Delivery Strategies for Postpartum Care: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.

OBJECTIVE: To systematically review the effects of postpartum health care-delivery strategies on health care utilization and maternal outcomes. DATA SOURCES: We searched Medline, EMBASE, CENTRAL, CINAHL, and ClinicalTrials.gov for studies in the United States or Canada from inception to November 16, 2022. METHODS OF STUDY SELECTION: We used duplicate screening for studies comparing health care-delivery strategies for routine postpartum care on health care utilization and maternal outcomes. We selected health care utilization, clinical, and harm outcomes prioritized by stakeholder panels. TABULATION, INTEGRATION, AND RESULTS: We found 64 eligible studies (50 randomized controlled trials, 14 nonrandomized comparative studies; N=543,480). For general postpartum care, care location (clinic, at home, by telephone) did not affect depression or anxiety symptoms (low strength of evidence), and care integration (by multiple types of health care professionals) did not affect depression symptoms or substance use (low strength of evidence). Providing contraceptive care earlier (compared with later) was associated with greater implant use at 6 months (summary effect size 1.36, 95% CI 1.13-1.64) (moderate strength of evidence). Location of breastfeeding care did not affect hospitalization, other unplanned care utilization, or mental health symptoms (all low strength of evidence). Peer support was associated with higher rates of any or exclusive breastfeeding at 1 month and any breastfeeding at 3-6 months (summary effect size 1.10-1.22) but not other breastfeeding measures (all moderate strength of evidence). Care by a lactation consultant was associated with higher breastfeeding rates at 6 months (summary effect size 1.43, 95% CI 1.07-1.91) but not exclusive breastfeeding (all moderate strength of evidence). Use and nonuse of information technology for breastfeeding care were associated with comparable rates of breastfeeding (moderate strength of evidence). Testing reminders for screening or preventive care were associated with greater adherence to oral glucose tolerance testing but not random glucose or hemoglobin A 1c testing (moderate strength of evidence). CONCLUSION: Various strategies have been shown to improve some aspects of postpartum care, but future research is needed on the most effective care delivery strategies to improve postpartum health. SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION: PROSPERO, CRD42022309756 .

Postpartum Home Blood Pressure Monitoring: A Systematic Review.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the effectiveness of postpartum home blood pressure (BP) monitoring compared with clinic-based follow-up and the comparative effectiveness of alternative home BP-monitoring regimens. DATA SOURCES: Search of Medline, Cochrane, EMBASE, CINAHL, and ClinicalTrials.gov from inception to December 1, 2022, searching for home BP monitoring in postpartum individuals. METHODS OF STUDY SELECTION: We included randomized controlled trials (RCTs), nonrandomized comparative studies, and single-arm studies that evaluated the effects of postpartum home BP monitoring (up to 1 year), with or without telemonitoring, on postpartum maternal and infant outcomes, health care utilization, and harm outcomes. After double screening, we extracted demographics and outcomes to SRDR+. TABULATION, INTEGRATION, AND RESULTS: Thirteen studies (three RCTs, two nonrandomized comparative studies, and eight single-arm studies) met eligibility criteria. All comparative studies enrolled participants with a diagnosis of hypertensive disorders of pregnancy. One RCT compared home BP monitoring with bidirectional text messaging with scheduled clinic-based BP visits, finding an increased likelihood that at least one BP measurement was ascertained during the first 10 days postpartum for participants in the home BP-monitoring arm (relative risk 2.11, 95% CI 1.68-2.65). One nonrandomized comparative study reported a similar effect (adjusted relative risk [aRR] 1.59, 95% CI 1.36-1.77). Home BP monitoring was not associated with the rate of BP treatment initiation (aRR 1.03, 95% CI 0.74-1.44) but was associated with reduced unplanned hypertension-related hospital admissions (aRR 0.12, 95% CI 0.01-0.96). Most patients (83.3-87.0%) were satisfied with management related to home BP monitoring. Home BP monitoring, compared with office-based follow-up, was associated with reduced racial disparities in BP ascertainment by approximately 50%. CONCLUSION: Home BP monitoring likely improves ascertainment of BP, which is necessary for early recognition of hypertension in postpartum individuals, and may compensate for racial disparities in office-based follow-up. There is insufficient evidence to conclude that home BP monitoring reduces severe maternal morbidity or mortality or reduces racial disparities in clinical outcomes. SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION: PROSPERO, CRD42022313075.

