Ringing up about breastfeeding: a randomised controlled trial exploring early telephone peer support for breastfeeding (RUBY) - trial protocol

BACKGROUND: The risks of not breastfeeding for mother and infant are well established, yet in Australia, although most women initiate breastfeeding many discontinue breastfeeding altogether and few women exclusively breastfeed to six months as recommended by the World Health Organization and Australian health authorities. We aim to determine whether proactive telephone peer support during the postnatal period increases the proportion of infants who are breastfed at six months, replicating a trial previously found to be effective in Canada. DESIGN/METHODS: A two arm randomised controlled trial will be conducted, recruiting primiparous women who have recently given birth to a live baby, are proficient in English and are breastfeeding or intending to breastfeed. Women will be recruited in the postnatal wards of three hospitals in Melbourne, Australia and will be randomised to peer support or to 'usual' care. All women recruited to the trial will receive usual hospital postnatal care and infant feeding support. For the intervention group, peers will make two telephone calls within the first ten days postpartum, then weekly telephone calls until week twelve, with continued contact until six months postpartum. Primary aim: to determine whether postnatal telephone peer support increases the proportion of infants who are breastfed for at least six months. HYPOTHESIS: that telephone peer support in the postnatal period will increase the proportion of infants receiving any breast milk at six months by 10% compared with usual care (from 46% to 56%).Outcome data will be analysed by intention to treat. A supplementary multivariate analysis will be undertaken if there are any baseline differences in the characteristics of women in the two groups which might be associated with the primary outcomes. DISCUSSION: The costs and health burdens of not breastfeeding fall disproportionately and increasingly on disadvantaged groups. We have therefore deliberately chosen trial sites which have a high proportion of women from disadvantaged backgrounds. This will be the first Australian randomised controlled trial to test the effectiveness and cost effectiveness of proactive peer telephone support for breastfeeding. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Australian and New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry ACTRN12612001024831

Outcomes of a four-year specialist-taught physical education program on physical activity: a cluster randomized controlled trial, the LOOK study

BackgroundThe objective of this study was to investigate the effect of a 4-year specialist-taught Physical Education (PE) program on physical activity (PA) among primary school children.MethodsA 4-year cluster randomised controlled trial was conducted in children (initially aged 8 years) from 29 primary schools (13 Intervention, 16 Control). Intervention students (N&thinsp;=&thinsp;457) received 2&thinsp;&times;&thinsp;45 min PE lessons per week from specialist-trained PE teachers (68 lessons per year, 272 lessons over 4 years). Control group students (N&thinsp;=&thinsp;396) received usual practice PE from generalist classroom teachers. PA during PE lessons was examined using the System for Observing Fitness Instruction Time (SOFIT). Pedometers (steps/day) were worn for 7 days each year, and accelerometers were worn concurrently in the final two years to assess moderate to vigorous (MVPA) and sedentary activity. Linear and generalized mixed models were used to determine differences in Intervention and Control student PA and the proportion of students meeting PA guidelines.ResultsThe intervention increased SOFIT-observed student MVPA during PE lessons by 6.5 mins (16.7 v 10.2, p&thinsp;&lt;&thinsp;0.001). Within intervention schools, participants increased their whole-day step counts (boys&thinsp;=&thinsp;449 [CI,140 to 756]; girls&thinsp;=&thinsp;424 [CI,222 to 626]) and minutes of MVPA (boys&thinsp;=&thinsp;8.0 [CI,6.8 to 9.2]; girls&thinsp;=&thinsp;3.5 [CI,1.7 to 5.4]) on PE days. However, compared to the Control group the Intervention did not: increase habitual steps/day or MVPA when averaged over 7 days; elicit greater improvements in these measures over time; or increase the odds of meeting step/day or MVPA recommendations. At age 11 years Intervention group boys were 20 mins less sedentary per day (380 [CI,369 to 391] vs 360 [CI,350 to 369]) and this effect was sustained at age 12 years.ConclusionsWell-designed specialist-taught PE can improve student PA during PE lessons. However for PE to be a significant contributor to improving habitual PA in pre-adolescent children, daily classes are likely to be required, and even this would need to be supplemented with a wider multicomponent strategy. Our finding of a reduction in sedentary time among Intervention boys warrants further investigation into the potential role PE could play in influencing sedentary behaviour.<br /

