RESUMO
Cluster randomized trial design, where groups of participants are randomized instead of individual participants, is increasingly being used in long-term care research. The purpose of this review was to determine the characteristics of cluster randomized trials in long-term care facilities. A medical librarian conducted the literature search. Two independent reviewers reviewed each paper. Studies were included if the design was cluster randomized and participants were from long-term care facilities. For each included study, two independent data extractors captured data on study attributes, including: journal, location, year published, author discipline, funding, methodology, number of participants, and intervention target. The literature search yielded 7,679 unique studies, with 195 studies meeting the selection criteria and being included for data extraction. The included studies were published between 1976 and 2017, with 53% of studies published after 2009. The term cluster randomized was in the title of only 45% of the studies. The studies were conducted worldwide; the United States had the largest number of studies (23%), followed by the United Kingdom (18%). Ten percent of studies were published in journals with an impact factor >10. The most frequent discipline of the first and last authors was medicine (34%), followed by nursing (17%). Forty-nine percent of the studies had government funding, while only 20% had medical industry funding. In studies with <1000 residents, 85% of the studies obtained consent from the resident and/or their proxy, while in studies with ≥ 1000 residents, it was 31%. The most frequent intervention targets were infection (13%), falls/fracture (13%), and behavior/physical restraint (13%). Cluster randomized controlled trials in long-term care have a unique set of characteristics. Results of this review will provide guidance to researchers conducting studies in long-term care facilities.
RESUMO
BACKGROUND: Almost half a million breast reduction surgeries are performed internationally each year, yet it is unclear how this type of surgery impacts breastfeeding. This is particularly important given the benefits of breastfeeding. OBJECTIVES: To determine if breast reduction surgery impacts breastfeeding success and whether different surgical techniques differentially impact breast feeding success. METHODS: Databases were searched up to September 5, 2017. Studies were included if they reported the number of women successful at breastfeeding or lactation after breast reduction surgery, and if they reported either the total number of women who had children following breast reduction surgery, or the total number of women who attempted to breastfeed following surgery. RESULTS: Of 1,212 studies, 51 studies met the inclusion criteria; they were located worldwide and had 31 distinct breast reduction techniques. The percentage of breastfeeding success among studies was highly variable. However, when analyzed by the preservation of the column of parenchyma from the nipple areola complex to the chest wall (subareolar parenchyma), a clear pattern emerged. The median breastfeeding success was 4% (interquartile range (IQR) 0-38%) for techniques with no preservation, compared to 75% (IQR 37-100%) for techniques with partial preservation and 100% (IQR 75-100%) for techniques with full preservation. CONCLUSIONS: Techniques that preserve the column of subareolar parenchyma appear to have a greater likelihood of successful breastfeeding. The preservation of the column of subareolar parenchyma should be disclosed to women prior to surgery. Guidelines on the best breast reduction techniques to be used in women of child bearing years may be advantageous to ensure women have the greatest potential for successful breastfeeding after breast reduction surgery.
