Factors associated with cervix, breast and oral cavity screening among Indian women.

Factors associated with cervix, breast and oral cavity screening among Indian women.</p

Foley catheter with simultaneous oxytocin on labor induction: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

<p><b>Objective:</b> It is unclear that whether Foley catheter with simultaneous oxytocin could improve the efficacy of induction outcome.</p> <p><b>Method:</b> To conduct a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trial (RCT) studies to evaluate the effect of Foley catheter with simultaneous oxytocin on labor induction. PubMed, Embase, and other databases were searched from their inception to July 2017. We included all RCTs comparing Foley catheter with simultaneous oxytocin (i.e. intervention group) with Foley catheter followed by oxytocin (i.e. control group) in the three kinds of women (nulliparas and multiparas/only nulliparas/only multiparas). We estimate summarized relative risk (RR) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for dichotomous outcomes, standard mean difference for continuous outcomes. Fixed- and random-effects models were used, depending on heterogeneity.</p> <p><b>Results:</b> After application of our inclusion and exclusion criteria, six RCTs with a total of 1133 participants were identified. We found that only nulliparas had significant RR of delivery within 24 h (RR = 1.32, 95% CI: 1.12, 1.55, <i>I</i>² = 46.5%). Meanwhile, there was no statistically significant difference between intervention and control groups in vaginal delivery in 24 h, cesarean delivery, time to delivery, and Apgar score at 5 min less than 7. Foley catheter with simultaneous oxytocin did not increase the risk of side effects, included chorioamnionitis, postpartum hemorrhage, uterine hyperstimulation, and neonatal intensive care unit admission.</p> <p><b>Conclusion:</b> The results seem to support the use of oxytocin to a Foley catheter at the initiation of labor induction, as it might lead to increases the rate of delivery within 24 h in nulliparas.</p

Description of the study variables.

Description of the study variables.</p

Additional file 1 of Uptake of COVID-19 and influenza vaccines in relation to preexisting chronic conditions in the European countries

Supplementary Material 1: Supplementary figures and table

Percent contribution of the explanatory variables to the outcomes.

Percent contribution of the explanatory variables to the outcomes.</p

Bivariable and multivariable correlation among breast screening and the covariables.

N.B.: * p < 0.05, ** p < 0.01, *** p < 0.001. HHsex = household head’s sex; Hdecision = healthcare decision maker, HEdu = husband’s education.</p

Prevalence of breast cancer, cervix and oral cavity test.

Prevalence of breast cancer, cervix and oral cavity test.</p

Urban-rural differences in the factors associated with cervix, breast and oral cavity screening among Indian women.

Urban-rural differences in the factors associated with cervix, breast and oral cavity screening among Indian women.</p

Bivariable and multivariable correlation among breast oral cavity test and the covariables.

N.B.: * p < 0.05, ** p < 0.01, *** p < 0.001. HHsex = household head’s sex; Hdecision = healthcare decision maker, HEdu = husband’s education.</p

Bivariable and multivariable correlation among cervix test and the covariables.

N.B.: * p < 0.05, ** p < 0.01, *** p < 0.001. HHsex = household head’s sex; Hdecision = healthcare decision maker, HEdu = husband’s education.</p