Methods | Type of study: open-label, randomised trial. | |
Participants | Location: tertiary hospital in northern India. Time frame: August 2004 onwards. Included: mothers from 26 to 33 weeks’ gestation who were at risk of preterm birth and who had received a course of betamethasone 7 or more days previously. Mothers had to be available for follow-up every week until birth Exclusion criteria: unreliable gestational age, frank chorioamnionitis, and major fetal malformation Total recruited: 76 mothers (38 repeat steroid, 38 control). 83 babies were born to 75 mothers but only the first born of multiple pregnancies were assessed (37 repeat steroid, 38 control) |
|
Interventions | Repeat steroid: betamethasone 12 mg intramuscularly, 2 doses, 24 hours apart. The course was repeated every 7 days until delivery or the end of the 33rd week of gestation Control: no intervention. | |
Outcomes | Primary outcome: severe RDS. RDS was defined as respiratory distress within 6 hours of birth in a preterm infant with either a negative gastric shake test or a typical chest radiograph. Severe RDS was defined as requiring mechanical ventilation for at least 12 hours. Mechanical ventilation was started in infants with hypoxaemia (Pa02 < 50 mmHg) or hypercapnic acidosis (PaC02 > 50mmHg with pH < 7.25) or worsening acidosis or clinically worsening respiratory fatigue/apnoea/work of breathing despite continuous positive airway pressure (maximum 8 cm water pressure) Secondary outcomes: RDS; intraventricular haemorrhage; necrotising enterocolitis (not defined); patent ductus arteriosus (not defined); bronchopulmonary dysplasia (not defined), sepsis (not defined), retinopathy of prematurity, stillbirth and neonatal death, weight, length and occipital-frontal circumference at birth and at 6 months’ corrected age, and body size and development (evaluated by the Denver Development Screening Test II) at 6 months’ corrected age |
|
Funding Support | None. | |
Notes | Sample-size calculation: yes, based on a reduction in severe RDS from an estimated 33% in the control group to 6% in the repeat steroid group (2 tailed alpha 0.05, beta 0.2). The planned sample size was 70 (35 women in each arm) | |
Risk of bias | ||
Bias | Authors’ judgement | Support for judgement |
Random sequence generation (selection bias) | Low risk | Website-generated random number list. |
Allocation concealment (selection bias) | Low risk | Subjects were “randomised” to receive by a process of simple randomisation. “Slips bearing the random allocation” (generated from the random number list) “were placed in opaque envelopes, sealed and numbered serially on the outside” |
Blinding (performance bias and detection bias) All outcomes |
High risk | Placebo not used so no blinding of participants or staff. |
Incomplete outcome data (attrition bias) All outcomes |
Unclear risk | One mother in the repeat steroid group was lost to follow-up before birth. Outcomes were recorded only for the firstborn of multiple pregnancies. Intention-to-treat analysis was performed on babies with known outcomes. Neonatal outcomes reported on 75 (99%) infants, 37 in the repeat steroid group and 38 in the control group. Infant outcomes reported to date for 44 (58%) infants, 21 in the repeat steroid group and 23 in the control group |
Selective reporting (reporting bias) | Unclear risk | Insufficient detail to permit judgement. Outcomes specified in the research methods reported |
Other bias | Low risk | No other obvious risk of bias identified. |