Women’s, partners’ and healthcare providers’ views and experiences of assisted vaginal birth: a systematic mixed methods review

Background When certain complications arise during the second stage of labour, assisted vaginal delivery (AVD), a vaginal birth with forceps or vacuum extractor, can effectively improve outcomes by ending prolonged labour or by ensuring rapid birth in response to maternal or fetal compromise. In recent decades, the use of AVD has decreased in many settings in favour of caesarean section (CS). This review aimed to improve understanding of experiences, barriers and facilitators for AVD use. Methods Systematic searches of eight databases using predefined search terms to identify studies reporting views and experiences of maternity service users, their partners, health care providers, policymakers, and funders in relation to AVD. Relevant studies were assessed for methodological quality. Qualitative findings were synthesised using a meta-ethnographic approach. Confidence in review findings was assessed using GRADE CERQual. Findings from quantitative studies were synthesised narratively and assessed using an adaptation of CERQual. Qualitative and quantitative review findings were triangulated using a convergence coding matrix. Results Forty-two studies (published 1985–2019) were included: six qualitative, one mixed-method and 35 quantitative. Thirty-five were from high-income countries, and seven from LMIC settings. Confidence in the findings was moderate or low. Spontaneous vaginal birth was most likely to be associated with positive short and long-term outcomes, and emergency CS least likely. Views and experiences of AVD tended to fall somewhere between these two extremes. Where indicated, AVD can be an effective, acceptable alternative to caesarean section. There was agreement or partial agreement across qualitative studies and surveys that the experience of AVD is impacted by the unexpected nature of events and, particularly in high-income settings, unmet expectations. Positive relationships, good communication, involvement in decision-making, and (believing in) the reason for intervention were important mediators of birth experience. Professional attitudes and skills (development) were simultaneously barriers and facilitators of AVD in quantitative studies. Conclusions Information, positive interaction and communication with providers and respectful care are facilitators for acceptance of AVD. Barriers include lack of training and skills for decision-making and use of instruments

Abatacept in individuals at high risk of rheumatoid arthritis (APIPPRA): a randomised, double-blind, multicentre, parallel, placebo-controlled, phase 2b clinical trial

\ua9 2024 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Ltd. This is an Open Access article under the CC BY 4.0 license. Background: Individuals with serum antibodies to citrullinated protein antigens (ACPA), rheumatoid factor, and symptoms, such as inflammatory joint pain, are at high risk of developing rheumatoid arthritis. In the arthritis prevention in the pre-clinical phase of rheumatoid arthritis with abatacept (APIPPRA) trial, we aimed to evaluate the feasibility, efficacy, and acceptability of treating high risk individuals with the T-cell co-stimulation modulator abatacept. Methods: The APIPPRA study was a randomised, double-blind, multicentre, parallel, placebo-controlled, phase 2b clinical trial done in 28 hospital-based early arthritis clinics in the UK and three in the Netherlands. Participants (aged ≥18 years) at risk of rheumatoid arthritis positive for ACPA and rheumatoid factor with inflammatory joint pain were recruited. Exclusion criteria included previous episodes of clinical synovitis and previous use of corticosteroids or disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs. Participants were randomly assigned (1:1) using a computer-generated permuted block randomisation (block sizes of 2 and 4) stratified by sex, smoking, and country, to 125 mg abatacept subcutaneous injections weekly or placebo for 12 months, and then followed up for 12 months. Masking was achieved by providing four kits (identical in appearance and packaging) with pre-filled syringes with coded labels of abatacept or placebo every 3 months. The primary endpoint was the time to development of clinical synovitis in three or more joints or rheumatoid arthritis according to American College of Rheumatology and European Alliance of Associations for Rheumatology 2010 criteria, whichever was met first. Synovitis was confirmed by ultrasonography. Follow-up was completed on Jan 13, 2021. All participants meeting the intention-to-treat principle were included in the analysis. This trial was registered with EudraCT (2013–003413–18). Findings: Between Dec 22, 2014, and Jan 14, 2019, 280 individuals were evaluated for eligibility and, of 213 participants, 110 were randomly assigned to abatacept and 103 to placebo. During the treatment period, seven (6%) of 110 participants in the abatacept group and 30 (29%) of 103 participants in the placebo group met the primary endpoint. At 24 months, 27 (25%) of 110 participants in the abatacept group had progressed to rheumatoid arthritis, compared with 38 (37%) of 103 in the placebo group. The estimated proportion of participants remaining arthritis-free at 12 months was 92\ub78% (SE 2\ub76) in the abatacept group and 69\ub72% (4\ub77) in the placebo group. Kaplan–Meier arthritis-free survival plots over 24 months favoured abatacept (log-rank test p=0\ub7044). The difference in restricted mean survival time between groups was 53 days (95% CI 28–78; p<0\ub70001) at 12 months and 99 days (95% CI 38–161; p=0\ub70016) at 24 months in favour of abatacept. During treatment, abatacept was associated with improvements in pain scores, functional wellbeing, and quality-of-life measurements, as well as low scores of subclinical synovitis by ultrasonography, compared with placebo. However, the effects were not sustained at 24 months. Seven serious adverse events occurred in the abatacept group and 11 in the placebo group, including one death in each group deemed unrelated to treatment. Interpretation: Therapeutic intervention during the at-risk phase of rheumatoid arthritis is feasible, with acceptable safety profiles. T-cell co-stimulation modulation with abatacept for 12 months reduces progression to rheumatoid arthritis, with evidence of sustained efficacy beyond the treatment period, and with no new safety signals. Funding: Bristol Myers Squibb

