RT Journal Article
SR Electronic
T1 Acceptability and feasibility of maternal screening for Group B Streptococcus: a rapid review
JF medRxiv
FD Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory Press
SP 2024.06.28.24309381
DO 10.1101/2024.06.28.24309381
A1 Constantinou, Georgina
A1 Webb, Rebecca
A1 Ayers, Susan
A1 Mitchell, Eleanor J
A1 Daniels, Jane
YR 2024
UL http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2024/06/28/2024.06.28.24309381.abstract
AB Background The risks and benefits of maternal screening for GBS during pregnancy or the intrapartum period are widely debated, since screen positive results trigger prophylactic antibiotic use. There is little known about women’s and health professional’s views regarding GBS screening.Objectives To conduct a rapid review to synthesise evidence on women and health professionals’: (1) knowledge and awareness of; (2) preferences for; and (3) acceptability of GBS screening programmes, and (4) how feasible they are to implement.Method Literature searches were conducted using online databases from their inception to 2023. Papers were included if they reported primary research from the perspectives of health professionals and women, about their knowledge and awareness, preferences, acceptability and feasibility of different types of GBS screening programmes. Data were assessed for confidence using GRADE- CERQual and analysed using a convergent synthesis approach.Findings 42 papers were eligible for inclusion. A total of 16,306 women and professionals were included. Women generally did not have extensive knowledge about GBS. Health professionals had a higher level of knowledge than women. Women were generally (but not universally) positive about GBS testing procedures. Some women were concerned about the impact on their place of birth.Discussion and Conclusion Where GBS screening programmes are available, parents must be provided with high quality information about them. Health professionals and service managers need to weigh up the benefits and risks of screening for GBS with local feasibility and treatment options, and with women’s individual values and birth plans.Statement of significance Problem: Maternal GBS colonisation at birth can lead to invasive GBS disease. The risks and benefits of screening for GBS during pregnancy is widely debated.What is already known: Different countries use different GBS screening strategies, such as the universal screening strategy vs risk based.What this paper adds: The World Health Organization reviewed their GBS policy guidelines in 2024.Results from this paper were used to ensure women and health professional’s views were considered. This paper found that women are generally (but not universally) positive about GBS testing procedures with some concerned about the impact on their birth choices.Competing Interest StatementGeorgina Constantinou, Susan Ayers, Eleanor J Mitchell and Jane Daniels work on the GBS3 trial of routine GBS testing vs risk-based approaches.Funding StatementThis work was funded by UNDP/UNFPA/ UNICEF/WHO/World Bank Special Programme of Research, Development and Research Training in Human Reproduction, a co-sponsored programme executed by the World Health Organization (WHO). The results of this study were presented to the Guideline Review Committee (GRC) in a meeting held virtually by WHO on 5th and 6th December 2023, this was a closed committee meeting and the results have not been published elsewhere. Author DeclarationsI confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.YesI confirm that all necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived, and that any patient/participant/sample identifiers included were not known to anyone (e.g., hospital staff, patients or participants themselves) outside the research group so cannot be used to identify individuals.YesI understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).YesI have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines, such as any relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material, if applicable.YesAll data produced in the present study are available upon reasonable request to the authors