Table 2 Characteristics of the included studies

Adler et al. (2004) [52]

To determine if protective behavior prevents child-to-mother transmission of HCMV during

pregnancy

Seronegative mothers with a child < 36 months of age

Childcare centres in Central, Northern, and Eastern Virginia, (USA), from 1999 through 2001

N = 166 (IG: n = 92; Full IG: n = 23; CG: n = 51)

Cluster RCT study

Not reported funding

Intervention (serologic status known but child’s shedding unknown): written, oral and video information + adherence visits. Liquid soap and latex gloves were provided

Full intervention (serologic status and child’s shedding known): written, oral and video + adherence visits. Liquid soap and latex gloves were provided

The women received basic information about HCMV. They were not aware of their serologic status or whether their child was shedding HCMV

a) Maternal HCMV seroconversion

b) Measures of adherence: percentage of times per biweekly that mothers performed or avoided a specific behaviour was estimated. The number of gloves remaining was monitored, the amount of soap remaining was weighed and the number of diapers remaining was counted

Picone et al. (2009) [50]

To evaluate the frequency of pregnant women agreeing to HCMV serologic screening after information of the consequences of HCMV infection

Pregnant women received information of HCMV infection during two years between January 2005 and December 2006.

Service de Gynécologie-Obstétrique, Hôpital Antoine Béclère, Clamart, France

N = 3665

Prospective cohort study

No funding

HCMV-seronegative:

detailed oral and written hygiene information + second test at 36WG + systematic ultrasound examinations at 12, 22, 32 WB

HCMV-seropositive: monthly fetal ultrasound examination

Seroconversion between 12–36 WB: ultra- sound examination + transvaginal evaluation of fetal brain

NA

a) Rate of HCMV seropositive and seronegative women

b) Rate of women consent for screening

c) Rate of primary infection

d) Rate of seroconversion

e) Number of HCMV-infected newborns

Vauloup-Fellous et al. (2009) [51]Vauloup-Fellou

To evaluate the impact of a prenatal HCMV infection screening

and counselling policy

Pregnant women who had their first medical visit to an obstetric department between January 2005 and December 2007

Service de Gynécologie-Obstétrique,

Setting: Hôpital Antoine Béclère, Clamart, France

N = 5173

Prospective cohort study

Not reported funding

HCMV-seronegative:

detailed oral and written hygiene information + second test at 36WG + contact telephone number for further information + systematic ultrasound examinations at 12, 22, 32 WB

HCMV-seropositive: monthly foetal ultrasound examination

Seroconversion between 12–36 WB: ultra- sound examination + transvaginal evaluation of the foetal brain

NA

a) Rate of women agreeing for screening

b) Rate of primary infection

c) Rate of seroconversion

d) Number of HCMV-infected newborns

Reichman et al. (2014) [48]

To assess the effect of counselling preconception

Women who planned pregnancy and were referred to a fertility clinic.

Outpatient fertility clinic at Shaare Zedek Medical Centre, Jerusalem, Israel over a 28-month period

N = 444

Retrospective Cohort study

Not reported funding

HCMV testing and counselling at preconception Seronegative women: advised to adopt behaviours and follow-up evaluation of their HCMV immunity status every 3–4 months

Women primary infection: advised to postpone pregnancy for 6–9 months

Women remote infection: continued with infertility treatment

NA

Preconception screening for HCMV

Seronegative: IgG (−)/IgM (−)

Seropositive: IgG (+)/IgM (−)

Seroconversion: (IgG (+) high avidity/IgM (+) (past primary infection or reactivation) or IgG (+) low avidity/IgM (+) (primary infection)

Revello et al. (2015) [49]

To investigate the effectiveness of information and hygiene recommendations for prevention of HCMV infection and to assess acceptance of and adherence to hygiene

Pregnant women at high risk for primary HCMV infection (seronegative)

Two participating centres were involved, one in Pavia and one in Turin (Italy)

N = 646 (IG: n = 331; CG: n = 315)

Interventional and observational

controlled study

Funded by Fondazione Carlo Denegri, Torino, Italy

The study time covered the period from 11–12 weeks of gestation to delivery

Seronegative women or unknown immune status received written

and oral information + reinforcement + adherence questionnaire

Women who were not tested or informed about HCMV during pregnancy but who have undergone foetal aneuploidy screening at 11–12 WG. At the time of delivery, both seronegative and susceptible women were informed of the potential risks associated with HCMV susceptibility in future pregnancies

HCMV seroconversion screening and self-report of adherence to hygiene recommendations

Calvert et al. (2021) [53]

To examine the efficacy of an antenatal digital intervention to reduce the risk of HCMV acquisition in pregnancy

Women in their first trimester of pregnancy who were attending antenatal clinics between September 2018 and September 2019

Teaching hospital in an ethnically diverse area of South-West London (UK)

N = 103 (IG: n = 51; CG: n = 52)

RCT study

Not reported funding

Women watched educational film about HCMV (prevalence and routes of transmission; families of affected children and advice to minimise the risk of HCMV infection) + baseline and 34-week questionnaire

Women viewed a series of slides about influenza vaccination in pregnancy +

Baseline and 34-week questionnaire

Differences in knowledge about HCMV, perceived severity, susceptibility and HCMV risk reducing behaviour of pregnant women

Anxiety and depression scores

Seroconversion