Dataset Information

Effectiveness of Non-Pharmacological Interventions for Overweight or Obese Infertile Women: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

ABSTRACT: Obesity is a well-known risk factor for infertility, and nonpharmacological treatments are recommended as effective and safe, but evidence is still lacking on whether nonpharmacological interventions improve fertility in overweight or obese women. The aim of this study was to systematically assess the current evidence in the literature and to evaluate the impact of nonpharmacological interventions on improving pregnancy-related outcomes in overweight or obese infertile women. Seven databases were searched for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of nonpharmacological interventions for infertile women with overweight or obesity through August 16, 2019 with no language restriction. A meta-analysis was conducted of the primary outcomes. A total of 21 RCTs were selected and systematically reviewed. Compared to the control group, nonpharmacological interventions significantly increased the pregnancy rate (relative risk (RR), 1.37; 95% CI, 1.04-1.81; p = 0.03; I² = 58%; nine RCTs) and the natural conception rate (RR, 2.17, 95% CI, 1.41-3.34; p = 0.0004; I² = 19%, five RCTs). However, they had no significant effect on the live birth rate (RR, 1.36, 95% CI, 0.94-1.95; p=0.10, I² = 65%, eight RCTs) and increased the risk of miscarriage (RR: 1.57, 95% CI, 1.05-2.36; p = 0.03; I² = 0%). Therefore, nonpharmacological interventions could have a positive effect on the pregnancy and natural conception rates, whereas it is unclear whether they improve the live birth rate. Further research is needed to demonstrate the integrated effects of nonpharmacological interventions involving psychological outcomes, as well as pregnancy-related outcomes.

SUBMITTER: Kim SY

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7650570 | biostudies-literature | 2020 Oct

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Effectiveness of Non-Pharmacological Interventions for Overweight or Obese Infertile Women: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Kim Seo Yun SY Park Eun-Sun ES Kim Hae Won HW

International journal of environmental research and public health 20201013 20

Obesity is a well-known risk factor for infertility, and nonpharmacological treatments are recommended as effective and safe, but evidence is still lacking on whether nonpharmacological interventions improve fertility in overweight or obese women. The aim of this study was to systematically assess the current evidence in the literature and to evaluate the impact of nonpharmacological interventions on improving pregnancy-related outcomes in overweight or obese infertile women. Seven databases wer ...[more]

PMID: 33066039

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundApproximately seven to nine percent of couples of reproductive age do not get pregnant despite regular and unprotected sexual intercourse. Various psychosocial interventions for women and men with fertility disorders are repeatedly found in the literature. The effects of these interventions on outcomes such as anxiety and depression, as well as on the probability of pregnancy, do not currently allow for reliable generalisable statements. This review includes studies published since 2015 performing a method-critical evaluation of the studies. Furthermore, we suggest how interventions could be implemented in the future to improve anxiety, depression, and pregnancy rates.MethodThe project was registered with Prospero (CRD42021242683 13 April 2021). The literature search was conducted according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. Six databases were searched and 479 potential studies were discovered. After reviewing the full texts, ten studies were included for the synthesis. Not all studies reported the three outcomes: four studies each for depression, three for anxiety and nine studies for pregnancy rates were included in the meta-analysis, which was conducted using the Comprehensive meta-analysis (CMA) software.ResultsPsychosocial interventions do not significantly change women's anxiety (Hedges' g -0,006; CI: -0,667 to 0,655; p = 0,985), but they have a significant impact on depression in infertile women (Hedges' g -0,893; CI: -1,644 to -0,145; p = 0,026). Implementations of psychosocial interventions during assisted reproductive technology (ART) treatment do not increase pregnancy rates (odds ratio 1,337; 95% CI 0,983 to 1,820; p = 0,064). The methodological critical evaluation indicates heterogeneous study design and samples. The results of the studies were determined with different methods and make comparability difficult. All these factors do not allow for a uniform conclusion.Methodological critical evaluationStudy design (duration and timing of intervention, type of intervention, type of data collection) and samples (age of women, reason for infertility, duration of infertility) are very heterogeneous. The results of the studies were determined with different methods and make comparability difficult. All these factors do not allow for a uniform conclusion.ConclusionIn order to be able to better compare psychosocial interventions and their influence on ART treatment and thus also to achieve valid results, a standardised procedure to the mentioned factors is necessary.

