Estimates of global, regional, and national incidence, prevalence, and mortality of HIV, 1980-2015 : the Global Burden of Disease Study 2015

Background Timely assessment of the burden of HIV/AIDS is essential for policy setting and programme evaluation. In this report from the Global Burden of Disease Study 2015 (GBD 2015), we provide national estimates of levels and trends of HIV/AIDS incidence, prevalence, coverage of antiretroviral therapy (ART), and mortality for 195 countries and territories from 1980 to 2015. Methods For countries without high-quality vital registration data, we estimated prevalence and incidence with data from antenatal care clinics and population-based seroprevalence surveys, and with assumptions by age and sex on initial CD4 distribution at infection, CD4 progression rates (probability of progression from higher to lower CD4 cell-count category), on and off antiretroviral therapy (ART) mortality, and mortality from all other causes. Our estimation strategy links the GBD 2015 assessment of all-cause mortality and estimation of incidence and prevalence so that for each draw from the uncertainty distribution all assumptions used in each step are internally consistent. We estimated incidence, prevalence, and death with GBD versions of the Estimation and Projection Package (EPP) and Spectrum software originally developed by the Joint United Nations Programme on HIV/AIDS (UNAIDS). We used an open-source version of EPP and recoded Spectrum for speed, and used updated assumptions from systematic reviews of the literature and GBD demographic data. For countries with high-quality vital registration data, we developed the cohort incidence bias adjustment model to estimate HIV incidence and prevalence largely from the number of deaths caused by HIV recorded in cause-of-death statistics. We corrected these statistics for garbage coding and HIV misclassifi cation. Findings Global HIV incidence reached its peak in 1997, at 3·3 million new infections (95% uncertainty interval [UI] 3·1–3·4 million). Annual incidence has stayed relatively constant at about 2·6 million per year (range 2·5–2·8 million) since 2005, after a period of fast decline between 1997 and 2005. The number of people living with HIV/AIDS has been steadily increasing and reached 38·8 million (95% UI 37·6–40·4 million) in 2015. At the same time, HIV/AIDS mortality has been declining at a steady pace, from a peak of 1·8 million deaths (95% UI 1·7–1·9 million) in 2005, to 1·2 million deaths (1·1–1·3 million) in 2015. We recorded substantial heterogeneity in the levels and trends of HIV/AIDS across countries. Although many countries have experienced decreases in HIV/AIDS mortality and in annual new infections, other countries have had slowdowns or increases in rates of change in annual new infections. Interpretation Scale-up of ART and prevention of mother-to-child transmission has been one of the great successes of global health in the past two decades. However, in the past decade, progress in reducing new infections has been slow, development assistance for health devoted to HIV has stagnated, and resources for health in low-income countries have grown slowly. Achievement of the new ambitious goals for HIV enshrined in Sustainable Development Goal 3 and the 90-90-90 UNAIDS targets will be challenging, and will need continued eff orts from governments and international agencies in the next 15 years to end AIDS by 2030.

Acupuncture with manual and electrical stimulation for labour pain : a two month follow up of recollection of pain and birth experience.

