MAIN BODY: Recent successes in malaria control and elimination have reduced the global malaria burden, but these gains are fragile and progress has stalled in the past 5 years. Withdrawing successful interventions often results in rapid malaria resurgence, primarily threatening vulnerable young children and pregnant women. Malaria programmes are being affected in many ways by COVID-19. For prevention of malaria, insecticide-treated nets need regular renewal, but distribution campaigns have been delayed or cancelled. For detection and treatment of malaria, individuals may stop attending health facilities, out of fear of exposure to COVID-19, or because they cannot afford transport, and health care workers require additional resources to protect themselves from COVID-19. Supplies of diagnostics and drugs are being interrupted, which is compounded by production of substandard and falsified medicines and diagnostics. These disruptions are predicted to double the number of young African children dying of malaria in the coming year and may impact efforts to control the spread of drug resistance. Using examples from successful malaria control and elimination campaigns, we propose strategies to re-establish malaria control activities and maintain elimination efforts in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic, which is likely to be a long-term challenge. All sectors of society, including governments, donors, private sector and civil society organisations, have crucial roles to play to prevent malaria resurgence. Sparse resources must be allocated efficiently to ensure integrated health care systems that can sustain control activities against COVID-19 as well as malaria and other priority infectious diseases.
CONCLUSION: As we deal with the COVID-19 pandemic, it is crucial that other major killers such as malaria are not ignored. History tells us that if we do, the consequences will be dire, particularly in vulnerable populations.
DESIGN: Retrospective observational analysis.
SETTING: 56 acute stroke hospitals in eight countries.
PARTICIPANTS: 1074 trial physiotherapists, nurses, and other clinicians.
OUTCOME MEASURES: Number of babies born during trial recruitment per trial participant recruited.
RESULTS: With 198 site recruitment years and 2104 patients recruited during AVERT, 120 babies were born to trial staff. Births led to an estimated 10% loss in time to achieve recruitment. Parental leave was linked to six trial site closures. The number of participants needed to recruit per baby born was 17.5 (95% confidence interval 14.7 to 21.0); additional trial costs associated with each birth were estimated at 5736 Australian dollars on average.
CONCLUSION: The staff absences registered in AVERT owing to parental leave led to delayed trial recruitment and increased costs, and should be considered by trial investigators when planning research and estimating budgets. However, the celebration of new life became a highlight of the annual AVERT collaborators' meetings and helped maintain a cohesive collaborative group.
TRIAL REGISTRATION: Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry no 12606000185561.
DISCLAIMER: Participation in a rehabilitation trial does not guarantee successful reproductive activity.
OBJECTIVES: To assess the optimal mode of delivery in women with, or carriers of, bleeding disorders.
SEARCH METHODS: We searched the Cochrane Cystic Fibrosis and Genetic Disorders Coagulopathies Trials Register, compiled from electronic database searches and handsearching of journals and conference abstract books. We also searched the Cochrane Pregnancy and Childbirth Group's Trials Register as well as trials registries and the reference lists of relevant articles and reviews.Date of last search of the Group's Trials Registers: 16 February 2017.
SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised controlled trials and all types of controlled clinical trials investigating the optimal mode of delivery in women with, or carriers of, any type of bleeding disorder during pregnancy were eligible for the review.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: No trials matching the selection criteria were eligible for inclusion MAIN RESULTS: No results from randomised controlled trials were found.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: The review did not identify any randomised controlled trials investigating the safest mode of delivery and associated maternal and foetal complications during delivery in women with, or carriers of, a bleeding disorder. In the absence of high quality evidence, clinicians need to use their clinical judgement and lower level evidence (e.g. from observational trials, case studies) to decide upon the optimal mode of delivery to ensure the safety of both mother and foetus.Given the ethical considerations, the rarity of the disorders and the low incidence of both maternal and foetal complications, future randomised controlled trials to find the optimal mode of delivery in this population are unlikely to be carried out. Other high quality controlled studies (such as risk allocation designs, sequential design, and parallel cohort design) are needed to investigate the risks and benefits of natural vaginal and caesarean section in this population or extrapolation from other clinical conditions that incur a haemorrhagic risk to the baby, such as platelet alloimmunisation.
OBJECTIVES: To assess the optimal mode of delivery in women with, or carriers of, bleeding disorders.
SEARCH METHODS: We searched the Cochrane Cystic Fibrosis and Genetic Disorders Coagulopathies Trials Register, compiled from electronic database searches and handsearching of journals and conference abstract books. We also searched the Cochrane Pregnancy and Childbirth Group's Trials Register as well as trials registries and the reference lists of relevant articles and reviews. Date of last search of the Group's Trials Registers: 21 June 2021.
SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised controlled trials and quasi-randomised controlled clinical trials investigating the optimal mode of delivery in women with, or carriers of, any type of bleeding disorder during pregnancy were eligible for the review.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: No trials matching the selection criteria were eligible for inclusion.
MAIN RESULTS: No trials matching the selection criteria were eligible for inclusion.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: The review did not identify any randomised controlled trials investigating the safest mode of delivery and associated maternal and foetal complications during delivery in women with, or carriers of, a bleeding disorder. In the absence of high quality evidence, clinicians need to use their clinical judgement and lower level evidence (e.g. from observational trials, case studies) to decide upon the optimal mode of delivery to ensure the safety of both mother and foetus. Given the ethical considerations, the rarity of the disorders and the low incidence of both maternal and foetal complications, future randomised controlled trials to find the optimal mode of delivery in this population are unlikely to be carried out. Other high quality controlled studies (such as risk allocation designs, sequential design, and parallel cohort design) are needed to investigate the risks and benefits of natural vaginal and caesarean section in this population or extrapolation from other clinical conditions that incur a haemorrhagic risk to the baby, such as platelet alloimmunisation.
METHODS: This scoping review is guided by the methodological framework by Arksey and O'Malley's and Prisma-ScR checklist. PubMed, EBSCO and OVID were searched for empirical studies between 2000 and February 2022 using the search terms "family planning", "contraceptive" and "diabetes mellitus". Data were summarized according to the study characteristics and levels of factors influencing family planning behaviours.
RESULTS: Thirty-five articles that met the eligibility criteria included 33 quantitative studies, one qualitative study and one mixed-methods study. The prevalence of family planning methods used by women with diabetes mellitus varied ranging from 4.8 to 89.8% among the studied population. Women with diabetes mellitus were reported to be less likely to utilise any family planning methods compared to women without diabetes mellitus.
CONCLUSIONS: Most of the evidence to date on family planning behaviours among women with diabetes mellitus focuses on the role of individual level sociodemographic factors. Few studies focused on exploring determinants at multiple levels. In this review we found that there is limited evidence on disease control and pregnancy intention in relation to their family planning practices. Future studies with more clinical and contextual factors are needed to guide the strengthening of family planning services for high-risk group women specifically for women with diabetes mellitus.