The AEDUCATE Collaboration. Comprehensive antenatal education birth preparation programmes to reduce the rates of caesarean section in nulliparous women. Protocol for an individual participant data prospective meta-analysis

Introduction: Rates of medical interventions in normal labour and birth are increasing. This prospective meta-analysis (PMA) proposes to assess whether the addition of a comprehensive multicomponent birth preparation programme reduces caesarean section (CS) in nulliparous women compared with standard hospital care. Additionally, do participant characteristics, intervention components or hospital characteristics modify the effectiveness of the programme? Methods and analysis: Population: women with singleton vertex pregnancies, no planned caesarean section (CS) or epidural. Intervention: in addition to hospital-based standard care, a comprehensive antenatal education programme that includes multiple components for birth preparation, addressing the three objectives: preparing women and their birth partner/support person for childbirth through education on physiological/hormonal birth (knowledge and understanding); building women’s confidence through psychological preparation (positive mindset) and support their ability to birth without pain relief using evidence-based tools (tools and techniques). The intervention could occur in a hospital-based or community setting. Comparator: standard care alone in hospital-based maternity units. Outcomes: Primary: CS. Secondary: epidural analgesia, mode of birth, perineal trauma, postpartum haemorrhage, newborn resuscitation, psychosocial well-being. Subgroup analysis: parity, model of care, maternal risk status, maternal education, maternal socio-economic status, intervention components. Study design: An individual participant data (IPD) prospective meta-analysis (PMA) of randomised controlled trials, including cluster design. Each trial is conducted independently but share core protocol elements to contribute data to the PMA. Participating trials are deemed eligible for the PMA if their results are not yet known outside their Data Monitoring Committees. Ethics and dissemination: Participants in the individual trials will consent to participation, with respective trials receiving ethical approval by their local Human Research Ethics Committees. Individual datasets remain the property of trialists, and can be published prior to the publication of final PMA results. The overall data for meta-analysis will be held, analysed and published by the collaborative group, led by the Cochrane PMA group. Trial registration number: CRD42020103857

Estimating the Impact of Adding C-Reactive Protein as a Criterion for Lipid Lowering Treatment in the United States

BACKGROUND: There is growing interest in using C-reactive protein (CRP) levels to help select patients for lipid lowering therapy—although this practice is not yet supported by evidence of benefit in a randomized trial. OBJECTIVE: To estimate the number of Americans potentially affected if a CRP criteria were adopted as an additional indication for lipid lowering therapy. To provide context, we also determined how well current lipid lowering guidelines are being implemented. METHODS: We analyzed nationally representative data to determine how many Americans age 35 and older meet current National Cholesterol Education Program (NCEP) treatment criteria (a combination of risk factors and their Framingham risk score). We then determined how many of the remaining individuals would meet criteria for treatment using 2 different CRP-based strategies: (1) narrow: treat individuals at intermediate risk (i.e., 2 or more risk factors and an estimated 10–20% risk of coronary artery disease over the next 10 years) with CRP > 3 mg/L and (2) broad: treat all individuals with CRP > 3 mg/L. DATA SOURCE: Analyses are based on the 2,778 individuals participating in the 1999–2002 National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey with complete data on cardiac risk factors, fasting lipid levels, CRP, and use of lipid lowering agents. MAIN MEASURES: The estimated number and proportion of American adults meeting NCEP criteria who take lipid-lowering drugs, and the additional number who would be eligible based on CRP testing. RESULTS: About 53 of the 153 million Americans aged 35 and older meet current NCEP criteria (that do not involve CRP) for lipid-lowering treatment. Sixty-five percent, however, are not currently being treated, even among those at highest risk (i.e., patients with established heart disease or its risk equivalent)—62% are untreated. Adopting the narrow and broad CRP strategies would make an additional 2.1 and 25.3 million Americans eligible for treatment, respectively. The latter strategy would make over half the adults age 35 and older eligible for lipid-lowering therapy, with most of the additionally eligible (57%) coming from the lowest NCEP heart risk category (i.e., 0–1 risk factors). CONCLUSION: There is substantial underuse of lipid lowering therapy for American adults at high risk for coronary disease. Rather than adopting CRP-based strategies, which would make millions more lower risk patients eligible for treatment (and for whom treatment benefit has not yet been demonstrated in a randomized trial), we should ensure the treatment of currently defined high-risk patients for whom the benefit of therapy is established

