scholarly journals Effectiveness of orthodontic temporary anchorage devices in canine retraction and anchorage preservation during the two-step technique: A systematic review and meta-analysis

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Haonan Tian ◽  
Congman Xie ◽  
Min Lin ◽  
Hongmei Yang ◽  
Aishu Ren
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Risk Of Bias ◽  
Mean Difference ◽  
Controlled Trials ◽  
Cochrane Central Register ◽  
Canine Retraction ◽  
Temporary Anchorage Devices ◽  
The Mean ◽  
Implant Anchorage

Abstract Background: Temporary anchorage devices have been used for decades in orthodontic practice for many applications. The aim of this systematic review was to assess the effectiveness of orthodontic temporary anchorage devices in canine retraction during the two-step technique. Methods: A search was systematically performed for articles published prior to June 30, 2019 in five electronic databases (PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Web of Science, Scopus). The risk of bias was assessed using the Cochrane risk of bias tool for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and the risk of bias in nonrandomized studies of interventions (ROBINS-I) tool for controlled clinical trials (CCTs) . The Grading of Recommendation, Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach was used for the quality assessment. Data concerning the mean difference in mesial molar movement and extent of canine retraction were extracted for statistical analysis. The mean difference s and 95% confidence intervals were analyzed for continuous data. A meta-analysis with a random-effects model for comparable outcomes was carried out. Results: Three RCTs and five CCTs were finally included. Meta-analysis showed a significant increase not only in anchorage preservation in the implant anchorage group in both the maxilla (1. 56 mm , 95% CI: 1.14 to 1.98, P <0.00001 ) and the mandible (1.62 mm , 95% CI: 1.24 to 2.01, P <0.00001 ) but also in canine retraction in the implant anchorage group in both the maxilla (0.43 mm , 95% CI: 0.16 to 0.69, P =0.001 ) and the mandible (0.26 mm , 95% CI: 0.02 to 0.49, P =0.03 ). Conclusions: There is very low-quality evidence showing that implant anchorage is more efficient than conventional anchorage during canine retraction. Additional high-quality studies are needed. Keywords: Orthodontic implants; Canine retraction; Systematic review; Meta-analysis

scholarly journals Effectiveness of orthodontic temporary anchorage devices in canine retraction and anchorage preservation during the two-step technique: a systematic review and meta-analysis

2020 ◽  
Vol 20 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Haonan Tian ◽  
Congman Xie ◽  
Min Lin ◽  
Hongmei Yang ◽  
Aishu Ren
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Risk Of Bias ◽  
Controlled Trials ◽  
Cochrane Central Register ◽  
Canine Retraction ◽  
Temporary Anchorage Devices ◽  
The Mean ◽  
Mean Differences ◽  
Implant Anchorage

Abstract Background Temporary anchorage devices have been used for decades in orthodontic practice for many applications. The aim of this systematic review was to assess the effectiveness of orthodontic temporary anchorage devices in canine retraction during the two-step technique. Methods A search was systematically performed for articles published prior to June 30, 2019 in five electronic databases (PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Web of Science, Scopus). The risk of bias was assessed using the Cochrane risk of bias tool for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and the risk of bias in nonrandomized studies of interventions (ROBINS-I) tool for controlled clinical trials (CCTs). The Grading of Recommendation, Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach was used for the quality assessment. Data concerning the mean difference in mesial molar movement and extent of canine retraction were extracted for statistical analysis. The mean differences and 95% confidence intervals were analyzed for continuous data. A meta-analysis with a random-effects model for comparable outcomes was carried out. Results Three RCTs and five CCTs were finally included. Meta-analysis showed a significant increase not only in anchorage preservation in the implant anchorage group in both the maxilla (1.56 mm, 95% CI: 1.14 to 1.98, P < 0.00001) and the mandible (1.62 mm, 95% CI: 1.24 to 2.01, P < 0.00001) but also in canine retraction in the implant anchorage group in both the maxilla (0.43 mm, 95% CI: 0.16 to 0.69, P = 0.001) and the mandible (0.26 mm, 95% CI: 0.02 to 0.49, P = 0.03). Conclusions There is very low-quality evidence showing that implant anchorage is more efficient than conventional anchorage during canine retraction. Additional high-quality studies are needed.

