Search

Background and Aims: Smokeless tobacco is a heterogeneous product group with diverse composition and prevalence globally. Tobacco use during pregnancy is concerning due to the risk of adverse pregnancy outcomes and effects on child health. Nicotine may mediate several of these effects. This systematic review measured health outcomes from Swedish smokeless tobacco (snus) use during pregnancy. Method: Literature search was conducted by an information specialist in May 2022. We included human studies of snus use during pregnancy compared with no tobacco use, assessed risk of bias, conducted a meta‐analysis and assessed confidence in effect‐estimates using Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluations (GRADE). Results: We included 18 cohort studies (42 to 1 006 398 participants). Snus use during pregnancy probably (moderate confidence in risk estimates) increase the risk of neonatal apnea, adjusted odds ratio 95% confidence interval [aOR (95% CI)] 1.96 (1.30 to 2.96). Snus use during pregnancy possibly (low confidence in risk estimates) increase the risk of stillbirths aOR 1.43 (1.02 to 1.99), extremely premature births aOR 1.69 (1.17 to 2.45), moderately premature birth aOR 1.26 (1.15 to 1.38), SGA aOR 1.26 (1.09 to 1.46), reduced birth weight mean difference of 72.47 g (110.58 g to 34.35 g reduction) and oral cleft malformations aOR 1.48 (1.00 to 2.21). It is uncertain (low confidence in risk estimates, CI crossing 1) whether snus use during pregnancy affects risk of preeclampsia aOR 1.11 (0.97 to 1.28), antenatal bleeding aOR 1.15 (0.92 to 1.44) and very premature birth aOR 1.26 (0.95 to 1.66). Risk of early neonatal mortality and altered heart rate variability is uncertain, very low confidence. Snus using mothers had increased prevalence of caesarean sections, low confidence. Conclusions: This systematic review reveals that use of smokeless tobacco (snus) during pregnancy may adversely impact the developing child. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background Organised follow-up is a common feature of several strategies at the primary health care level to promote health behaviour change, e.g. to increase physical activity. In Norway, municipal 'healthy living' centres run by health care personnel are established to offer counselling and organised follow-up of health behaviour change during a 12-week programme. We report the results of a systematic review commissioned by the Norwegian Directorate of Health concerning organised follow-up to improve physical activity. Methods We searched ten electronic databases up to June 2012, reference lists of included publications, and relevant journals. Study selection and quality risk of bias assessment were carried out independently. Data were synthesised narratively due to heterogeneity of measurements of physical activity. The GRADE approach was used to assess our confidence in the effect estimate for each outcome in each comparison. Results Fourteen randomised controlled trials from seven countries and with a total of 5,002 participants were included in the systematic review. All studies were carried out in primary care or community settings. The interventions comprised referral to supervised group physical activity (2 studies), referral to local resources with follow-up (6 studies), and selforganised physical activity with follow-up (6 studies). The narrative synthesis, comprising a total of 39 comparisons, indicated effects of self-organised physical activity with follow-up (compared to both advice and no treatment) and referral to local resources with follow-up (compared to advice) in some of the comparisons where we rated our confidence in the effect estimates as moderate. However, the results indicated no difference between intervention and control groups for the majority of comparisons. Follow-up in the studies was mainly shortterm with the longest follow-up 9 months post-treatment. We rated our confidence in the effect estimates as low or very low in most comparisons, both for positive and neutral results. Conclusions The results of this systematic review indicate considerable uncertainty concerning effects of organised follow-up during 10-14 weeks on physical activity. Major methodological problems concerning the measurement of physical activity are discussed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]