Cochrane Db Syst Rev
-
Cochrane Db Syst Rev · Oct 2004
ReviewDisclosing to parents newborn carrier status identified by routine blood spot screening.
Newborn blood spot screening programmes are designed to detect serious conditions affecting individuals, where early treatment can improve health. It is suggested that screening can improve the experience of diagnosis for parents. For example, without newborn screening, when a child with cystic fibrosis becomes symptomatic a period of uncertainty can arise prior to diagnosis. These potential advantages of screening need to be weighed against potential disadvantages of screening at individual and population levels. Some newborn screening programmes inadvertently identify newborn infants who, although not affected by the condition, carry a gene for it and can pass on that gene to their children; these are 'genetic carriers'. Knowledge of newborn carrier status can lead to: testing of parents and family members, and concern about possible affected future siblings should both parents be identified as carriers; the possibility of such testing revealing the putative father is not the biological father; concern about the child's future reproductive choices; and unjustified anxiety about the health of the carrier newborn. There is an urgent need to develop clear guidance as to how to respond, with advances in technology fuelling the expansion of newborn blood spot screening and raised expectations of informed consent and disclosing test results. Depending on the condition for which screening is offered, options include: employing tests that do not identify carrier status, if available; identifying acceptable ways of disclosing carrier status; or identifying acceptable ways of not disclosing carrier status. These options are illustrated by screening programmes for sickle cell disorders and cystic fibrosis. Currently, there are no screening tests available for sickle cell disorders that do not identify carrier status. For cystic fibrosis, the policy choice is between an extended period of testing, and a screening result that is available sooner for most newborns, but inadvertently identifies carrier babies. ⋯ There is a need to develop and evaluate the effects of interventions to support the disclosure of carrier status to parents following newborn screening.
-
Cochrane Db Syst Rev · Oct 2004
Review Meta AnalysisLow glycaemic index diets for coronary heart disease.
The glycaemic index (GI) is a physiological measure of the ability of a carbohydrate to affect blood glucose. Interest is growing in the low GI carbohydrate concept for the clinical management of people at risk of, or with established coronary heart disease. There is a need to review the current evidence from controlled trials in this area. ⋯ The evidence from randomised controlled trials showing that low glycaemic index diets reduces coronary heart disease and CHD risk factors is weak. Many of the trials identified were short-term, of poor quality and conducted on small sample sizes. There is a need for well designed, adequately powered, randomised controlled studies, of greater than 12 weeks duration to assess the effects of low glycaemic index diets for CHD.
-
Cochrane Db Syst Rev · Oct 2004
Review Meta AnalysisProphylactic intravenous preloading for regional analgesia in labour.
Reduced uterine blood flow from maternal hypotension may contribute to fetal heart rate changes which are common following regional analgesia (epidural or spinal or combined spinal-epidural (CSE)) during labour. Intravenous fluid preloading may help to reduce maternal hypotension but using lower doses of local anaesthetic, and opioid only blocks, may reduce the need for preloading. ⋯ Preloading prior to traditional high-dose local anaesthetic blocks may have some beneficial fetal and maternal effects in healthy women. Low-dose epidural and CSE analgesia techniques may reduce the need for preloading. The studies reviewed were too small to show whether preloading is beneficial for women having regional analgesia during labour using the lower-dose local anaesthetics or opioids. Further investigation of low-dose epidural or CSE (including opioid only) blocks, and the risks and benefits of intravenous preloading for women with pregnancy complications, is required.
-
Since the introduction of the Swedish back school in 1969, back schools have frequently been used for treating patients with low-back pain (LBP). However, the content of back schools has changed and appears to vary widely today. ⋯ There is moderate evidence suggesting that back schools, in an occupational setting, reduce pain, and improve function and return-to-work status, in the short and intermediate-term, compared to exercises, manipulation, myofascial therapy, advice, placebo or waiting list controls, for patients with chronic and recurrent LBP. However, future trials should improve methodological quality and clinical relevance and evaluate the cost-effectiveness of back schools.
-
Cochrane Db Syst Rev · Oct 2004
Review Meta Analysis Comparative StudyExtra-abdominal versus intra-abdominal repair of the uterine incision at caesarean section.
Different techniques have been described to reduce morbidity during caesarean section. After the baby has been born by caesarean section and the placenta has been extracted, temporary removal of the uterus from the abdominal cavity (exteriorisation of the uterus) to facilitate repair of the uterine incision has been postulated as a valuable technique. This is particularly so when exposure of the incision is difficult and when there are problems with haemostasis. Several clinical trials have been done, with varying results, including substantial reduction in the rate of postoperative infection and morbidity with extra-abdominal closure of the uterine incision, and less associated peri-operative haemorrhage. Subsequent studies suggest that the method of placental removal rather than method of closure of the uterine incision influences peri-operative morbidity. ⋯ There is no evidence from this review to make definitive conclusions about which method of uterine closure offers greater advantages, if any. However, these results are based on too few and too small studies to detect differences in rare, but severe, complications.