scholarly journals Effectiveness of orthodontic temporary anchorage devices in canine retraction and anchorage preservation during two-step technique: A systematic review and meta-analysis

2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Haonan Tian ◽  
Congman Xie ◽  
Min Lin ◽  
Hongmei Yang ◽  
Aishu Ren
Keyword(s):  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Risk Of Bias ◽  
Mean Difference ◽  
Controlled Trials ◽  
Cochrane Central Register ◽  
Assessment Development ◽  
Canine Retraction ◽  
Temporary Anchorage Devices ◽  
The Mean ◽  
Implant Anchorage

Abstract Background: To assess the effectiveness of orthodontic temporary anchorage devices in canine retraction during two-step technique. Methods: The search was systematically performed up to June 2019 in five electronic databases (PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Web of Science, Scopus). A risk of bias assessment was performed using the Cochrane Risk of Bias Tool for Randomized Controlled Trials (RCTs) and the Risk of Bias in Nonrandomized Studies - of Interventions (ROBINS-I) tool for controlled clinical trials (CCTs) . The Grades of Recommendation, Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach was applied for quality assessment. Data concerning the mean difference in mesial molar movement and extent of canine retraction were extracted for statistical analysis. The mean difference and 95% confidence interval were analyzed for continuous data. A meta-analysis with a random-effects model for comparable outcomes was carried out. Results: Three RCTs and five CCTs were finally included. Meta-analysis showed a significant increase not only in anchorage preservation in the implant anchorage group in both the maxilla (1. 56 mm , 95% CI: 1.14 to 1.98, P <0.00001 ) and the mandible (1.62 mm , 95% CI: 1.24 to 2.01, P <0.00001 ) but also in canine retraction in the implant anchorage group in both the maxilla (0.43 mm , 95% CI: 0.16 to 0.69, P =0.001 ) and the mandible (0.26 mm , 95% CI: 0.02 to 0.49, P =0.03 ). Conclusions: Very low-quality evidence shows that implant anchorage is more efficient than conventional anchorage during canine retraction. Further high-quality studies are needed.

scholarly journals Effectiveness of probiotics on the duration of illness in healthy children and adults who develop common acute respiratory infectious conditions: a systematic review and meta-analysis

2014 ◽  
Vol 112 (1) ◽  
pp. 41-54 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sarah King ◽  
Julie Glanville ◽  
Mary Ellen Sanders ◽  
Anita Fitzgerald ◽  
Danielle Varley
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Systematic Reviews ◽  
Weighted Mean Difference ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Risk Of Bias ◽  
Mean Difference ◽  
Controlled Trials ◽  
Cochrane Central Register ◽  
Healthy Children ◽  
Duration Of Illness

Recent systematic reviews have reported a positive, although modest, effect of probiotics in terms of preventing common cold symptoms. In this systematic review, the effect of probiotics, specifically Lactobacillus and Bifidobacterium strains, on the duration of acute respiratory infections in otherwise healthy children and adults was evaluated. To identify relevant trials, eight databases, including MEDLINE, Embase, the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews (CDSR), the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), the Database of Abstracts of Reviews of Effects (DARE), Health Technology Assessment (HTA), Science Citation Index (SCI) and OAISTER, were searched from inception to 20 July 2012. Details regarding unpublished studies/databases were also obtained from probiotic manufacturers. Study selection, data extraction and quality assessment were carried out by two reviewers. Risk of bias was assessed using criteria adapted from those published by the Centre for Reviews and Dissemination. In this review, twenty randomised controlled trials (RCT) were included, of which twelve were considered to have a low risk of bias. Meta-analysis revealed significantly fewer numbers of days of illness per person (standardised mean difference (SMD) − 0·31 (95 % CI − 0·41, − 0·11), I2= 3 %), shorter illness episodes by almost a day (weighted mean difference − 0·77 (95 % CI − 1·50, − 0·04), I2= 80 %) (without an increase in the number of illness episodes), and fewer numbers of days absent from day care/school/work (SMD − 0·17 (95 % CI − 0·31, − 0·03), I2= 67 %) in participants who received a probiotic intervention than in those who had taken a placebo. Reasons for heterogeneity between the studies were explored in subgroup analysis, but could not be explained, suggesting that the effect sizes found may differ between the population groups. This systematic review provides evidence from a number of good-quality RCT that probiotics reduce the duration of illness in otherwise healthy children and adults.

