Background Pregnant patients are potentially vulnerable to COVID‐19. Objectives To clarify the clinical features of COVID‐19 and analyze maternal/fetal morbidity and mortality and the obstetric and neonatal outcomes of pregnant patients. Search strategy Embase, PubMed, Web of Science, CINAHAL, LILACS, Google Scholar, and Scopus. Selection criteria Articles published from December 2019 to February 2021. Data collection and analysis The reviewers extracted relevant data from the full‐text. Data synthesis was performed using the R‐4.1.0 Project for Statistical Computing for Windows. The meta‐analysis of the included studies was carried out using the random‐effects model (DerSimonian and Laird). Heterogeneity was measured using I2 analysis. Results A total of 70 studies included 10 047 pregnant women with COVID‐19, of whom 71.6% were in their third trimester. The most common symptoms were fever, cough, chest pain, dyspnea, and fatigue. Most newborns were delivered preterm (24%, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.17–0.34, I2 = 93%) and via cesarean delivery (42%, 95% CI 0.38–0.47, I2 = 92%). There were 108 maternal mortalities (2%, 95% CI 0.01–0.03, I2 = 54%) and 50 abortions (5%, 95% CI 0.03–0.09, I2 = 73%). The neonatal outcomes included fetal distress (11%, 95% CI 0.06–0.19, I2 = 91%), birth weight (15%, 95% CI 0.10–0.21, I2 = 76%), APGAR <7 (19%, 95% CI 0.12–0.28, I2 = 43%), admission to the neonatal intensive care unit (28%, 95% CI 0.17–0.43, I2 = 90%), and fetal mortality (2%, 95% CI 0.01–0.03, I2 = 46%). Conclusion There was no evidence of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus‐2 in the placenta, breast milk, umbilical cord, and amniotic fluid of pregnant patients. PROSPERO registration number: CRD42020181519.
Although the video-sharing site YouTube is widely used today, it lacks videos about CPR and BLS that comply to the most recent AHA recommendations, which may negatively influence the population that uses it.
Background Genitourinary syndrome of menopause (GSM) negatively affects sexual function and quality of life. Techniques like laser and radiofrequency are being used to manage GSM, particularly in women with contraindications for hormone therapy. Objectives To verify whether the physical methods of laser and radiofrequency can be recommended as safe and effective options for the treatment of GSM/urinary urgency or incontinence in pre‐ and postmenopausal women. Search strategy Databases were comprehensively searched using combinations of the following keywords in any language: “postmenopause”; “genitourinary syndrome of menopause”; “vaginal atrophy”; “radiofrequency”; and “laser.” Selection criteria Full articles of case‐control, cross‐sectional, cohort, randomized clinical trials, and quasi‐randomized or controlled clinical trials were included. Data collection and analysis All authors independently evaluated the design of the studies for quality of reporting, risk of bias, and quality of evidence. Main results Of the included 49 studies, 37 were on the CO2 laser, 10 on the Erbium laser, and two on radiofrequency. Conclusions Laser and radiofrequency therapy could be promising and safe therapeutic options for GSM/urinary incontinence. However, the study findings cannot be generalized until new randomized clinical trials are performed that confirm the strength of the evidence. This review has been registered with PROSPERO: CRD42020141913.
IntroductionSARS-CoV-2 is responsible for a large number of global COVID-19 cases. Strategies such as social isolation, personal hygiene and frequent hand washing have been implemented; however, a protective vaccine is required to achieve sufficient herd immunity to SARS-CoV-2 infection to ultimately control the COVID-19 pandemic. To meet the urgent need for a vaccine, a reduction in the development schedule has been proposed from 10–15 years to 1–2 years. For this reason, this systematic review and meta-analysis protocol aims to compare the side effects, safety and toxicity of COVID-19 vaccines available globally, including their combinations.Methods and analysisWe will select randomised controlled trial-type studies that evaluate the side effects of the COVID-19 vaccine. PubMed, Web of Science, Embase, CINAHL, PsycINFO, LILACS, SCOPUS, ClinicalTrials.gov, International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP), medRxiv.org, biorxiv.org, preprints.org and the Cochrane Library will be searched for eligible studies until December 2021. Three reviewers will independently screen and select studies, assess methodological quality and extract data. A meta-analysis will be performed, if possible, and the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluations summary of findings will be presented.Ethics and disseminationThis study will review published data, and thus it is unnecessary to obtain ethical approval. The findings of this systematic review will be published in a peer-reviewed journal.PROSPERO registration numberCRD42021231101.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
customersupport@researchsolutions.com
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.