Impact of vaccination on the association of COVID-19 with cardiovascular diseases:An OpenSAFELY cohort study

Infection with SARS-CoV-2 is associated with an increased risk of arterial and venous thrombotic events, but the implications of vaccination for this increased risk are uncertain. With the approval of NHS England, we quantified associations between COVID-19 diagnosis and cardiovascular diseases in different vaccination and variant eras using linked electronic health records for ~40% of the English population. We defined a 'pre-vaccination' cohort (18,210,937 people) in the wild-type/Alpha variant eras (January 2020-June 2021), and 'vaccinated' and 'unvaccinated' cohorts (13,572,399 and 3,161,485 people respectively) in the Delta variant era (June-December 2021). We showed that the incidence of each arterial thrombotic, venous thrombotic and other cardiovascular outcomes was substantially elevated during weeks 1-4 after COVID-19, compared with before or without COVID-19, but less markedly elevated in time periods beyond week 4. Hazard ratios were higher after hospitalised than non-hospitalised COVID-19 and higher in the pre-vaccination and unvaccinated cohorts than the vaccinated cohort. COVID-19 vaccination reduces the risk of cardiovascular events after COVID-19 infection. People who had COVID-19 before or without being vaccinated are at higher risk of cardiovascular events for at least two years.</p

Where are the pregnant and breastfeeding women in new pre-exposure prophylaxis trials? The imperative to overcome the evidence gap

Pregnant and breastfeeding populations are at substantial risk of acquiring HIV in some settings, yet are underrepresented in clinical trials of new pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) agents. Several PrEP formulations are in development (eg, vaginal rings, long-acting injectables, and other modalities). Pregnant and breastfeeding populations are typically excluded from initial clinical trials. We identified 14 PrEP trials of novel agents in non-pregnant or non-breastfeeding populations, and six phase 1–3 trials and open label extensions among pregnant and breastfeeding populations, that are currently ongoing or complete. A framework shift is needed to consider the ethical costs of excluding pregnant and breastfeeding populations at risk for HIV in PrEP clinical trials and promote inclusion to maximise the benefits from PrEP tools in the pipeline. Research on new PrEP agents should include pregnant and breastfeeding populations to avoid delays in reaching those who could benefit from PrEP after efficacy is established.https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lanhiv/homehj2023Paediatrics and Child Healt

COSMOS: COmparing Standard Maternity care with One-to-one midwifery Support: a randomised controlled trial

Background: In Australia and internationally, there is concern about the growing proportion of women giving birth by caesarean section. There is evidence of increased risk of placenta accreta and percreta in subsequent pregnancies as well as decreased fertility; and significant resource implications. Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of continuity of midwifery care have reported reduced caesareans and other interventions in labour, as well as increased maternal satisfaction, with no statistically significant differences in perinatal morbidity or mortality. RCTs conducted in the UK and in Australia have largely measured the effect of teams of care providers (commonly 6&ndash;12 midwives) with very few testing caseload (one-to-one) midwifery care. This study aims to determine whether caseload (one-to-one) midwifery care for women at low risk of medical complications decreases the proportion of women delivering by caesarean section compared with women receiving \u27standard\u27 care. This paper presents the trial protocol in detail.Methods/design: A two-arm RCT design will be used. Women who are identified at low medical risk will be recruited from the antenatal booking clinics of a tertiary women\u27s hospital in Melbourne, Australia. Baseline data will be collected, then women randomised to caseload midwifery or standard low risk care. Women allocated to the caseload intervention will receive antenatal, intrapartum and postpartum care from a designated primary midwife with one or two antenatal visits conducted by a \u27back-up\u27 midwife. The midwives will collaborate with obstetricians and other health professionals as necessary. If the woman has an extended labour, or if the primary midwife is unavailable, care will be provided by the back-up midwife. For women allocated to standard care, options include midwifery-led care with varying levels of continuity, junior obstetric care and community based general medical practitioner care. Data will be collected at recruitment (self administered survey) and at 2 and 6 months postpartum by postal survey. Medical/obstetric outcomes will be abstracted from the medical record. The sample size of 2008 was calculated to identify a decrease in caesarean birth from 19 to 14% and detect a range of other significant clinical differences. Comprehensive process and economic evaluations will be conducted.Trial registration: Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry ACTRN012607000073404.<br /

