Cochrane Db Syst Rev
-
Cochrane Db Syst Rev · Mar 2017
Review Meta AnalysisPlanned early birth versus expectant management for women with preterm prelabour rupture of membranes prior to 37 weeks' gestation for improving pregnancy outcome.
Current management of preterm prelabour rupture of the membranes (PPROM) involves either initiating birth soon after PPROM or, alternatively, adopting a 'wait and see' approach (expectant management). It is unclear which strategy is most beneficial for mothers and their babies. This is an update of a Cochrane review published in 2010 (Buchanan 2010). ⋯ With the addition of five randomised controlled trials (2927 women) to this updated review, we found no clinically important difference in the incidence of neonatal sepsis between women who birth immediately and those managed expectantly in PPROM prior to 37 weeks' gestation. Early planned birth was associated with an increase in the incidence of neonatal RDS, need for ventilation, neonatal mortality, endometritis, admission to neonatal intensive care, and the likelihood of birth by caesarean section, but a decreased incidence of chorioamnionitis. Women randomised to early birth also had an increased risk of labour induction, but a decreased length of hospital stay. Babies of women randomised to early birth were more likely to be born at a lower gestational age.In women with PPROM before 37 weeks' gestation with no contraindications to continuing the pregnancy, a policy of expectant management with careful monitoring was associated with better outcomes for the mother and baby.The direction of future research should be aimed at determining which groups of women with PPROM would not benefit from expectant management. This could be determined by analysing subgroups according to gestational age at presentation, corticosteroid usage, and abnormal vaginal microbiological colonisation. Research should also evaluate long-term neurodevelopmental outcomes of infants.
-
Cochrane Db Syst Rev · Mar 2017
Review Meta AnalysisPayment methods for outpatient care facilities.
Outpatient care facilities provide a variety of basic healthcare services to individuals who do not require hospitalisation or institutionalisation, and are usually the patient's first contact. The provision of outpatient care contributes to immediate and large gains in health status, and a large portion of total health expenditure goes to outpatient healthcare services. Payment method is one of the most important incentive methods applied by purchasers to guide the performance of outpatient care providers. ⋯ Our review found that if policymakers intend to apply P4P incentives to pay health facilities providing outpatient services, this intervention will probably lead to a slight improvement in health professionals' use of tests or treatments, particularly for chronic diseases. However, it may lead to little or no improvement in patients' utilisation of health services or health outcomes. When considering using P4P to improve the performance of health facilities, policymakers should carefully consider each component of their P4P design, including the choice of performance measures, the performance target, payment frequency, if there will be additional funding, whether the payment level is sufficient to change the behaviours of health providers, and whether the payment to facilities will be allocated to individual professionals. Unfortunately, the studies included in this review did not help to inform those considerations.Well-designed comparisons of different payment methods for outpatient health facilities in low- and middle-income countries and studies directly comparing different designs (e.g. different payment levels) of the same payment method (e.g. P4P or FFS) are needed.
-
Cochrane Db Syst Rev · Mar 2017
Review Meta AnalysisBotulinum toxin for the treatment of strabismus.
The use of botulinum toxin as an investigative and treatment modality for strabismus is well reported in the medical literature. However, it is unclear how effective it is in comparison to other treatment options for strabismus. ⋯ Most published literature on the use of botulinum toxin in the treatment of strabismus consists of retrospective studies, cohort studies or case reviews. Although these provide useful descriptive information, clarification is required as to the effective use of botulinum toxin as an independent treatment modality. Six RCTs on the therapeutic use of botulinum toxin in strabismus, graded as low and very low-certainty evidence, have shown varying responses. These include a lack of evidence for effect of botulinum toxin on reducing visual symptoms in acute sixth nerve palsy, poor response in people with horizontal strabismus without binocular vision, similar or slightly reduced achievement of successful ocular alignment in children with esotropia and potential increased achievement of successful ocular alignment where surgery and botulinum toxin are combined. Further high quality trials using robust methodologies are required to compare the clinical and cost effectiveness of various forms of botulinum toxin (e.g. Dysport, Xeomin, etc), to compare botulinum toxin with and without adjuvant solutions and to compare botulinum toxin to alternative surgical interventions in strabismus cases with and without potential for binocular vision.