Nutritional practices to manage menstrual cycle related symptoms: A systematic review

Certain nutritional practices may reduce menstrual-related symptoms, but there is no current consensus on what foods/supplements are sufficiently evidenced to warrant promotion to reduce menstrual symptoms of naturally menstruating individuals. This review followed the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. Two online databases were searched for published experimental studies that investigated the effects of foods/supplements on menstrual-related symptoms in eumenorrheic women. Extracted data and study characteristics were tabulated and grouped based on food/supplement intervention and dosage compared to UK dietary reference values (DRVs) and safe upper limits. In total, 28 studies and 21 different foods/supplement interventions were included in the review. None of the studies reported a negative effect on symptoms, 23 reported a positive effect and 5 had no effect. Eighteen different ways of measuring menstrual-related symptoms were described across the studies. The results indicate a lack of consistency in studies to confidently provide information to eumenorrheic, naturally menstruating women regarding the use of foods/supplements to reduce menstrual symptoms. Determination of menstrual-related symptoms varied along with dose and duration of food or supplements provided. These data provide some evidence for the use of vitamin D, calcium, zinc and curcumin to reduce menstrual related symptoms of non-hormonal contraceptive users, on an individual basis, however further investigation is required prior to implementation with a focus on robust protocols to determine and measure changes in menstrual symptoms, with interventions adhering to DRVs and safe upper limits

Effect of self-monitoring of blood pressure on blood pressure control in pregnant individuals with chronic or gestational hypertension: the BUMP 2 randomized clinical trial

Importance: inadequate management of elevated blood pressure is a significant contributing factor to maternal deaths. The role of blood pressure self-monitoring in pregnancy in improving clinical outcomes for the pregnant individual and infant is unclear. Objective: To evaluate the effect of blood pressure self-monitoring, compared with usual care alone, on blood pressure control and other related maternal and infant outcomes, in individuals with pregnancy hypertension. Design, setting, and participants: unblinded, randomized clinical trial that recruited between November 2018 and September 2019 in 15 hospital maternity units in England. Individuals with chronic hypertension (enrolled up to 37 weeks' gestation) or with gestational hypertension (enrolled between 20 and 37 weeks' gestation). Final follow-up was in May 2020. Interventions: Participants were randomized to either blood pressure self-monitoring using a validated monitor and a secure telemonitoring system in addition to usual care (n = 430) or to usual care alone (n = 420). Usual care comprised blood pressure measured by health care professionals at regular antenatal clinics. Main outcomes and measures: the primary maternal outcome was the difference in mean systolic blood pressure recorded by health care professionals between randomization and birth. Results: Among 454 participants with chronic hypertension (mean age, 36 years; mean gestation at entry, 20 weeks) and 396 with gestational hypertension (mean age, 34 years; mean gestation at entry, 33 weeks) who were randomized, primary outcome data were available from 444 (97.8%) and 377 (95.2%), respectively. In the chronic hypertension cohort, there was no statistically significant difference in mean systolic blood pressure for the self-monitoring groups vs the usual care group (133.8 mm Hg vs 133.6 mm Hg, respectively; adjusted mean difference, 0.03 mm Hg [95% CI, -1.73 to 1.79]). In the gestational hypertension cohort, there was also no significant difference in mean systolic blood pressure (137.6 mm Hg compared with 137.2 mm Hg; adjusted mean difference, -0.03 mm Hg [95% CI, -2.29 to 2.24]). There were 8 serious adverse events in the self-monitoring group (4 in each cohort) and 3 in the usual care group (2 in the chronic hypertension cohort and 1 in the gestational hypertension cohort). Conclusions andrelevance: among pregnant individuals with chronic or gestational hypertension, blood pressure self-monitoring with telemonitoring, compared with usual care, did not lead to significantly improved clinic-based blood pressure control. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03334149.</p