Pubertal development and prostate cancer risk: Mendelian randomization study in a population-based cohort.

BACKGROUND: Epidemiological studies have observed a positive association between an earlier age at sexual development and prostate cancer, but markers of sexual maturation in boys are imprecise and observational estimates are likely to suffer from a degree of uncontrolled confounding. To obtain causal estimates, we examined the role of pubertal development in prostate cancer using genetic polymorphisms associated with Tanner stage in adolescent boys in a Mendelian randomization (MR) approach. METHODS: We derived a weighted genetic risk score for pubertal development, combining 13 SNPs associated with male Tanner stage. A higher score indicated a later puberty onset. We examined the association of this score with prostate cancer risk, stage and grade in the UK-based ProtecT case-control study (n = 2,927), and used the PRACTICAL consortium (n = 43,737) as a replication sample. RESULTS: In ProtecT, the puberty genetic score was inversely associated with prostate cancer grade (odds ratio (OR) of high- vs. low-grade cancer, per tertile of the score: 0.76; 95 % CI, 0.64-0.89). In an instrumental variable estimation of the causal OR, later physical development in adolescence (equivalent to a difference of one Tanner stage between pubertal boys of the same age) was associated with a 77 % (95 % CI, 43-91 %) reduced odds of high Gleason prostate cancer. In PRACTICAL, the puberty genetic score was associated with prostate cancer stage (OR of advanced vs. localized cancer, per tertile: 0.95; 95 % CI, 0.91-1.00) and prostate cancer-specific mortality (hazard ratio amongst cases, per tertile: 0.94; 95 % CI, 0.90-0.98), but not with disease grade. CONCLUSIONS: Older age at sexual maturation is causally linked to a reduced risk of later prostate cancer, especially aggressive disease.This work was supported by the World Cancer Research Fund (2011/419) and Cancer Research UK (C18281/A19169). The Integrative Epidemiology Unit (IEU) is supported by the MRC and the University of Bristol (G0600705, MC_UU_12013/19), and the Integrative Cancer Epidemiology Programme is supported by Cancer Research UK programme grant C18281/A19169. The National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Bristol Nutrition Biomedical Research Unit is funded by the NIHR and is a partnership between University Hospitals Bristol NHS Foundation Trust and the University of Bristol. The ProtecT study is supported by the UK NIHR Health Technology Assessment (HTA) Programme (HTA 96/20/99; ISRCTN20141297). Funding for PRACTICAL and the iCOGS infrastructure came from: the European Community’s Seventh Framework Programme under grant agreement n° 223175 (HEALTH-F2-2009-223175) (COGS), Cancer Research UK (C1287/A10118, C1287/A 10710, C12292/A11174, C1281/A12014, C5047/A8384, C5047/A15007, C5047/A10692, C8197/ A16565), the National Institutes of Health (CA128978), and Post-Cancer GWAS initiative (1U19 CA148537, 1U19 CA148065 and 1U19 CA148112 – the GAME-ON initiative), the Department of Defence (W81XWH-10-1-0341), the Canadian Institutes of Health Research (CIHR) for the CIHR Team in Familial Risks of Breast Cancer, Komen Foundation for the Cure, the Breast Cancer Research Foundation, and the Ovarian Cancer Research Fund. We acknowledge support from the NIHR to the Biomedical Research Centre at The Institute of Cancer Research and The Royal Marsden NHS Foundation Trust.This is the final version of the article. It first appeared from BioMed Central via http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12916-016-0602-