scholarly journals Relationship between hormonal contraceptives and sleep among women of reproductive age: a systematic review protocol

BMJ Open ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (10) ◽  
pp. e045819
Author(s):  
Jinhui Ma ◽  
Megan Cheng ◽  
Lehana Thabane ◽  
Caihong Ma ◽  
Ning Zhang ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Research Question ◽  
Risk Of Bias ◽  
Reproductive Age ◽  
Hormonal Contraceptives ◽  
Controlled Trials ◽  
Cochrane Central Register ◽  
Women Of Reproductive Age

IntroductionThe aetiology of sleep disruptions is unknown, but hormonal fluctuations during the menstrual cycle, pregnancy and menopause have been shown to potentially affect how well a woman sleeps. The aim of this systematic review was to investigate whether hormonal contraceptives are associated with a decreased quality of sleep and increased sleep duration in women of reproductive age.MethodsThis review will analyse data from randomised controlled trials or non-randomised comparative studies investigating the association between hormonal contraceptives and sleep outcomes among women of reproductive age. Reviews addressing the same research question with similar eligibility criteria will be included. A literature search will be performed using the MEDLINE, Embase and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials databases from inception to 7 March 2021. The Cochrane Collaboration’s Risk of Bias for Randomised Trials V.2.0 and The Risk of Bias for Non-randomised Studies of Interventions tool will be used to assess risk of bias for each outcome in eligible studies. Two reviewers will independently assess eligibility of studies and risk of bias and extract the data. All extracted data will be presented in tables and narrative form. For sleep measures investigated by two or more studies with low heterogeneity, we will conduct random-effects meta-analysis to estimate the magnitude of the overall effect of hormonal contraceptives. If studies included in this systematic review form a connected network, a network meta-analysis will be conducted to estimate the comparative effect of different contraceptives. The Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation approach will be used to summarise the quality of evidence. Our protocol follows the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses for Protocols 2015 guidelines.Ethics and disseminationEthics approval is not required as data were sourced from previously reported studies. The findings of this review will be published in a peer-reviewed journal and presented at relevant conferences.PROSPERO registration numberCRD42020199958.

scholarly journals Psychological interventions for chronic non-specific low back pain: protocol of a systematic review with network meta-analysis

BMJ Open ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 10 (9) ◽  
pp. e034996
Author(s):  
Emma Ho ◽  
Manuela Ferreira ◽  
Lingxiao Chen ◽  
Milena Simic ◽  
Claire Ashton-James ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Low Back Pain ◽  
Back Pain ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Risk Of Bias ◽  
Psychological Interventions ◽  
Controlled Trials ◽  
Cochrane Central Register ◽  
Low Back ◽  
Fear Avoidance

