Literature DB >> 23471548

Obstetric and neonatal outcomes of women with FGM I and II in San Camillo Hospital, Burkina Faso.

Antonio Frega1, Giuliana Puzio, Paolo Maniglio, Angelica Catalano, Giusi Natalia Milazzo, Danila Lombardi, Henri Nitiema, Paola Bianchi.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: Female genital mutilation (FGM) is still performed in the world. Women who underwent FGM have marked psychological, gynecological and obstetric consequences. This article contributes to the spread of knowledge about obstetric and neonatal outcomes in women with FGM I and II.
METHODS: Our observational study compared the obstetric outcomes of 85 women with FGM I and II (case group) and 95 women without it (control group). We evaluated age, need of oxytocin during labor, duration of the expulsion phase, need of episiotomy, weight of the newborn, Apgar score at birth, resuscitation of the newborn, stillbirth. We observed the rate of cesarean sections and their main indications. We compared the rate of cesarean sections among the cases and the controls.
RESULTS: Controls were younger than women who underwent FGM. Intravenous oxytocin injection was higher in cases. The expulsion phase was longer in women with FGM than in the controls. FGM is related to a higher risk of episiotomy. Apgar score 9/10 was more frequently assigned to babies from mothers without FGM. There were more resuscitated babies and more stillbirth in the group of cases. Ten percent of all women underwent cesarean section. FGM is related to a higher incidence of cesarean section.
CONCLUSION: FGM is associated with a higher risk of gynecological and obstetrical consequences, acting on women's health and also on the economy of resource limited countries. Because of migration, health professionals could interface with women who underwent FGM and have to know their related complications.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2013        PMID: 23471548     DOI: 10.1007/s00404-013-2779-y

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Arch Gynecol Obstet        ISSN: 0932-0067            Impact factor:   2.344


  7 in total

1.  Obstetric outcomes for women with female genital mutilation at an Australian hospital, 2006-2012: a descriptive study.

Authors:  Nesrin Varol; Angela Dawson; Sabera Turkmani; John J Hall; Susie Nanayakkara; Greg Jenkins; Caroline S E Homer; Kevin McGeechan
Journal:  BMC Pregnancy Childbirth       Date:  2016-10-28       Impact factor: 3.007

2.  Sequela of female genital mutilation on birth outcomes in Jijiga town, Ethiopian Somali region: a prospective cohort study.

Authors:  Kiros Gebremicheal; Fisehaye Alemseged; Haimanot Ewunetu; Daniel Tolossa; Abdibari Ma'alin; Mahlet Yewondwessen; Samuel Melaku
Journal:  BMC Pregnancy Childbirth       Date:  2018-07-20       Impact factor: 3.007

3.  Knowledge and Attitude on Obstetric Effects of Female Genital Mutilation among Maasai Women in Maternity Ward at Loitokitok Sub-County Hospital, Kenya.

Authors:  Keddy Wanjiru Muchene; Irene Gacheri Mageto; Joyce Jebet Cheptum
Journal:  Obstet Gynecol Int       Date:  2018-08-01

4.  Trend in female genital mutilation and its associated adverse birth outcomes: A 10-year retrospective birth registry study in Northern Tanzania.

Authors:  Issa Rashid Suleiman; Eusebious Maro; Benjamin C Shayo; Julius Pius Alloyce; Gileard Masenga; Michael J Mahande; Bariki Mchome
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2021-01-06       Impact factor: 3.240

5.  Obstetric Complications in Women from Sub-Saharan Africa-A Cross-Sectional Study.

Authors:  Laura Gombau-Giménez; Pilar Almansa-Martínez; María Suarez-Cortés; Alonso Molina-Rodríguez; César Leal-Costa; Ismael Jiménez-Ruiz
Journal:  Int J Environ Res Public Health       Date:  2022-08-16       Impact factor: 4.614

6.  Economic burden of female genital mutilation in 27 high-prevalence countries.

Authors:  David Tordrup; Chrissy Bishop; Nathan Green; Max Petzold; Fernando Ruiz Vallejo; Joshua P Vogel; Christina Pallitto
Journal:  BMJ Glob Health       Date:  2022-02

7.  Painful gynecologic and obstetric complications of female genital mutilation/cutting: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

Authors:  Jacob Michael Lurie; Alessandra Weidman; Samantha Huynh; Diana Delgado; Imaani Easthausen; Gunisha Kaur
Journal:  PLoS Med       Date:  2020-03-31       Impact factor: 11.613

  7 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.