross-sectional research design was conducted on a snowball sample of 774 pregnant women from the Najran region, Saudi Arabia, using an online survey between February and May 2024. A self-administered questionnaire consisting of sociodemographic data, pregnancy-related characteristics, and the MD scale was used for data collection. The current study showed that only 32.2% of participants had high adherence to the MD, and 57.6% had moderate adherence. Regarding sociodemographic determinants of MD adherence, highly educated, older women with lower pre-pregnancy body mass index (BMI) and higher monthly income increased the probability of high adherence to the MD (p < 0.05). In addition, being physically active before or during pregnancy significantly increased the woman's probability of having higher adherence to the MD (p < 0.05). Concerning pregnancy-related determinants, having a planned pregnancy and regular antenatal care (ANC) increased the woman's probability of high adherence to the MD by nearly 1.3 times (p < 0.05). In addition, low adherence to the MD increases the risk of gestational diabetes. In conclusion, numerous sociodemographic and pregnancy-related determinacies can significantly affect a woman's adherence to the MD. Healthcare providers should address these determinants during the planning and implementation of pregnant women's nutritional counseling to make the counseling process woman-centered and more effective. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Fear of Childbirth (FOC) can significantly impact women's physical and psychological health; therefore, healthcare providers must provide proactive care, which means they have to intervene before FOC becomes tokophobia. This study's purpose is to evaluate the determinants of prenatal childbirth fear during the third trimester among low-risk expectant mothers. Methods: A cross-sectional comparative study was conducted at the Maternal and Children Hospital's outpatient clinics in Najran City, Saudi Arabia, from April to July 2023. The study involved 377 nulliparous and multiparous women, using a systemic random sampling technique. The data were collected using an interview schedule composed of questions related to demographic and obstetrics characteristics, the FOC questionnaire, and a multidimensional scale of perceived social support. Significant FOC predictors were examined using a binary logistic regression model. Results: There was a statistically significant difference between nulliparous and multiparous participants concerning FOC; 80.0% of nulliparous participants had significant FOC compared to 67.8% of multiparous participants (p = 0.011). A binary logistic regression clarified that regular antenatal care and family and spousal support were significantly negatively correlated with significant FOC among multiparous and nulliparous women (p < 0.05). For multiparas, FOC was associated with pregnancy planning and previous labor-related complications. In addition, friends' support was an important predictor of significantly lower FOC among nulliparous women (p < 0.05). Conclusions: Significant FOC was higher in nulliparous women when compared to multiparous women. Numerous obstetric variables and different types of social support play important roles in significant FOC. Special attention and support should be provided to high-risk women for proper FOC management during prenatal classes to improve their childbirth experiences. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: This study aimed to conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis of all randomized and nonrandomized controlled trials (RCTs and NCTs, respectively) that explored the maternal-neonatal outcomes of cervical osmotic dilators versus dinoprostone in promoting cervical ripening during labor induction., Study Design: Six major databases were screened until August 27, 2022. The quality of included studies was evaluated. The data were summarized as mean difference or risk ratio (RR) with 95% confidence interval (CI) in a random-effects model., Results: Overall, 14 studies with 15 arms were analyzed ( n  = 2,380 patients). Ten and four studies were RCTs and NCTs, respectively. The overall quality for RCTs varied (low risk n  = 2, unclear risk n  = 7, and high risk n  = 1), whereas all NCTs had good quality ( n  = 4). For the primary endpoints, there was no significant difference between both groups regarding the rate of normal vaginal delivery (RR = 1.04, 95% CI: 0.95-1.14, p  = 0.41) and rate of cesarean delivery (RR = 1.04, 95% CI: 0.93-1.17, p  = 0.51). Additionally, there was no significant difference between both groups regarding the mean change in Bishop score and mean time from intervention to delivery. The rate of uterine hyperstimulation was significantly lower in the cervical osmotic dilator group. For the neonatal outcomes, during cervical ripening, the rate of fetal distress was significantly lower in the cervical osmotic dilator group. There was no significant difference between both groups regarding the mean Apgar scores, rate of meconium-stained amniotic fluid, rate of umbilical cord metabolic acidosis, rate of neonatal infection, and rate of neonatal intensive care unit admission., Conclusion: During labor induction, cervical ripening with cervical osmotic dilators and dinoprostone had comparable maternal-neonatal outcomes. Cervical osmotic dilators had low risk of uterine hyperstimulation compared with dinoprostone. Overall, cervical osmotic dilators might be more preferred over dinoprostone in view of their analogous cervical ripening effects, comparable maternal-neonatal outcomes, and lack of drug-related adverse events., Key Points: · This is the first analysis of cervical osmotic dilators versus PGE2 for cervical ripening during labor.. · There was no difference between both arms regarding the rates of normal vaginal/cesarean deliveries.. · There was no difference between both arms regarding the rates of neonatal adverse events.. · Cervical osmotic dilators had significant lower risk of uterine hyperstimulation compared with PGE2.. · Cervical osmotic dilators may be superior to PGE2 in view of their similar efficacy and better safety.., Competing Interests: None declared., (Thieme. All rights reserved.)