IntroductionPsychological factors such as fear avoidance beliefs, depression, anxiety, catastrophic thinking and familial and social stress, have been associated with high disability levels in people with chronic low back pain (LBP). Guidelines endorse the integration of psychological interventions in the management of chronic LBP. However, uncertainty surrounds the comparative effectiveness of different psychological approaches. Network meta-analysis (NMA) allows comparison and ranking of numerous competing interventions for a given outcome of interest. Therefore, we will perform a systematic review with a NMA to determine which type of psychological intervention is most effective for adults with chronic non-specific LBP.Methods and analysisWe will search electronic databases (MEDLINE, Embase, PsycINFO, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Web of Science, SCOPUS and CINAHL) from inception until 22 August 2019 for randomised controlled trials comparing psychological interventions to any comparison interventions in adults with chronic non-specific LBP. There will be no restriction on language. The primary outcomes will include physical function and pain intensity, and secondary outcomes will include health-related quality of life, fear avoidance, intervention compliance and safety. Risk of bias will be assessed using the Revised Cochrane risk-of-bias tool for randomised trials (RoB 2) tool and confidence in the evidence will be assessed using the Confidence in NMA (CINeMA) framework. We will conduct a random-effects NMA using a frequentist approach to estimate relative effects for all comparisons between treatments and rank treatments according to the mean rank and surface under the cumulative ranking curve values. All analyses will be performed in Stata.Ethics and disseminationNo ethical approval is required. The research will be published in a peer-reviewed journal.PROSPERO registration numberCRD42019138074.

Mirror therapy simultaneously combined with electrical stimulation for upper limb motor function recovery after stroke: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

2020 ◽  
pp. 026921552095193
Author(s):  
Alberto Saavedra-García ◽  
Jose A Moral-Munoz ◽  
David Lucena-Anton
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Electrical Stimulation ◽  
Motor Function ◽  
Upper Limb ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Mean Difference ◽  
Current Evidence ◽  
Controlled Trials ◽  
Cochrane Central Register ◽  
Mirror Therapy

Objective: To evaluate the current evidence on the effectiveness of simultaneous combination of mirror therapy and electrical stimulation in the recovery of upper limb motor function after stroke, compared with conventional therapy, mirror therapy or electrical stimulation isolated. Data sources: Articles published in PubMed, Web of Science, Scopus, Physiotherapy Evidence Database (PEDro), Cochrane Central register of controlled trials and ScienceDirect up to July 2020. Review methods: The PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) guidelines were followed. Methodological quality was assessed using the PEDro tool. The RevMan 5.4 statistical software was used to obtain the meta-analysis, through the standardized mean difference and 95% confidence intervals (CI), and to evaluate the risk of bias. The GRADE approach was employed to assess the certainty of evidence. Results: Eight articles were included in this systematic review, seven were included in the meta-analysis. A total of 314 participants were analyzed. The overall quality of the articles included in this review was good. There was no overall significant mean difference on upper limb motor function after stroke using the Upper-Extremity Fugl-Meyer Assessment by 1.56 (95% CI = –2.08, 5.20; P = 0.40; moderate-certainty evidence) and the Box and Block Test results by 1.39 (95% CI = –2.14, 4.92; P = 0.44; high-certainty evidence). There was overall significant difference in the Action Research Arm Test by 3.54 (95% CI = 0.18, 6.90; P = 0.04; high-certainty evidence). Conclusion: Direct scientific evidence about the effectiveness of the combined therapy of mirror therapy and electrical stimulation simultaneously for the improvement of the upper limb motor function after stroke is lacking. Further high-quality and well-designed research is needed.

scholarly journals The efficacy of analgesics in controlling orthodontic pain: a systematic review and meta-analysis

2020 ◽  
Vol 20 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Caiqi Cheng ◽  
Tian Xie ◽  
Jun Wang
Keyword(s):  
Analgesic Effect ◽  
Orthodontic Treatment ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Mean Difference ◽  
Controlled Trials ◽  
Cochrane Central Register ◽  
Analgesic Effects ◽  
Orthodontic Pain ◽  
The Mean ◽  
Mean Differences

