A systematic review of the cost-effectiveness of maternity models of care.

OBJECTIVES: In this systematic review, we aimed to identify the full extent of cost-effectiveness evidence available for evaluating alternative Maternity Models of Care (MMC) and to summarize findings narratively. METHODS: Articles that included a decision tree or state-based (Markov) model to explore the cost-effectiveness of an MMC, and at least one comparator MMC, were identified from a systematic literature review. The MEDLINE, Embase, Web of Science, CINAHL and Google Scholar databases were searched for papers published in English, Arabic, and French. A narrative synthesis was conducted to analyse results. RESULTS: Three studies were included; all using cost-effectiveness decision tree models with data sourced from a combination of trials, databases, and the literature. Study quality was fair to poor. Each study compared midwife-led or doula-assisted care to obstetrician- or physician-led care. The findings from these studies indicate that midwife and doula led MMCs may provide value. CONCLUSION: The findings of these studies indicate weak evidence that midwife and doula models of care may be a cost-effective or cost-saving alternative to standard care. However, the poor quality of evidence, lack of standardised MMC classifications, and the dearth of research conducted in this area are barriers to conclusive evaluation and highlight the need for more research incorporating appropriate models and population diversity.

Clinical Hypnosis for Procedural Pain and Distress in Children: A Scoping Review.

OBJECTIVE: Pain and distress are common in children undergoing medical procedures, exposing them to acute and chronic biopsychosocial impairments if inadequately treated. Clinical hypnosis has emerged as a potentially beneficial treatment for children's procedural pain and distress due to evidence of effectiveness and potential superiority to other psychological interventions. However, systematic reviews of clinical hypnosis for children's procedural pain and distress have been predominantly conducted in children undergoing oncology and needle procedures and are lacking in broader pediatric contexts. This scoping review maps the evidence of clinical hypnosis for children's procedural pain and distress across broad pediatric contexts while highlighting knowledge gaps and areas requiring further investigation. METHODS: Published databases (PubMed, Cochrane Library, PsycINFO, Embase, CINAHL, Scopus, and Web of Science) and grey literature were searched in addition to hand-searching reference lists and key journals (up to May 2022). Two independent reviewers screened the titles and abstracts of search results followed by a full-text review against eligibility criteria. Articles were included if they involved a clinical hypnosis intervention comprising an induction followed by therapeutic suggestions for pain and distress in children undergoing medical procedures. This review followed the Arksey and O'Malley (2005) methodology and incorporated additional scoping review recommendations by the Joanna Briggs Institute and Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses. RESULTS: A total of 38 eligible studies involving 2,205 children were included after 4,775 articles were screened. Research on clinical hypnosis for children's procedural pain and distress was marked by a lack of fidelity measures and qualitative data as well as by inadequate intervention reporting and high attrition rates. Evidence regarding the safety of clinical hypnosis, pain unpleasantness outcomes, factors influencing outcomes, as well as barriers and facilitators to implementing hypnosis and study procedures was also lacking. Clinical hypnosis has potential benefits for children's procedural pain and distress based on evidence of superiority to control conditions and nonpharmacological interventions (e.g., distraction, acupressure) with moderate to large effect sizes as reported in 76% of studies. However, heterogeneous interventions, contexts, study designs, and populations were identified, and the certainty of the evidence was not evaluated. CONCLUSIONS: The review suggests potential benefits of clinical hypnosis for children's procedural pain and distress and thus provides a precursor for further systematic reviews and trials investigating the effectiveness of clinical hypnosis. The review also indicates the need to further explore the feasibility, acceptability, implementation, and safety of clinical hypnosis in children undergoing painful procedures. Based on the review, researchers implementing clinical hypnosis should adequately report interventions or use treatment manuals, follow recommended research guidelines, and assess the fidelity of intervention delivery to promote replicating and comparing interventions. The review also highlights common methodological shortcomings of published trials to avoid, such as the lack of implementation frameworks, small sample sizes, inadequate reporting of standard care or control conditions, and limited evidence on pain unpleasantness outcomes.

The effect of 20 minutes of cool running water first aid within three hours of thermal burn injury on patient outcomes: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Burn injuries are a leading cause of morbidity that can result in devastating disability and poor quality of life for survivors. This systematic review aimed to synthesise evidence regarding the effect of 20 minutes of cool running water (CRW) within three hours of injury on outcomes of patients with thermal burn injuries. METHODS: This systematic review was conducted in reference to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses. Multiple databases (PubMed, EMBASE, CENTRAL, CINAHL Complete via EBSCO, PROQUEST Dissertations and Theses), and the Australia New Zealand Clinical Trial Registry were searched for eligible studies published in English and Chinese, without date restriction. Meta-analyses were undertaken Methodological quality of studies was assessed by using Downs and Black Checklist. RESULTS: Of 323 records, seven studies were included. The majority (67%) of studies were conducted in Australia and New Zealand. The methodological quality was ranked between 'fair' and 'good'. Twenty minutes of CRW within the first three hours of burn injury significantly decreased the odds of patients requiring skin grafting and surgical intervention for wound management. CONCLUSIONS: There is considerable evidence suggesting the application of 20 min of CRW within the first three hours of injury improves outcomes for patients with burn injury. Consensus between burn organisations and collaborative efforts to translate evidence into practice are needed to optimise burn first aid care which can improve patient outcomes globally.