Search

Objective: To estimate the effect of diabetes group prenatal care on rates of preterm birth and large for gestational age (LGA) among patients with diabetes in pregnancy compared with individual diabetes prenatal care., Data Sources: We searched Ovid Medline (1946-), Embase.com (1947-), Scopus (1823-), Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and ClinicalTrials.gov ., Methods of Study Selection: We searched electronic databases for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and observational studies comparing diabetes group prenatal care with individual care among patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus or gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM). The primary outcomes were preterm birth before 37 weeks of gestation and LGA (birth weight at or above the 90th percentile). Secondary outcomes were small for gestational age, cesarean delivery, neonatal hypoglycemia, neonatal intensive care unit admission, breastfeeding at hospital discharge, long-acting reversible contraception (LARC) uptake, and 6-week postpartum visit attendance. Secondary outcomes, limited to the subgroup of patients with GDM, included rates of GDM requiring diabetes medication (A2GDM) and completion of postpartum oral glucose tolerance testing (OGTT). Heterogeneity was assessed with the Cochran Q test and I2 statistic. Random-effects models were used to calculate pooled relative risks (RRs) and weighted mean differences., Tabulation, Integration, and Results: Eight studies met study criteria and were included in the final analysis: three RCTs and five observational studies. A total of 1,701 patients were included in the pooled studies: 770 (45.3%) in diabetes group prenatal care and 931 (54.7%) in individual care. Patients in diabetes group prenatal care had similar rates of preterm birth compared with patients in individual care (seven studies: pooled rates 9.5% diabetes group prenatal care vs 11.5% individual care, pooled RR 0.77, 95% CI, 0.59-1.01), which held for RCTs and observational studies. There was no difference between diabetes group prenatal care and individual care in rates of LGA overall (four studies: pooled rate 16.7% diabetes group prenatal care vs 20.2% individual care, pooled RR 0.93, 95% CI, 0.59-1.45) or by study type. Rates of other secondary outcomes were similar between diabetes group prenatal care and individual care, except patients in diabetes group prenatal care were more likely to receive postpartum LARC (three studies: pooled rates 46.1% diabetes group prenatal care vs 34.1% individual care, pooled RR 1.44, 95% CI, 1.09-1.91). When analysis was limited to patients with GDM, there were no differences in rates of A2GDM or postpartum visit attendance, but patients in diabetes group prenatal care were significantly more likely to complete postpartum OGTT (five studies: pooled rate 74.0% diabetes group prenatal care vs 49.4% individual care, pooled RR 1.58, 95% CI, 1.19-2.09)., Conclusion: Patients with type 2 diabetes and GDM who participate in diabetes group prenatal care have similar rates of preterm birth, LGA, and other pregnancy outcomes compared with those who participate in individual care; however, they are significantly more likely to receive postpartum LARC, and those with GDM are more likely to return for postpartum OGTT., Systematic Review Registration: PROSPERO, CRD42021279233., Competing Interests: Financial Disclosure Stacey Ehrenberg Buchner reports receiving payment from Dexcom, Inc. Michelle P Debbink reports her institution received payment from the March of Dimes as part of the Reproductive Scientist Development Program, and from the Larry H. Miller Family Foundation as part of the Driving Out Diabetes Program at the University of Utah. Jeannie C. Kelly reports receiving payment to her institution from the National Institute on Drug Abuse, the Doris Duke Foundation, and past payments from Pew Charitable Trusts and the Barnes Jewish Foundation. The other authors did not report any potential conflicts of interest., (Copyright © 2023 by the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists. Published by Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. All rights reserved.)

Objective: To estimate short-term maternal and neonatal outcomes with one-compared with two-step testing for gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM)., Data Sources: A systematic review of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and observational studies comparing one-step and two-step GDM testing strategies before September 2021 was conducted. We searched Ovid Medline (1946-), EMBASE (1947-), Scopus (1960-), Cochrane Central, and ClinicalTrials.gov . The primary outcome was rate of large-for-gestational age (LGA) neonates. Secondary outcomes were clinically relevant outcomes for GDM that were selected a priori., Methods of Study Selection: Titles, abstracts, and manuscripts were screened, selected, and reviewed by the first two authors. Four RCTs (24,966 patients) and 13 observational studies (710,677 patients) were analyzed., Tabulation, Integration, and Results: Pooled relative risks (RRs) were calculated with 95% CIs using random-effects models and were plotted graphically with forest plots. Study heterogeneity was evaluated using Cochran Q and Higgins I 2 tests. The quality of studies that met the inclusion criteria was evaluated with the Downs and Black checklist. Publication bias was assessed by using asymmetry of funnel plots and Harbord's test. There was no difference in the rate of LGA neonates (pooled RR 0.95; 95% CI 0.88-1.04) by testing strategy among RCTs, but patients who underwent one-step testing were more likely to be diagnosed with GDM (pooled RR 2.13; 95% CI 1.61-2.82) and treated with diabetes medications (pooled RR 2.24; 95% CI 1.21-4.15). One-step testing was associated with higher rates of neonatal intensive care unit (NICU) admission (pooled RR 1.12; 95% CI 1.00-1.26) and neonatal hypoglycemia (pooled RR 1.23; 95% CI 1.13-1.34). In analysis of high-quality RCTs and observational studies, one-step testing was associated with a lower rate of LGA neonates (pooled RR 0.97; 95% CI 0.95-0.98), but higher rates of GDM diagnosis, treatment, NICU admission, and neonatal hypoglycemia., Conclusion: Despite a significant increase in GDM diagnosis and treatment with one-step testing, there is no difference in rate of LGA neonates compared with two-step testing among RCTs., Systematic Review Registration: PROSPERO, CRD42021252703., Competing Interests: Financial Disclosure Jeannie C. Kelly reports that money was paid to her institution from PEW, the Barnes Jewish Foundation, and Doris Duke. Ebony Carter's institution received payment from the American Diabetes Association NIH/NIMH Robert Wood Johnson Foundation. She received payment as part of Carter Expert Strategic Consulting and from Affinia Healthcare (board advisor, Mother Goose). The other authors did not report any potential conflicts of interest., (Copyright © 2022 by the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists. Published by Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. All rights reserved.)

