Suppr超能文献

提高既往妊娠糖尿病妇女产后糖尿病筛查接受率的干预措施:一项系统评价和贝叶斯网络荟萃分析

Interventions to increase the uptake of postpartum diabetes screening among women with previous gestational diabetes: a systematic review and Bayesian network meta-analysis.

作者信息

Huang Jing, Forde Rita, Parsons Judith, Zhao Xiaoyan, Wang Jianying, Liu Yingjie, Forbes Angus

机构信息

Division of Care for Long-term Conditions, Florence Nightingale Faculty of Nursing, Midwifery and Palliative Care, King's College London, London, United Kingdom (Ms Huang, Drs Forde and Parsons, Ms Zhao, and Dr Forbes).

Division of Care for Long-term Conditions, Florence Nightingale Faculty of Nursing, Midwifery and Palliative Care, King's College London, London, United Kingdom (Ms Huang, Drs Forde and Parsons, Ms Zhao, and Dr Forbes).

出版信息

Am J Obstet Gynecol MFM. 2023 Oct;5(10):101137. doi: 10.1016/j.ajogmf.2023.101137. Epub 2023 Aug 22.

Abstract

OBJECTIVE

This study aimed to summarize the current interventions aimed at improving postpartum diabetes screening attendance and to compare their effectiveness.

DATA SOURCES

Literature searches were conducted in the Web of Science, Embase, Cochrane Library, CINAHL, and PubMed from inception to March 20, 2023.

STUDY ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA

Quantitative studies involving an intervention to increase postpartum diabetes screening attendance among women with gestational diabetes mellitus were included.

METHODS

The Joanna Briggs Institute checklists were used for the quality appraisal of the included studies. A Bayesian network meta-analysis was performed to synthesize the comparative effectiveness of the relevant interventions aimed at improving postpartum diabetes screening rates.

RESULTS

A total of 40 studies were included in this review with pooled data from 17,123 women. Studies included randomized controlled trials (n=11, including 3 US-based studies and 8 non-US-based studies) and nonrandomised studies (n=29, including 13 US-based studies and 16 non-US-based studies). Of the 14 studies that reported screening outcomes, 11 detected early type 2 diabetes at a rate ranging from 2.0% to 23.0%. The types of interventions identified included reminders (eg, postal letters, emails, and phone messages), educational interventions, screening methods and delivery, policy changes, antenatal groups, and multimodal interventions. Based on the network meta-analysis from randomized controlled trials, antenatal group intervention, which refers to antenatal patient education delivered in groups (1 US-based study), had the highest probability to be the most effective intervention (odds ratio, 10; 95% confidence interval, 1.6-77.0), followed by one-to-one educational intervention with written educational materials or counselling (odds ratio, 6.9; 95% confidence interval, 3.6-16.0). The results from nonrandomized studies indicated that flexible screening methods and delivery (2 US-based studies) had the greatest impact on screening uptake (odds ratio, 3.9; 95% confidence interval, 1.8-10.0), followed by educational interventions (1 US-based study and 2 non-US-based studies) with antenatal patient education and written educational materials (odds ratio, 3.4; 95% confidence interval, 1.9-6.3) and antenatal groups (odds ratio, 3.3; 95% confidence interval, 1.7-6.7).

CONCLUSION

The presented evidence suggests that antenatal patient education delivered in groups and offering more flexible screening methods were associated with the greatest increase in attendance. The multimodal interventions and reminders could still be important if they were more theoretically grounded and were more integrated into the healthcare system.

摘要

目的

本研究旨在总结目前旨在提高产后糖尿病筛查参与率的干预措施,并比较其有效性。

数据来源

从创刊至2023年3月20日,在Web of Science、Embase、Cochrane图书馆、CINAHL和PubMed中进行文献检索。

研究纳入标准

纳入涉及干预措施以提高妊娠期糖尿病妇女产后糖尿病筛查参与率的定量研究。

方法

使用乔安娜·布里格斯研究所核对清单对纳入研究进行质量评估。进行贝叶斯网络荟萃分析,以综合旨在提高产后糖尿病筛查率的相关干预措施的比较有效性。

结果

本综述共纳入40项研究,汇总了17123名女性的数据。研究包括随机对照试验(n = 11,包括3项美国的研究和8项非美国的研究)和非随机研究(n = 29,包括13项美国的研究和16项非美国的研究)。在报告筛查结果的14项研究中,11项检测到早期2型糖尿病的比例为2.0%至23.0%。确定的干预措施类型包括提醒(如邮政信件、电子邮件和电话信息)、教育干预、筛查方法和实施方式、政策变化、产前小组以及多模式干预。基于随机对照试验的网络荟萃分析,产前小组干预(指以小组形式进行的产前患者教育,1项美国的研究)最有可能是最有效的干预措施(优势比,10;95%置信区间,1.6 - 77.0),其次是一对一的教育干预,提供书面教育材料或咨询(优势比,6.9;95%置信区间,3.6 - 16.0)。非随机研究的结果表明,灵活的筛查方法和实施方式(2项美国的研究)对筛查参与率的影响最大(优势比,3.9;95%置信区间,1.8 - 10.0),其次是教育干预(1项美国的研究和2项非美国的研究),包括产前患者教育和书面教育材料(优势比,3.4;95%置信区间,1.9 - 6.3)以及产前小组(优势比,3.3;95%置信区间,;1.7 - 6.7)。

结论

现有证据表明,以小组形式进行的产前患者教育以及提供更灵活的筛查方法与参与率的最大提高相关。如果多模式干预和提醒措施更具理论基础并更好地融入医疗保健系统,它们仍然可能很重要。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验