Abstract Background Patients who had gone through orthodontic treatment experienced pain and discomfort which could be the highest-ranking reason for treatment disturbance or early termination. Thus, this review aimed to assess the efficacy of analgesics on the relief of pain in orthodontic treatment. Methods A computerized literature search was conducted in the databases of EMBASE (via OVID, 1974 to 2019 Week 50), MEDLINE (via OVID, 1946 to Dec 2019), the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (December 2019). The Cochrane Collaboration’s Review Manager 5.3 software was applied in the present study. And methodological quality was evaluated by the Cochrane Risk of Bias Tool. Results We identified twelve publications including 587 patients in 19 randomized controlled trials. The results showed that the mean difference of naproxen in visual analogue scale (VAS) were − 1.45 (95% CI -2.72, − 0.19; P = .02), − 2.11 (95% CI -3.96, − 0.26; P = .03) and − 1.90 (95% CI -3.33, − 0.47; P = .009) in 2 h, 6 h and 24 h respectively. As for ibuprofen, the standard mean differences were − 1.10 (95% CI -1.49, − 0.71), − 1.63(95% CI -2.32, − 0.95) and − 1.34 (95% CI -2.12, − 0.55) at 2 h, 6 h, and 24 h, with the overall P values all < 0.001. The mean difference of acetaminophen is − 0.68, − 1.34, − 1.91 at three time points and the overall P values all < 0.01. Conclusions This meta-analysis suggests that the use of analgesics is effective for patients in controlling orthodontic pain. Ibuprofen and naproxen are both of stable analgesic effects which could peak at 6 h, while the analgesic effect of acetaminophen increases steadily from 2 h through 24 h. Compared with ibuprofen and acetaminophen, naproxen shows a stronger analgesic effect either at 2 h or 6 h, and its effect lasts to 24 h.

scholarly journals Platelet-Rich Fibrin in Third Molar Surgery: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis Protocol

2021 ◽  
pp. 194338752110162
Author(s):  
Gaston A. Salas ◽  
Shuheng A. Lai ◽  
Francisca Verdugo-Paiva ◽  
Roberto A. Requena
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Grey Literature ◽  
Third Molar ◽  
Risk Of Bias ◽  
Third Molar Surgery ◽  
Controlled Trials ◽  
Cochrane Central Register ◽  
Eligibility Criteria ◽  
Platelet Rich Fibrin

Objective: The objective of this systematic review is to assess the effectiveness and safety of platelet-rich fibrin (PRF) in third molar surgery. Data Sources: A comprehensive search strategy is meant to be used in an attempt to identify all relevant randomized controlled trials (RCTs), ongoing investigation reported in specialty congresses and trials regardless of language or publication status (published, unpublished, in press and in progress). Searches will be conducted in the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), PUBMED, Embase, Lilacs, the International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP), ClinicalTrials.gov , US National Institutes of Health (NIH), grey literature and in specialized congresses and conferences. Eligibility Criteria: We will include randomized trials evaluating the effect of PRF on wound healing after third molar surgery. Two reviewers will independently screen each study for eligibility, data extraction and risk of bias assessment using Cochrane “risk of bias” tool. We will pool the results using meta-analysis and will apply the GRADE system to assess the certainty of the evidence for each outcome. Ethics and Dissemination: As researchers will not access information that could lead to the identification of an individual participant, obtaining ethical approval was waived.

scholarly journals Impact of levothyroxine in women with positive thyroid antibodies on pregnancy outcomes: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials

BMJ Open ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (2) ◽  
pp. e043751
Author(s):  
Lorraine Lau ◽  
Jamie L Benham ◽  
Patricia Lemieux ◽  
Jennifer Yamamoto ◽  
Lois E Donovan
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Preterm Delivery ◽  
Pregnancy Outcomes ◽  
Randomised Controlled Trials ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Risk Of Bias ◽  
Controlled Trials ◽  
Cochrane Central Register ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Randomised Controlled