Health Insurance Coverage and Postpartum Outcomes in the US: A Systematic Review.

Importance: Approximately half of postpartum individuals in the US do not receive any routine postpartum health care. Currently, federal Medicaid coverage for pregnant individuals lapses after the last day of the month in which the 60th postpartum day occurs, which limits longer-term postpartum care. Objective: To assess whether health insurance coverage extension or improvements in access to health care are associated with postpartum health care utilization and maternal outcomes within 1 year post partum. Evidence Review: Medline, Embase, CENTRAL, CINAHL, and ClinicalTrials.gov were searched for US-based studies from inception to November 16, 2022. The reference lists of relevant systematic reviews were scanned for potentially eligible studies. Risk of bias was assessed using questions from the Cochrane Risk of Bias tool and the Risk of Bias in Nonrandomized Studies of Interventions tool. Strength of evidence (SoE) was assessed using the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality Methods Guide. Findings: A total of 25 973 citations were screened and 28 mostly moderate-risk-of-bias nonrandomized studies were included (3 423 781 participants) that addressed insurance type (4 studies), policy changes that made insurance more comprehensive (13 studies), policy changes that made insurance less comprehensive (2 studies), and Medicaid expansion (9 studies). Findings with moderate SoE suggested that more comprehensive association was likely associated with greater attendance at postpartum visits. Findings with low SoE indicated a possible association between more comprehensive insurance and fewer preventable readmissions and emergency department visits. Conclusions and Relevance: The findings of this systematic review suggest that evidence evaluating insurance coverage and postpartum visit attendance and unplanned care utilization is, at best, of moderate SoE. Future research should evaluate clinical outcomes associated with more comprehensive insurance coverage.

Quality improvement strategies for diabetes care: Effects on outcomes for adults living with diabetes.

