Results of a pilot study in the U.S. and Vietnam to assess the utility and acceptability of a multi-level pregnancy test (MLPT) for home monitoring of hCG trends after assisted reproduction

The impacts of telemedicine on assisted reproduction: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Telemedicine is being applied in assisted reproduction technology (ART) to provide remote consultations, monitoring and support for patients. This study aimed to evaluate the potential advantages of telemedicine in ART treatment in the form of virtual consultations. Studies in which patients were using telemedicine during ART treatment were identified from four scientific databases (PudMed, EMBASE, Scopus, Web of Science). The success of fertility treatments was compared between telemedicine and in-office care, and patient satisfaction with ART through telemedicine was assessed. Eleven studies, comprising 4697 patients, were identified. Quality assessment (Joanna Briggs Institute Critical Appraisal and revised Cochrane risk-of-bias tools) revealed an acceptable risk of bias for both randomized controlled trials and observational studies. Using a fixed-effects model, telemedicine was comparable to in-person care regarding the pregnancy rate achieved (odds ratio 1.02, 95% confidence intervals 0.83-1.26, P = 0.83). A Q-test suggested that all the included studies were homogeneous. Patients who received telemedicine during fertility treatment reported a high level of satisfaction (91%, 95% confidence intervals 80-96%). Egger's test confirmed that no publication bias was found. Telemedicine could serve as a complementary tool during fertility treatment to facilitate patients' satisfaction and overcome some practical problems without compromising treatment outcomes. Future studies should continue exploring the potential applications of telemedicine in assisted reproduction.

Self-testing for pregnancy: a systematic review and meta-analysis

OBJECTIVES

Urine pregnancy tests are often inaccessible in low-income settings. Expanded provision of home pregnancy testing could support self-care options for sexual and reproductive health and rights. We conducted a systematic review of pregnancy self-testing effectiveness, values and preferences and cost.

DESIGN

Systematic review and meta-analysis using the Grading of Recommendation, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) approach.

DATA SOURCES

PubMed, CINAHL, LILACS and EMBASE and four trial registries were searched through 2 November 2020.

ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA FOR SELECTING STUDIES

We included trials and observational studies that compared urine self-testing for pregnancy to health worker-led pregnancy testing on effectiveness outcomes; quantitative and qualitative studies describing values and preferences of end users and health workers and costs of pregnancy self-testing.

DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS

Two independent reviewers used standardised methods to search, screen and code included studies. Risk of bias was assessed using the Cochrane Collaboration and Evidence Project tools. Meta-analysis was conducted using random effects models. Findings were summarised in GRADE evidence profiles and synthesised qualitatively.

RESULTS

For effectiveness, four randomised trials following 5493 individuals after medical abortion showed no difference or improvements in loss to follow-up with home pregnancy self-testing compared with return clinic visits. One additional trial of community health workers offering home pregnancy tests showed a significant increase in pregnancy knowledge and antenatal counselling among 506 clients. Eighteen diverse values and preferences studies found support for pregnancy self-testing because of quick results, convenience, confidentiality/privacy, cost and accuracy. Most individuals receiving pregnancy self-tests for postabortion home management preferred this option. No studies reported cost data.

CONCLUSION

Pregnancy self-testing is acceptable and valued by end users. Effectiveness data come mostly from articles on postabortion care, and cost data are lacking. Greater availability of pregnancy self-tests, including in postabortion care and CHW programs, may lead to improved health outcomes.

PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER

CRD42021231656.

Self-Monitoring of Urinary Hormones in Combination with Telemedicine - a Timely Review and Opinion Piece in Medically Assisted Reproduction

Cycle monitoring via ultrasound and serum-based hormonal assays during medically assisted reproduction (MAR) can provide information on ovarian response and assist in optimizing treatment strategies in addition to reducing complications such as ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome (OHSS). Two surveys conducted in 2019 and 2020, including overall 24 fertility specialists from Europe, Asia and Latin America, confirmed that the majority of fertility practitioners routinely conduct hormone monitoring during MAR. However, blood tests may cause inconvenience to patients. The reported drawbacks of blood tests identified by the survey included the validity of results from different service providers, long waiting times and discomfort to patients due to travelling to clinics for tests and repeated venepunctures. Historically, urine-based assays were used by fertility specialists in clinics but were subsequently replaced by more practical and automated serum-based assays. A remote urine-based hormonal assay could be an alternative to current serum-based testing at clinics, reducing the inconvenience of blood tests and the frequency of appointments, waiting times and patient burden. Here we provide an overview of the current standard of care for cycle monitoring and review the literature to assess the correlation between urine-based hormonal assays and serum-based hormonal assays during MAR. In addition, in this review, we discuss the evidence supporting the introduction of remote urine-based hormonal monitoring as part of a novel digital health solution that includes remote ultrasound and tele-counselling to link clinics and patients at home.

The Ability of Quantitative, Specific, and Sensitive Point-of-Care/Chair-Side Oral Fluid Immunotests for aMMP-8 to Detect Periodontal and Peri-Implant Diseases

The analysis of the disease-specific oral and systemic biomarkers in saliva and oral fluids (i.e., mouth rinse, gingival crevicular fluid (GCF), and peri-implantitis fluid (PISF)) is demanding. Several hosts and microbial factors may influence their expression, release, and levels. The type of saliva/oral fluids utilized for the diagnostics affects the analysis. High sensitivity and specificities together with sophisticated methods and techniques are essential for valuable outcome. We describe here recently developed practical, convenient, inexpensive, noninvasive, and quantitative mouth rinse and PISF/GCF/chair-side/point-of-care (PoC) lateral-flow aMMP-8 immunoassays (PerioSafe and ImplantSafe/ORALyser) to detect, predict, and monitor successfully the course, treatment, and prevention of periodontitis and peri-implantitis, respectively. The tests have been independently and successfully validated to differentiate periodontal and peri-implant health and disease in Finland, Germany, Netherland, Sweden, Turkey, Nigeria, Malawi, and USA. The clinical use of salivary/oral fluid biomarkers to identify oral and systemic conditions requires additional studies utilizing these noninvasive screening, diagnostic, and preventive aMMP-8 PoC/chair-side technologies.