Project description:IntroductionPostpartum fatigue is a common symptom among new mothers after their pregnancy. It has a considerable negative impact on women's functional and mental status as well as the development of babies. Identifying effective interventions to prevent or reduce postpartum fatigue is meaningful to improve the quality of life and avoid adverse outcomes of this vulnerable population. This systematic review aims to synthesise non-pharmacological evidence and evaluate the effectiveness of interventions for reducing postpartum fatigue among puerperas.Methods and analysisThis review will be conducted in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis Protocols. We will systematically search the Cochrane Library, PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, PsycINFO, CINAHL and ProQuest databases to identify clinical trials implementing non-pharmacological interventions conducted during 0-78 weeks postpartum for fatigue reduction. An additional search of OpenGrey will be conducted to identify grey literature. The search will be performed on 30 March 2021 without restrictions on time and language. Two independent reviewers will be responsible for study selection, data extraction and study quality assessment. The Cochrane risk-of-bias tool will be adopted to evaluate the risk biases of the included randomised controlled trials, and the Risk of Bias in Non-randomised Studies of Interventions will be applied to evaluate non-randomised controlled trials. Any disagreements will be referred to a third reviewer to reach a consensus. Findings will be qualitatively synthesised, and a meta-analysis will be conducted for the statistical combination if outcome data are sufficient and available.Ethics and disseminationThis systematic review will not involve the collection of primary data and will be based on published data. Therefore, ethics approval is not required. The final findings will be disseminated through peer-reviewed journals and academic conferences.Prospero registration numberCRD42021234869.

Project description:People with severe mental illness (SMI) have reduced life expectancy compared with the general population, which can be explained partly by their increased risk of diabetes. We conducted a meta-analysis to determine the clinical effectiveness of pharmacological and non-pharmacological interventions for improving glycaemic control in people with SMI (PROSPERO registration: CRD42015015558). A systematic literature search was performed on 30/10/2015 to identify randomised controlled trials (RCTs) in adults with SMI, with or without a diagnosis of diabetes that measured fasting blood glucose or glycated haemoglobin (HbA1c). Screening and data extraction were carried out independently by two reviewers. We used random effects meta-analysis to estimate effectiveness, and subgroup analysis and univariate meta-regression to explore heterogeneity. The Cochrane Collaboration's tool was used to assess risk of bias. We found 54 eligible RCTs in 4,392 adults (40 pharmacological, 13 behavioural, one mixed intervention). Data for meta-analysis were available from 48 RCTs (n = 4052). Both pharmacological (mean difference (MD), -0.11mmol/L; 95% confidence interval (CI), [-0.19, -0.02], p = 0.02, n = 2536) and behavioural interventions (MD, -0.28mmol//L; 95% CI, [-0.43, -0.12], p<0.001, n = 956) were effective in lowering fasting glucose, but not HbA1c (pharmacological MD, -0.03%; 95% CI, [-0.12, 0.06], p = 0.52, n = 1515; behavioural MD, 0.18%; 95% CI, [-0.07, 0.42], p = 0.16, n = 140) compared with usual care or placebo. In subgroup analysis of pharmacological interventions, metformin and antipsychotic switching strategies improved HbA1c. Behavioural interventions of longer duration and those including repeated physical activity had greater effects on fasting glucose than those without these characteristics. Baseline levels of fasting glucose explained some of the heterogeneity in behavioural interventions but not in pharmacological interventions. Although the strength of the evidence is limited by inadequate trial design and reporting and significant heterogeneity, there is some evidence that behavioural interventions, antipsychotic switching, and metformin can lead to clinically important improvements in glycaemic measurements in adults with SMI.

