BJOG : an international journal of obstetrics and gynaecology · 2001
Is maternal underweight really a risk factor for adverse pregnancy outcome? A population-based study in London.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Sebire N J, Jolly M, Harris J, Regan L, Robinson S
Аннотация
OBJECTIVE: To determine the maternal and fetal risk of adverse outcome during pregnancy in relation to low maternal body mass index in an unselected population.
DESIGN: Retrospective analysis.
METHODS: Information for the years between 1988 and 1997 was extracted from a validated maternity database, including all but one of the maternity units in the North West Thames Region; 215,105 completed singleton pregnancies were studied. Comparison of pregnancy outcome was made on the basis of maternal body mass index at booking. There were 176,923 with a normal weight body mass index ( = 20 < 25). There were 38,182 with an underweight body mass index (< 20). Comparisons included antenatal complications (e.g. gestational diabetes, pre-eclampsia); intervention in labour, maternal morbidities (e.g. infection, postpartum haemorrhage, pulmonary thromboembolism); and neonatal outcome (admitted to special care baby unit at 24 hour of age, gestation at delivery, birthweight, stillbirth). Data are presented as percentages of outcomes in the normal and underweight groups with adjusted odds ratios and confidence intervals according to body mass index group.
RESULTS: In the underweight group only antenatal anaemia, preterm delivery and birthweight below the 5th centile were more frequent than in women of normal body mass index. The prevalence of certain complications, including development of gestational diabetes mellitus, pre-eclampsia, obstetric intervention and postpartum haemorrhage, were significantly lower in those with low body mass index.
CONCLUSION: Low maternal body mass index is associated with increased prevalence of some pregnancy complications, notably preterm delivery and low birthweight, but overall the outcome is favourable and several adverse outcomes are less common in this group of women.
DESIGN: Retrospective analysis.
METHODS: Information for the years between 1988 and 1997 was extracted from a validated maternity database, including all but one of the maternity units in the North West Thames Region; 215,105 completed singleton pregnancies were studied. Comparison of pregnancy outcome was made on the basis of maternal body mass index at booking. There were 176,923 with a normal weight body mass index ( = 20 < 25). There were 38,182 with an underweight body mass index (< 20). Comparisons included antenatal complications (e.g. gestational diabetes, pre-eclampsia); intervention in labour, maternal morbidities (e.g. infection, postpartum haemorrhage, pulmonary thromboembolism); and neonatal outcome (admitted to special care baby unit at 24 hour of age, gestation at delivery, birthweight, stillbirth). Data are presented as percentages of outcomes in the normal and underweight groups with adjusted odds ratios and confidence intervals according to body mass index group.
RESULTS: In the underweight group only antenatal anaemia, preterm delivery and birthweight below the 5th centile were more frequent than in women of normal body mass index. The prevalence of certain complications, including development of gestational diabetes mellitus, pre-eclampsia, obstetric intervention and postpartum haemorrhage, were significantly lower in those with low body mass index.
CONCLUSION: Low maternal body mass index is associated with increased prevalence of some pregnancy complications, notably preterm delivery and low birthweight, but overall the outcome is favourable and several adverse outcomes are less common in this group of women.