A randomised controlled trial testing the effect of counselling via ‘zoom’ upon intake of iron and folic acid supplements, diets, and antenatal care in pregnancy in the rural plains of Nepal

2022 ◽  
Author(s):  
Naomi Saville ◽  
Sara Hillman ◽  
Sanju Bhattarai
Nutrients ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 13 (3) ◽  
pp. 769
Author(s):  
Abrar M Babateen ◽  
Oliver M Shannon ◽  
Gerard M O’Brien ◽  
Edward Okello ◽  
Anmar A Khan ◽  
...  

Nitrate-rich food can increase nitric oxide production and improve vascular and brain functions. This study examines the feasibility of a randomised controlled trial (RCT) testing the effects of prolonged consumption of different doses of dietary nitrate (NO3-) in the form of beetroot juice (BJ) in overweight and obese older participants. A single-blind, four-arm parallel pilot RCT was conducted in 62 overweight and obese (30.4 ± 4 kg/m2) older participants (mean ± standard deviation (SD), 66 ± 4 years). Participants were randomized to: (1) high-NO3- (HN: 2 × 70 mL BJ/day) (2) medium-NO3- (MN: 70 mL BJ/day), (3) low-NO3- (LN: 70 mL BJ on alternate days) or (4) Placebo (PL: 70 mL of NO3--depleted BJ on alternate days), for 13 weeks. Compliance was checked by a daily log of consumed BJ, NO3- intake, and by measuring NO3- and NO2- concentrations in plasma, saliva, and urine samples. Fifty participants completed the study. Self-reported compliance to the interventions was >90%. There were significant positive linear relationships between NO3- dose and the increase in plasma and urinary NO3- concentration (R2 = 0.71, P < 0.001 and R2 = 0.46 P < 0.001, respectively), but relationships between NO3- dose and changes in salivary NO3- and NO2- were non-linear (R2 = 0.35, P = 0.002 and R2 = 0.23, P = 0.007, respectively). The results confirm the feasibility of prolonged BJ supplementation in older overweight and obese adults.


1985 ◽  
Vol 40 (3) ◽  
pp. 151-152
Author(s):  
LEIV S. BAKKETEIG ◽  
GEIR JACOBSEN ◽  
CHRISTIAN J. BRODTKORB ◽  
BJARNE C. ERIKSEN ◽  
STURLA H. EIK-NES ◽  
...  

2020 ◽  
Vol 20 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Meg Wiggins ◽  
Mary Sawtell ◽  
Octavia Wiseman ◽  
Christine McCourt ◽  
Sandra Eldridge ◽  
...  

Abstract Background Group antenatal care has been successfully implemented around the world with suggestions of improved outcomes, including for disadvantaged groups, but it has not been formally tested in the UK in the context of the NHS. To address this the REACH Pregnancy Circles intervention was developed and a randomised controlled trial (RCT), based on a pilot study, is in progress. Methods The RCT is a pragmatic, two-arm, individually randomised, parallel group RCT designed to test clinical and cost-effectiveness of REACH Pregnancy Circles compared with standard care. Recruitment will be through NHS services. The sample size is 1732 (866 randomised to the intervention and 866 to standard care). The primary outcome measure is a ‘healthy baby’ composite measured at 1 month postnatal using routine maternity data. Secondary outcome measures will be assessed using participant questionnaires completed at recruitment (baseline), 35 weeks gestation (follow-up 1) and 3 months postnatal (follow-up 2). An integrated process evaluation, to include exploration of fidelity, will be conducted using mixed methods. Analyses will be on an intention to treat as allocated basis. The primary analysis will compare the number of babies born “healthy” in the control and intervention arms and provide an odds ratio. A cost-effectiveness analysis will compare the incremental cost per Quality Adjusted Life Years and per additional ‘healthy and positive birth’ of the intervention with standard care. Qualitative data will be analysed thematically. Discussion This multi-site randomised trial in England is planned to be the largest trial of group antenatal care in the world to date; as well as the first rigorous test within the NHS of this maternity service change. It has a recruitment focus on ethnically, culturally and linguistically diverse and disadvantaged participants, including non-English speakers. Trial registration Trial registration; ISRCTN, ISRCTN91977441. Registered 11 February 2019 - retrospectively registered. The current protocol is Version 4; 28/01/2020.


2020 ◽  
Vol 5 (12) ◽  
pp. e003897
Author(s):  
Kaitlyn L I Samson ◽  
Su Peng Loh ◽  
Siew Siew Lee ◽  
Dian C Sulistyoningrum ◽  
Geok Lin Khor ◽  
...  

IntroductionWeekly iron–folic acid (IFA) supplements are recommended for all menstruating women in countries where anaemia prevalence is >20%. Anaemia caused by folate deficiency is low worldwide, and the need to include folic acid is in question. Including folic acid might reduce the risk of a neural tube defect (NTD) should a woman become pregnant. Most weekly supplements contain 0.4 mg folic acid; however, WHO recommends 2.8 mg because it is seven times the daily dose effective in reducing NTDs. There is a reluctance to switch to supplements containing 2.8 mg of folic acid because of a lack of evidence that this dose would prevent NTDs. Our aim was to investigate the effect of two doses of folic acid, compared with placebo, on red blood cell (RBC) folate, a biomarker of NTD risk.MethodsWe conducted a three-arm double-blind efficacy trial in Malaysia. Non-pregnant women (n=331) were randomised to receive 60 mg iron and either 0, 0.4, or 2.8 mg folic acid once weekly for 16 weeks.ResultsAt 16 weeks, women receiving 0.4 mg and 2.8 mg folic acid per week had a higher mean RBC folate than those receiving 0 mg (mean difference (95% CI) 84 (54 to 113) and 355 (316 to 394) nmol/L, respectively). Women receiving 2.8 mg folic acid had a 271 (234 to 309) nmol/L greater mean RBC folate than those receiving 0.4 mg. Moreover, women in the 2.8 mg group were seven times (RR 7.3, 95% CI 3.9 to 13.7; p<0.0001) more likely to achieve an RBC folate >748 nmol/L, a concentration associated with a low risk of NTD, compared with the 0.4 mg group.ConclusionWeekly IFA supplements containing 2.8 mg folic acid increases RBC folate more than those containing 0.4 mg. Increased availability and access to the 2.8 mg formulation is needed.Trail registration numberThis trial is registered with the Australian New Zealand Clinical Trial Registry (ACTRN12619000818134).


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document