BACKGROUND: In a previous randomised controlled trial we showed that acupuncture with a combination of manual- and electrical stimulation (EA) did not affect the level of pain, as compared with acupuncture with manual stimulation (MA) and standard care (SC), but reduced the need for other forms of pain relief, including epidural analgesia. To dismiss an under-treatment of pain in the trial, we did a long-term follow up on the recollection of labour pain and the birth experience comparing acupuncture with manual stimulation, acupuncture with combined electrical and manual stimulation with standard care. Our hypothesis was that despite the lower frequency of use of other pain relief, women who had received EA would make similar retrospective assessments of labour pain and the birth experience 2 months after birth as women who received standard care (SC) or acupuncture with manual stimulation (MA). METHODS: Secondary analyses of data collected for a randomised controlled trial conducted at two delivery wards in Sweden. A total of 303 nulliparous women with normal pregnancies were randomised to: 40 min of MA or EA, or SC without acupuncture. Questionnaires were administered the day after partus and 2 months later. RESULTS: Two months postpartum, the mean recalled pain on the visual analogue scale (SC: 70.1, MA: 69.3 and EA: 68.7) did not differ between the groups (SC vs MA: adjusted mean difference 0.8, 95 % confidence interval [CI] -6.3 to 7.9 and SC vs EA: mean difference 1.3 CI 95 % -5.5 to 8.1). Positive birth experience (SC: 54.3 %, MA: 64.6 % and EA: 61.0 %) did not differ between the groups (SC vs MA: adjusted Odds Ratio [OR] 1.8, CI 95 % 0.9 to 3.7 and SC vs EA: OR 1.4 CI 95 % 0.7 to 2.6). CONCLUSIONS: Despite the lower use of other pain relief, women who received acupuncture with the combination of manual and electrical stimulation during labour made the same retrospective assessments of labour pain and birth experience 2 months postpartum as those who received acupuncture with manual stimulation or standard care. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT01197950.

Manual and electroacupuncture for labour pain : study design of a longitudinal randomized controlled trial

Introduction. Results from previous studies on acupuncture for labour pain are contradictory and lack important information on methodology. However, studies indicate that acupuncture has a positive effect on women's experiences of labour pain. The aim of the present study was to evaluate the efficacy of two different acupuncture stimulations, manual or electrical stimulation, compared with standard care in the relief of labour pain as the primary outcome. This paper will present in-depth information on the design of the study, following the CONSORT and STRICTA recommendations. Methods. The study was designed as a randomized controlled trial based on western medical theories. Nulliparous women with normal pregnancies admitted to the delivery ward after a spontaneous onset of labour were randomly allocated into one of three groups: manual acupuncture, electroacupuncture, or standard care. Sample size calculation gave 101 women in each group, including a total of 303 women. A Visual Analogue Scale was used for assessing pain every 30 minutes for five hours and thereafter every hour until birth. Questionnaires were distributed before treatment, directly after the birth, and at one day and two months postpartum. Blood samples were collected before and after the first treatment. This trial is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT01197950.

Acupuncture with manual and electrical stimulation for labour pain : a longitudinal randomised controlled trial

Background: Acupuncture is commonly used to reduce pain during labour despite contradictory results. The aim of this study is to evaluate the effectiveness of acupuncture with manual stimulation and acupuncture with combined manual and electrical stimulation (electro-acupuncture) compared with standard care in reducing labour pain. Our hypothesis was that both acupuncture stimulation techniques were more effective than standard care, and that electro-acupuncture was most effective.  Methods: A longitudinal randomised controlled trial. The recruitment of participants took place at the admission to the labour ward between November 2008 and October 2011 at two Swedish hospitals. 303 nulliparous women with normal pregnancies were randomised to: 40 minutes of manual acupuncture (MA), electro-acupuncture (EA), or standard care without acupuncture (SC). Primary outcome: labour pain, assessed by Visual Analogue Scale (VAS). Secondary outcomes: relaxation, use of obstetric pain relief during labour and post-partum assessments of labour pain. The sample size calculation was based on the primary outcome and a difference of 15 mm on VAS was regarded as clinically relevant, this gave 101 in each group, including a total of 303 women.  Results: Mean estimated pain scores on VAS (SC: 69.0, MA: 66.4 and EA: 68.5), adjusted for: treatment, age, education, and time from baseline, with no interactions did not differ between the groups (SC vs MA: mean difference 2.6, 95% confidence interval [CI] -1.7-6.9 and SC vs EA: mean difference 0.6 [95% CI] -3.6-4.8). Fewer number of women in the EA group used epidural analgesia (46%) than women in the MA group (61%) and SC group (70%) (EA vs SC: odds ratio [OR] 0.35; [95% CI] 0.19-0.67).  Conclusions: Acupuncture does not reduce women's experience of labour pain, neither with manual stimulation nor with combined manual and electrical stimulation. However, fewer women in the EA group used epidural analgesia thus indicating that the effect of acupuncture with electrical stimulation may be underestimated. These findings were obtained in a context with free access to other forms of pain relief.