Objectives: The aim was to determine the nutritional adequacy of calorie restricted (CR) diets during CR interventions up to 12 months., Methods: The Comprehensive Assessment of Long-Term Effects of Reducing Intake of Energy (CALERIE™) phase 1 trial consisted of 3 single-site studies to test the feasibility and effectiveness of CR in adults without obesity. After baseline assessments, participants who were randomized to a CR intervention received education and training from registered dietitians on how to follow a healthful CR diet. Food diaries were completed at baseline and during the CR interventions (~6, 9, and 12 months) when participants were self-selecting CR diets. Diaries were analyzed for energy, macronutrients, fiber, 11 vitamins, and 9 minerals. Nutritional adequacy was defined by sex- and age-specific Estimated Average Requirement (EAR) or Adequate Intake (AI) criteria for each nutrient. Diet quality was evaluated using the PANDiet diet quality index., Results: Eighty-eight CR participants (67% women, age 40 ± 9 y, BMI 27.7 ± 1.5 kg/m 2 ) were included in the analysis. Dietary intake of fiber and most vitamins and minerals increased during CR. More than 90% of participants achieved 100% of EAR or AI during CR for 2 of 4 macronutrients (carbohydrate and protein), 6 of 11 vitamins (A, B1, B2, B3, B6, B12), and 6 of 9 minerals assessed (copper, iron, phosphorus, selenium, sodium, zinc). Nutrients for which <90% of participants achieved adequacy included fiber, omega-3 fatty acids, vitamins B5, B9, C, E, and K, and the minerals calcium, magnesium, and potassium. The PANDiet diet quality index improved from 72.9 ± 6.0% at baseline to 75.7 ± 5.2% during CR (p < 0.0001)., Conclusion: Long-term, calorie-restricted diets were nutritionally equal or superior to baseline ad libitum diets among adults without obesity. Our results support modest calorie restriction as a safe strategy to promote healthy aging without compromising nutritional adequacy or diet quality., (Copyright © 2022. Published by Elsevier Inc.)

Study Objective: To evaluate whether an Intensive Cardiac Rehabilitation (ICR) program improves depression and cardiac self-efficacy among patients with a qualifying cardiac diagnosis., Design: Prospective, longitudinal cohort design., Setting: Single-center, tertiary referral, outpatient cardiac rehabilitation center., Participants: Patients with a qualifying diagnosis for ICR., Interventions: Outpatient ICR., Main Outcome Measures: Mental health, as assessed using the Patient Health Questionnaire-9 (PHQ-9) and cardiac self-efficacy using the Cardiac Self-Efficacy (CSE) scale., Results: Of the 268 patients included (median age 69 y, 73% men), 70% had no depressive symptoms at baseline (PHQ-9 score <5). PHQ-9 scores improved in the overall sample (p < 0.0001), with greater improvements among patients with mild depressive symptoms at baseline (-4 points, p < 0.001) and those with moderate to severe depressive symptoms at baseline (-5.5 points, p < 0.001). Cardiac self-efficacy improved overall, and the two subsections of the cardiac self-efficacy questionnaire titled, "maintain function" and "control symptoms" improved (all p < 0.001)., Conclusions: Participation in an outpatient ICR program is associated with fewer depressive symptoms and greater cardiac self-efficacy among patients with CVD who qualify for ICR. The improvement in depression was greatest for those with moderate to severe depressive symptoms.

Background & Aims: Segmental body composition may be an important indicator of health and nutritional status in conditions where variations in fat and lean mass are frequently isolated to a particular body segment (e.g. paralysis, sarcopenia). Until recently, segment-specific body composition could only be assessed using invasive and expensive methods such as dual-energy x-ray absorptiometry (DXA), magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), or computed tomography (CT). Bioelectrical impedance analysis (BIA) may be a rapid, inexpensive alternative for assessing segmental composition, but it has not been fully validated for this purpose. The purpose of this study was to compare segmental estimates of lean and fat mass using BIA versus a criterion standard of DXA., Methods: A cross-sectional pilot study was conducted in n = 30 healthy adults. Outcome measures included total mass, fat mass and lean mass of arm, leg and trunk. Pearson correlation coefficients (r) and paired-samples t-tests (t) were used to assess relationships between each outcome as measured by BIA and DXA., Results: Although the methods were strongly correlated for all measures, (r > .87 for all segments) BIA routinely overestimated lean mass for arm and trunk (mean difference arm: 0.97 kg, p = .008; trunk: 5.58 kg, p < .0001); and underestimated fat mass for arm and leg (mean difference arm: 0.42 kg, p < .0001; leg: 1.94 kg p < .0001). BIA overestimated total body lean mass in 93% of participants and underestimated total body fat mass in 90% of participants., Conclusions: Significant discrepancies were noted between DXA and BIA in all body segments. Further research is needed to refine BIA methods for segmental composition estimates in heterogeneous samples and disease-specific populations before this methods can be used reliably in a clinical setting., (Copyright © 2018 European Society for Clinical Nutrition and Metabolism. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)