ObjectiveTo evaluate the effect of levothyroxine therapy on pregnancy outcomes compared with placebo or no treatment in women without overt hypothyroidism with presence of thyroid peroxidase antibodies (TPOAb) and/or thyroglobulin antibodies (TgAb).DesignSystematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trialsStudy eligibility criteriaPrespecified criteria for inclusion were: randomised trials of levothyroxine versus control (placebo or no treatment) among women with positive TPOAb or TgAb who were pregnant or considering conception.Data sourcesOvid MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials were searched from 1980 to 5 November 2020.Outcome measuresPrespecified data elements were extracted and where appropriate, meta-analyses were conducted. Main outcomes include pregnancy achieved, miscarriage, preterm delivery and live birth.Risk of bias assessmentCochrane Risk of Bias Tool for Quality Assessment of Randomised Controlled Trials.ResultsFrom 3023 citations, 79 citations were identified for full-text review. Of these, six trials (total of 2263 women) were included for qualitative and quantitative analyses. Risk of bias was deemed low for only one trial. There was no significant difference in the relative risk (RR) of pregnancy achieved (RR 1.03; 95% CI 0.93 to 1.13), miscarriage (RR 0.93; 95% CI 0.76 to 1.14), preterm delivery (RR 0.66; 95% CI 0.39 to 1.10) or live births (RR 1.01; 95% CI 0.89 to 1.16) in thyroid autoimmune women treated with levothyroxine compared with controls. Sensitivity analyses of preterm birth identified study quality and timing of levothyroxine initiation as sources of heterogeneity.ConclusionsAmong pregnant women or women planning conception, with thyroid autoimmunity, there is a lack of evidence of benefit for levothyroxine use (moderate to high Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluations). Recommendations to use levothyroxine in this setting need to be reconsidered.PROSPERO registration numberCRD42019130459.

scholarly journals Probiotics for preventing and treating gastro-oesophageal reflux/gastro-oesophageal reflux disease in infants: A systematic review and meta-analysis

2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jann Foster ◽  
Hannah Dahlen ◽  
Sabina Fijan ◽  
Nadia Badawi ◽  
Viginia Schmied ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Placebo Group ◽  
Reflux Disease ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Mean Difference ◽  
Oesophageal Reflux ◽  
Controlled Trials ◽  
Cochrane Central Register ◽  
Probiotic Group ◽  
Oesophageal Reflux Disease

Abstract Background Gastro-oesophageal reflux (GOR) and Gastro-oesophageal reflux disease (GORD) are common during infancy and can cause substantial discomfort in infants, parental distress and financial burden on parents and the health care system. Effective treatment regimens, however, remain elusive. Probiotics given to women during pregnancy and lactation, and babies may have therapeutic effects when it comes to GOR/GORD. The objective of this systematic review and meta-analysis is to evaluate the efficacy of probiotic supplementation for the prevention and treatment of GOR/GORD in infants.Methods Literature searches were conducted using MEDLINE, EMBASE and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled trials. Only randomised controlled trials (RCTs) were included. A meta-analysis of included trials was performed using the Cochrane Collaboration methodology where possible. Results Six RCTs examined the prevention or treatment with probiotics on GOR. There were no studies examining probiotics for GORD. A meta-analysis of 3 studies showed a statistically significant reduction in regurgitation episodes for the probiotic group compared to the placebo group [mean difference -1.44 episodes/day; 95% CI -1.71 to -1.17] but there was high heterogeneity (96%). Meta-analysis of two studies found a statistically significant increased number of stools per day in the probiotic group compared to the placebo group [mean difference 1.26, 95% CI 1.12 to 1.41]. However, there was moderate heterogeneity (69%). Individual studies reported: a decrease in crying time, increased gastric emptying rate, infant length and head circumference, visits to an emergency department or health professional, and loss of parent working days were significantly less with infants receiving probiotic compared to a placebo but more research is needed. Meta-analysis of two studies showed no difference in body weight between the two groups (minimal heterogeneity 23%). None of the studies reported any adverse effects for the women or infants. Conclusions Probiotic therapy appears promising with some evidence of benefit but most studies are small and there was high heterogeneity between the studies. The use of probiotics could potentially be a non-invasive, cost effective and preventative positive health strategy for both women and their babies. Further well controlled RCTs examining the effect of probiotics for GOR /GORD are warranted.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document