Health problems commonly occurred after childbirth with some resolution over the 6 months postpartum. Some important differences in prevalence of health problems were evident when parity and method of birth were considered.

Animal and human observational studies suggest that iron deficiency impairs physical exercise performance, but findings from randomized trials on the effects of iron are equivocal. Iron deficiency and anemia are especially common in women of reproductive age (WRA). Clear evidence of benefit from iron supplementation would inform clinical and public health guidelines. Therefore, we performed a systematic review and meta-analysis to determine the effect of iron supplementation compared with control on exercise performance in WRA. We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Clinical Trials, MEDLINE, Scopus (comprising Embase and MEDLINE), WHO regional databases, and other sources in July 2013.Randomized controlled trials that measured exercise outcomes in WRA randomized to daily oral iron supplementation vs.control were eligible. Random-effects meta-analysis was used to calculate mean differences (MDs) and standardized MDs (SMDs). Risk of bias was assessed using the Cochrane risk-of-bias tool. Of 6757 titles screened, 24 eligible studies were identified, 22 of which contained extractable data. Only 3 studies were at overall low risk of bias. Iron supplementation improved both maximal exercise performance, demonstrated by an increase in maximal oxygen consumption (VO 2 max) [for relative VO 2 max, MD: 2.35 mL/(kg Á min); 95% CI: 0.82, 3.88; P = 0.003, 18 studies; for absolute VO 2 max, MD: 0.11 L/min; 95% CI: 0.03, 0.20; P = 0.01, 9 studies; for overall VO 2 max, SMD: 0.37; 95% CI: 0.11, 0.62; P = 0.005, 20 studies], and submaximal exercise performance, demonstrated by a lower heart rate (MD: 24.05 beats per minute; 95% CI: 27.25, 20.85; P = 0.01, 6 studies) and proportion of VO 2 max (MD: 22.68%; 95% CI: 24.94, 20.41; P = 0.02, 6 studies) required to achieve defined workloads. Daily iron supplementation significantly improves maximal and submaximal exercise performance in WRA, providing a rationale to prevent and treat iron deficiency in this group. This trial was registered with PROSPERO (http://www. crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/prospero.asp) as CRD42013005166. J. Nutr. 144: 906-914, 2014.

No abstract

SummaryBackgroundStaphylococcus aureus bacteraemia is a common cause of severe community-acquired and hospital-acquired infection worldwide. We tested the hypothesis that adjunctive rifampicin would reduce bacteriologically confirmed treatment failure or disease recurrence, or death, by enhancing early S aureus killing, sterilising infected foci and blood faster, and reducing risks of dissemination and metastatic infection.MethodsIn this multicentre, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial, adults (≥18 years) with S aureus bacteraemia who had received ≤96 h of active antibiotic therapy were recruited from 29 UK hospitals. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1) via a computer-generated sequential randomisation list to receive 2 weeks of adjunctive rifampicin (600 mg or 900 mg per day according to weight, oral or intravenous) versus identical placebo, together with standard antibiotic therapy. Randomisation was stratified by centre. Patients, investigators, and those caring for the patients were masked to group allocation. The primary outcome was time to bacteriologically confirmed treatment failure or disease recurrence, or death (all-cause), from randomisation to 12 weeks, adjudicated by an independent review committee masked to the treatment. Analysis was intention to treat. This trial was registered, number ISRCTN37666216, and is closed to new participants.FindingsBetween Dec 10, 2012, and Oct 25, 2016, 758 eligible participants were randomly assigned: 370 to rifampicin and 388 to placebo. 485 (64%) participants had community-acquired S aureus infections, and 132 (17%) had nosocomial S aureus infections. 47 (6%) had meticillin-resistant infections. 301 (40%) participants had an initial deep infection focus. Standard antibiotics were given for 29 (IQR 18–45) days; 619 (82%) participants received flucloxacillin. By week 12, 62 (17%) of participants who received rifampicin versus 71 (18%) who received placebo experienced treatment failure or disease recurrence, or died (absolute risk difference −1·4%, 95% CI −7·0 to 4·3; hazard ratio 0·96, 0·68–1·35, p=0·81). From randomisation to 12 weeks, no evidence of differences in serious (p=0·17) or grade 3–4 (p=0·36) adverse events were observed; however, 63 (17%) participants in the rifampicin group versus 39 (10%) in the placebo group had antibiotic or trial drug-modifying adverse events (p=0·004), and 24 (6%) versus six (2%) had drug interactions (p=0·0005).InterpretationAdjunctive rifampicin provided no overall benefit over standard antibiotic therapy in adults with S aureus bacteraemia.FundingUK National Institute for Health Research Health Technology Assessment.

SummaryBackgroundResults of small trials indicate that fluoxetine might improve functional outcomes after stroke. The FOCUS trial aimed to provide a precise estimate of these effects.MethodsFOCUS was a pragmatic, multicentre, parallel group, double-blind, randomised, placebo-controlled trial done at 103 hospitals in the UK. Patients were eligible if they were aged 18 years or older, had a clinical stroke diagnosis, were enrolled and randomly assigned between 2 days and 15 days after onset, and had focal neurological deficits. Patients were randomly allocated fluoxetine 20 mg or matching placebo orally once daily for 6 months via a web-based system by use of a minimisation algorithm. The primary outcome was functional status, measured with the modified Rankin Scale (mRS), at 6 months. Patients, carers, health-care staff, and the trial team were masked to treatment allocation. Functional status was assessed at 6 months and 12 months after randomisation. Patients were analysed according to their treatment allocation. This trial is registered with the ISRCTN registry, number ISRCTN83290762.FindingsBetween Sept 10, 2012, and March 31, 2017, 3127 patients were recruited. 1564 patients were allocated fluoxetine and 1563 allocated placebo. mRS data at 6 months were available for 1553 (99·3%) patients in each treatment group. The distribution across mRS categories at 6 months was similar in the fluoxetine and placebo groups (common odds ratio adjusted for minimisation variables 0·951 [95% CI 0·839–1·079]; p=0·439). Patients allocated fluoxetine were less likely than those allocated placebo to develop new depression by 6 months (210 [13·43%] patients vs 269 [17·21%]; difference 3·78% [95% CI 1·26–6·30]; p=0·0033), but they had more bone fractures (45 [2·88%] vs 23 [1·47%]; difference 1·41% [95% CI 0·38–2·43]; p=0·0070). There were no significant differences in any other event at 6 or 12 months.InterpretationFluoxetine 20 mg given daily for 6 months after acute stroke does not seem to improve functional outcomes. Although the treatment reduced the occurrence of depression, it increased the frequency of bone fractures. These results do not support the routine use of fluoxetine either for the prevention of post-stroke depression or to promote recovery of function.FundingUK Stroke Association and NIHR Health Technology Assessment Programme.