Acupuncture for labour pain

Background: Acupuncture involves puncturing the skin with thin sterile needles at defined acupuncture points. Previous studies are inconclusive regarding the effect of acupuncture on labour pain, but some studies have found a reduction in the use of pharmacological pain relief when acupuncture is administered. The appropriate dose of acupuncture treatment required to elicit a potential effect on labour pain has not been fully explored. The dose is determined by many different factors, including the number of needles used and the intensity of the stimulation. In Sweden, manual stimulation of the needles is common practice when acupuncture is used for labour pain, but electrical stimulation of the needles, which gives a higher dose, could possibly be more effective. The overall aim of this thesis was to evaluate the effectiveness of acupuncture with manual stimulation (MA) of the needles as well as acupuncture with a combination of manual and electrical stimulation (EA) in reducing labour pain, compared with standard care without any form of acupuncture (SC). Methods: The study was designed as a three-armed randomised controlled trial in which 303 nulliparous women with normal pregnancies were randomised to MA, EA, or SC. The primary outcome was labour pain, assessed using the Visual Analogue Scale (VAS). Secondary outcomes were relaxation during labour, use of obstetric pain relief, and associations between maternal characteristics and labour pain and use of epidural analgesia respectively. Also, labour and infant outcomes, recollection of labour pain, and maternal experiences, such as birth experience and experience of the midwife, were investigated two months after the birth. The sample size calculation was based on the potential to discover a difference of 15 mm on the VAS. Data were collected during labour before the interventions, the day after birth, and two months later. Besides using the VAS, information was collected by means of study specific protocol, questionnaires and medical records. Results: The mean VAS scores were 66.4 in the MA group, 68.5 in the EA group, and 69.0 in the SC group (mean differences: MA vs. SC 2.6 95% CI -1.7 to 6.9, and EA vs. SC 0.6 95% CI -3.6 to 4.8). Other methods of pain relief were used less frequently in the EA group, including epidural analgesia, MA 61.4%, EA 46%, and SC 69.9%. (EA vs. SC OR 0.4 95% CI 0.2 to 0.7). No statistically significant differences were found in the recollection of labour pain between the three groups two months after birth (mean VAS score: MA 69.3, EA 68.7 and SC 70.1). A few maternal characteristics were associated with labour pain (age, dysmenorrhea, and cervix dilatation), but none of the investigated characteristics predicted the outcome of the acupuncture treatment in MA or EA. Women in the EA group experienced acupuncture as being effective for labour pain to a higher extent than women who received MA, MA 44.4%, EA 67.1% (EA vs. MA OR 2.4 95% CI 1.2 to 4.8). Women in the EA group also spent less time in labour (mean 500 min) than those who received MA (mean 619 min) and SC (mean 615 min) (EA vs. MA HR 1.4 95% CI 1.0 to1.9, EA vs. SC HR 1.4, 95% CI 1.1 to 2.0), and had less blood loss than women receiving SC, (EA vs. SC OR 0.1 95% CI 0.3 to 0.7). The women’s assessment of the midwife as being supportive during labour (MA 77.2%, EA 83.5%, SC 80%), overall satisfaction with midwife care (MA 100%, EA 97.5%, SC 98.7%), and having an overall positive childbirth experience (MA 64.6%, EA 61.0%, SC 54.3%) did not differ statistically. No serious side effects of the acupuncture treatment were reported. Conclusion: Acupuncture, regardless of type of stimulation, did not differ from standard care without acupuncture in terms of reducing women’s experience of pain during labour, or their memory of pain and childbirth overall two months after the birth. However, other forms of obstetric pain relief were less frequent in women receiving a combination of manual and electrical stimulation, suggesting that this method could facilitate coping with labour pain.