Project description:BackgroundScientific developments have brought hope to infertile couples; however, the results are not always favorable. This makes women suffer psychological pressure. Therefore, previous studies have investigated the effectiveness of many psychological interventions but no research identified the most common psychological interventions. In this regard, the present review aimed to investigate different psychological interventions that promote mental health in infertile to identify the most frequent (common) ones.MethodsIn the present study, the search was carried out using appropriate keywords Infertility, psychological interventions, mental health, stress, anxiety, depression and women in the Google Scholar، Magiran، SID، Pubmed، Scopus، Science Direct، ProQuest، Web of Science databases and One of the leading websites in health- WHO with Persian and English languages and two operators of "AND" and "OR" between 2000 and 2021.ResultsFirst, 7319 articles were searched, 6948 articles of which were removed due to irrelevant subjects, and 31 articles were removed due to duplication. 340 abstracts were examined and the results of 60 articles were extracted. Two approaches (examining the type and content of intervention) were used to extract findings. The first approach indicated high diversity in psychological interventions, leading to the categorization of the interventions into 4 categories of cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT), mind-body interventions (MBI), stress management skills, and others. CBT and MBI and stress management skills were found as the most frequent promoting interventions for mental health in infertile women. The second approach indicated the differences in protocols (number of sessions and time of interventions).ConclusionDespite differences in protocol of interventions under study, the results of all articles revealed the effectiveness of interventions in improving infertile women's mental health; therefore, it is suggested to apply the most common psychological interventions based on scientific evidence (CBT, MBI, and stress management skills) along with infertility treatment methods. The results will help the specialists, policy-makers, and planners to select and implement the most appropriate psychological interventions for infertile women.

Project description:IntroductionSexual dysfunction in the postpartum period is a very common and relevant clinical problem, which has a significant adverse impact on the health of women. We aim to analyse the efficacy and safety of non-pharmacological interventions for treating sexual dysfunction in postpartum women. Our review aims to provide accurate data for effective policy-making and improve our understanding of the treatment of postpartum sexual dysfunction with non-pharmacological therapies.Methods and analysisThe Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials in The Cochrane Library, clinicaltrials.gov, Medline/PubMed, CINAHL (Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature), LILACS (Literatura Latino-americana e do Caribe em Ciências da Saúde) and Embase will be used to search for articles dated from database inception to July 2019. Randomised controlled clinical trials and large prospective cohorts with control groups using non-pharmacological treatments for sexual dysfunction in postpartum women will be included. Sexual problems are directly linked to sexual dysfunction; thus, the primary outcome will be the absolute number or percentage of sexual issues in each treatment group. The secondary outcomes will be assessed by decreased sexual problems, such as lack of lubrication, decreased libido and difficulty reaching orgasm. Three reviewers will independently select trials and extract data from the original publications. The citations will be screened independently by reviewers in duplicate. The risk of bias of the included studies will be assessed according to the Cochrane risk of bias tool. Data synthesis will be performed using Review Manager (RevMan) software V.5.2.3. In the event that a meta-analysis is possible, we will assess the heterogeneity across the studies by computing the I2 statistic.Ethics and disseminationAs the design of this study includes a review of published data, the need to obtain ethical approval was waived by our institutional review committee. We intend to publish the findings of this systematic review in a peer-reviewed journal.Prospero registration numberCRD42018103077.