Key signaling nodes in mammary gland development and cancer: β-catenin

β-Catenin plays important roles in mammary development and tumorigenesis through its functions in cell adhesion, signal transduction and regulation of cell-context-specific gene expression. Studies in mice have highlighted the critical role of β-catenin signaling for stem cell biology at multiple stages of mammary development. Deregulated β-catenin signaling disturbs stem and progenitor cell dynamics and induces mammary tumors in mice. Recent data showing deregulated β-catenin signaling in metaplastic and basal-type tumors suggest a similar link to reactivated developmental pathways and human breast cancer. The present review will discuss β-catenin as a central transducer of numerous signaling pathways and its role in mammary development and breast cancer

Beyond equilibrium climate sensitivity

ISSN:1752-0908ISSN:1752-089

Device-measured physical activity and its association with physical function in adults with type 2 diabetes mellitus.

AIM:To quantify how differences in metrics characterizing physical activity and sedentary behaviour in type 2 diabetes are associated with physical function METHODS: This analysis included participants' data from the Chronotype of Patients with Type 2 Diabetes and Effect on Glycaemic Control (CODEC) cross-sectional study. Data were stratified into two groups according to their short physical performance battery (SPPB) score (impaired physical function = SPPB < 10 and normal physical function = SPPB ≥ 10). Hand-grip strength, sit-to-stand 60 (STS-60) and the Duke Activity Status Index (DASI) score were used to assess functional capacity, while physical activity metrics were measured with a wrist-worn accelerometer. The associations between physical activity metrics and measures of functional capacity were analysed using generalized linear modelling. RESULTS:Some 635 adults (median age 66 years, 34% female) were included in this analysis. Overall, 29% of the cohort scored < 10 in the SPPB test indicating impaired physical function. This group spent more time in prolonged sedentary behaviour (600.7 vs. 572.5 min) and undertook less-intense physical activity. Each sd increase in physical activity volume and intensity gradients for those with impaired physical function was associated with 17% more repetitions for STS-60 with similar associations seen for DASI score. Each sd in sedentary time was associated with 15% fewer repetitions in STS-60 and 16% lower DASI score in those with impaired physical function, whereas in normal physical function group it was 2% and 1%, respectively. CONCLUSIONS:The strength of the associations for physical activity measures and functional capacity were modified by physical function status, with the strongest association seen in those with impaired physical function