BACKGROUND: There is a large body of evidence evaluating quality improvement (QI) programmes to improve care for adults living with diabetes. These programmes are often comprised of multiple QI strategies, which may be implemented in various combinations. Decision-makers planning to implement or evaluate a new QI programme, or both, need reliable evidence on the relative effectiveness of different QI strategies (individually and in combination) for different patient populations. OBJECTIVES: To update existing systematic reviews of diabetes QI programmes and apply novel meta-analytical techniques to estimate the effectiveness of QI strategies (individually and in combination) on diabetes quality of care. SEARCH METHODS: We searched databases (CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase and CINAHL) and trials registers (ClinicalTrials.gov and WHO ICTRP) to 4 June 2019. We conducted a top-up search to 23 September 2021; we screened these search results and 42 studies meeting our eligibility criteria are available in the awaiting classification section. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included randomised trials that assessed a QI programme to improve care in outpatient settings for people living with diabetes. QI programmes needed to evaluate at least one system- or provider-targeted QI strategy alone or in combination with a patient-targeted strategy. - System-targeted: case management (CM); team changes (TC); electronic patient registry (EPR); facilitated relay of clinical information (FR); continuous quality improvement (CQI). - Provider-targeted: audit and feedback (AF); clinician education (CE); clinician reminders (CR); financial incentives (FI). - Patient-targeted: patient education (PE); promotion of self-management (PSM); patient reminders (PR). Patient-targeted QI strategies needed to occur with a minimum of one provider or system-targeted strategy. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: We dual-screened search results and abstracted data on study design, study population and QI strategies. We assessed the impact of the programmes on 13 measures of diabetes care, including: glycaemic control (e.g. mean glycated haemoglobin (HbA1c)); cardiovascular risk factor management (e.g. mean systolic blood pressure (SBP), low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C), proportion of people living with diabetes that quit smoking or receiving cardiovascular medications); and screening/prevention of microvascular complications (e.g. proportion of patients receiving retinopathy or foot screening); and harms (e.g. proportion of patients experiencing adverse hypoglycaemia or hyperglycaemia). We modelled the association of each QI strategy with outcomes using a series of hierarchical multivariable meta-regression models in a Bayesian framework. The previous version of this review identified that different strategies were more or less effective depending on baseline levels of outcomes. To explore this further, we extended the main additive model for continuous outcomes (HbA1c, SBP and LDL-C) to include an interaction term between each strategy and average baseline risk for each study (baseline thresholds were based on a data-driven approach; we used the median of all baseline values reported in the trials). Based on model diagnostics, the baseline interaction models for HbA1c, SBP and LDL-C performed better than the main model and are therefore presented as the primary analyses for these outcomes. Based on the model results, we qualitatively ordered each QI strategy within three tiers (Top, Middle, Bottom) based on its magnitude of effect relative to the other QI strategies, where 'Top' indicates that the QI strategy was likely one of the most effective strategies for that specific outcome. Secondary analyses explored the sensitivity of results to choices in model specification and priors.  Additional information about the methods and results of the review are available as Appendices in an online repository. This review will be maintained as a living systematic review; we will update our syntheses as more data become available. MAIN RESULTS: We identified 553 trials (428 patient-randomised and 125 cluster-randomised trials), including a total of 412,161 participants. Of the included studies, 66% involved people living with type 2 diabetes only. Participants were 50% female and the median age of participants was 58.4 years. The mean duration of follow-up was 12.5 months. HbA1c was the commonest reported outcome; screening outcomes and outcomes related to cardiovascular medications, smoking and harms were reported infrequently. The most frequently evaluated QI strategies across all study arms were PE, PSM and CM, while the least frequently evaluated QI strategies included AF, FI and CQI. Our confidence in the evidence is limited due to a lack of information on how studies were conducted.  Four QI strategies (CM, TC, PE, PSM) were consistently identified as 'Top' across the majority of outcomes. All QI strategies were ranked as 'Top' for at least one key outcome. The majority of effects of individual QI strategies were modest, but when used in combination could result in meaningful population-level improvements across the majority of outcomes. The median number of QI strategies in multicomponent QI programmes was three.  Combinations of the three most effective QI strategies were estimated to lead to the below effects:  - PR + PSM + CE: decrease in HbA1c by 0.41% (credibility interval (CrI) -0.61 to -0.22) when baseline HbA1c < 8.3%; - CM + PE + EPR: decrease in HbA1c by 0.62% (CrI -0.84 to -0.39) when baseline HbA1c > 8.3%;  - PE + TC + PSM: reduction in SBP by 2.14 mmHg (CrI -3.80 to -0.52) when baseline SBP < 136 mmHg; - CM + TC + PSM: reduction in SBP by 4.39 mmHg (CrI -6.20 to -2.56) when baseline SBP > 136 mmHg;  - TC + PE + CM: LDL-C lowering of 5.73 mg/dL (CrI -7.93 to -3.61) when baseline LDL < 107 mg/dL; - TC + CM + CR: LDL-C lowering by 5.52 mg/dL (CrI -9.24 to -1.89) when baseline LDL > 107 mg/dL. Assuming a baseline screening rate of 50%, the three most effective QI strategies were estimated to lead to an absolute improvement of 33% in retinopathy screening (PE + PR + TC) and 38% absolute increase in foot screening (PE + TC + Other). AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: There is a significant body of evidence about QI programmes to improve the management of diabetes. Multicomponent QI programmes for diabetes care (comprised of effective QI strategies) may achieve meaningful population-level improvements across the majority of outcomes. For health system decision-makers, the evidence summarised in this review can be used to identify strategies to include in QI programmes. For researchers, this synthesis identifies higher-priority QI strategies to examine in further research regarding how to optimise their evaluation and effects. We will maintain this as a living systematic review.