Project description:Background: Several pharmacological interventions are now under investigation for the treatment of Covid-19, and the evidence is evolving rapidly. Our aim is to assess the comparative efficacy and safety of these drugs. Methods and Findings: We performed a systematic review and network meta-analysis searching Medline, Pubmed, Embase, Cochrane Covid-19 register, international trial registers, medRxiv, bioRxiv, and arXiv up to December 10, 2020. We included all randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing any pharmacological intervention for Covid-19 against any drugs, placebo or standard care (SC). Data extracted from published reports were assessed for risk of bias in accordance with the Cochrane tool, and using the GRADE framework. Primary outcomes were all-cause mortality, adverse events (AEs) and serious adverse events (SAEs). We estimated summary risk ratio (RR) using pairwise and network meta-analysis with random effects (Prospero, number CRD42020176914). We performed a systematic review and network meta-analysis searching Medline, Pubmed, Embase, Cochrane Covid-19 register, international trial registers, medRxiv, bioRxiv, and arXiv up to December 10, 2020. We included all randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing any pharmacological intervention for Covid-19 against any drugs, placebo or standard care (SC). Data extracted from published reports were assessed for risk of bias in accordance with the Cochrane tool, and using the GRADE framework. Primary outcomes were all-cause mortality, adverse events (AEs) and serious adverse events (SAEs). We estimated summary risk ratio (RR) using pairwise and network meta-analysis with random effects (Prospero, number CRD42020176914). We included 96 RCTs, comprising of 34,501 patients. The network meta-analysis showed in terms of all-cause mortality, when compared to SC or placebo, only corticosteroids significantly reduced the mortality rate (RR 0.90, 95%CI 0.83, 0.97; moderate certainty of evidence). Corticosteroids significantly reduced the mortality rate also when compared to hydroxychloroquine (RR 0.83, 95%CI 0.74, 0.94; moderate certainty of evidence). Remdesivir proved to be better in terms of SAEs when compared to SC or placebo (RR 0.75, 95%CI 0.63, 0.89; high certainty of evidence) and plasma (RR 0.57, 95%CI 0.34, 0.94; high certainty of evidence). The combination of lopinavir and ritonavir proved to reduce SAEs when compared to plasma (RR 0.49, 95%CI 0.25, 0.95; high certainty of evidence). Most of the RCTs were at unclear risk of bias (42 of 96), one third were at high risk of bias (34 of 96) and 20 were at low risk of bias. Certainty of evidence ranged from high to very low. Conclusion: At present, corticosteroids reduced all-cause mortality in patients with Covid-19, with a moderate certainty of evidence. Remdesivir appeared to be a safer option than SC or placebo, while plasma was associated with safety concerns. These preliminary evidence-based observations should guide clinical practice until more data are made public.

Project description:BackgroundFor infertile women with overweight/obesity and insulin resistance (IR), it is uncertain whether intervention before infertility treatment can improve live birth rate (LBR). We implemented a factorial-design study to explore the effectiveness of lifestyle and metformin interventions. This pilot study aimed to evaluate the feasibility of a definitive study.MethodsWe randomised 80 women without polycystic ovarian syndrome (PCOS) who planned to start their first or second IVF/ICSI treatment with a body mass index ≥ 25 kg/m2 and IR. Participants were randomised (1:1:1:1) into four groups: (A) lifestyle intervention, (B) metformin intervention, (C) lifestyle + metformin intervention, or (D) no intervention. All interventions were performed before IVF/ICSI treatment.ResultsDuring 10 months, 114 women were screened and eligible; 80 were randomised, and 72 received the assigned treatment. The recruitment rate was 70.18% (80/114, 95% CI 61.65%-78.70%). An average of 10 participants were randomised each month. None of the participants crossed over from one group to another. Approximately 93.15% (68/73) of the participants achieved good intervention compliance. Only 77.78% (56/72) of the recruited participants started infertility treatment after achieving the goal of the intervention. All randomised participants completed the follow-up. Mild adverse events after metformin administration were reported in 43.24% (16/37) of the cases, although no serious adverse events related to the interventions occurred. The LBR for groups A + C and B + D were 33.33% (12/36) and 33.33% (12/36) (RR = 1.00, 95%CI:0.52-1.92) (lifestyle intervention effect). The LBR for groups B + C and A + D were 43.24% (16/37) and 22.86% (8/35) (RR = 1.89, 95% CI:0.93-3.86) (metformin intervention effect). There was no evidence for an intervention interaction between lifestyle and metformin. We cannot yet confirm the effects of lifestyle, metformin, or their interaction owing to the insufficient sample size in this pilot study.ConclusionsInstituting a 2 × 2 factorial design randomized controlled trial (RCT) is feasible, as the pilot study showed a high recruitment rate and compliance. There is no evidence that lifestyle or metformin improves live birth, and adequately powered clinical trials are required.Trial registrationclinicaltrials.gov NCT03898037. Registered: April 1, 2019.

Dataset Information

Effectiveness of Non-Pharmacological Interventions for Overweight or Obese Infertile Women: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Publications

Effectiveness of Non-Pharmacological Interventions for Overweight or Obese Infertile Women: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets