| Literature DB >> 24800249 |
Tamme W Goecke1, Pascal Burger2, Peter A Fasching3, Abdulsallam Bakdash4, Anne Engel3, Lothar Häberle3, Franziska Voigt1, Florian Faschingbauer3, Eva Raabe3, Nicolai Maass5, Michael Rothe6, Matthias W Beckmann3, Fritz Pragst4, Johannes Kornhuber2.
Abstract
AIM: Identification of women with moderate alcohol abuse during pregnancy is difficult. We correlated self-reported alcohol consumption during pregnancy and patient characteristics with objective alcohol indicators measured in fetal meconium.Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2014 PMID: 24800249 PMCID: PMC3985164 DOI: 10.1155/2014/702848
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Biomed Res Int Impact factor: 3.411
Figure 1Boxplots of EtG and ester measures and alcohol abuse confession. Suitable ranges are displayed.
Association of meconium results, report of alcohol consumption count and percentage, and P values of Wilcoxon rank-sum tests are shown (test based on raw values, classifications just for illustration).
| Meconium results | ng/g | Total | No alcohol abuse reported | Alcohol abuse reported |
|
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Stearate | 0 | 411 | 80.8% | 19.2% | 0.08 |
| >0 | 139 | 72.7% | 27.3% | ||
|
| |||||
| Linoleate | 0 | 460 | 79.1% | 20.9% | 0.66 |
| >0 | 90 | 76.7% | 23.3% | ||
|
| |||||
| Oleate | 0 | 416 | 78.8% | 21.2% | 0.75 |
| >0 | 134 | 78.4% | 21.6% | ||
|
| |||||
| Palmitate | 0 | 121 | 80.2% | 19.8% | 0.55 |
| >0 | 423 | 78.5% | 21.5% | ||
|
| |||||
| Myristate | 0 | 367 | 79.3% | 20.7% | 0.76 |
| >0 | 183 | 77.6% | 22.4% | ||
|
| |||||
| EtG | 0 | 451 | 81.4% | 18.6% | <0.01 |
| >0 | 92 | 66.3% | 33.7% | ||
Association of socioeconomic parameters and EtG measures. Count, percentage, and P value of nonparametric test are shown.
| Patient characteristic | Total | EtG measurement <120 ng/g | EtG measurement ≥120 ng/g |
|
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Age | ||||
| <20 | 3 | 66.7% | 33.3% | |
| 20–30 | 128 | 90.6% | 9.4% | |
| 30–40 | 382 | 90.1% | 9.9% | |
| 40+ | 32 | 90.6% | 9.4% | |
| Total |
| 0.92 | ||
| Education | ||||
| No university-entrance diploma | 245 | 91.8% | 8.2% | |
| University-entrance diploma | 296 | 88.5% | 11.5% | |
| Total |
| 0.25 | ||
| Marital status | ||||
| Not married | 110 | 84.5% | 15.5% | |
| Married | 434 | 91.5% | 8.5% | |
| Total |
| 0.05 | ||
| Income | ||||
| <500€ | 1 | 0.0% | 0.0% | |
| 500–1000€ | 19 | 100.0% | 0.0% | |
| 1000–2000€ | 59 | 89.8% | 10.2% | |
| 2000–3000€ | 122 | 85.2% | 14.8% | |
| 3000–4000€ | 94 | 94.7% | 5.3% | |
| 4000–5000€ | 56 | 89.3% | 10.7% | |
| >5000€ | 48 | 93.8% | 6.3% | |
| Total |
| 0.32 | ||
| Smoking | ||||
| No | 503 | 90.1% | 9.9% | |
| Yes | 40 | 90.0% | 10.0% | |
| Total |
| 1.00 | ||
| EPDS | ||||
| No depression | 428 | 90.0% | 10.0% | |
| Slight depression | 37 | 89.2% | 10.8% | |
| Moderate-to-strong depression | 36 | 91.7% | 8.3% | |
| Total |
| 0.88 | ||
| HAMD | ||||
| No depression | 466 | 91.8% | 8.2% | |
| Slight-to-moderate depression | 56 | 91.1% | 8.9% | |
| Strong depression | 11 | 90.9% | 9.1% | |
| Total |
| 0.77 |
Association of socioeconomic parameters and alcohol for Group 1 (EtG < cutoff of 120 ng/g). Count, percentage, and P value of nonparametric test are shown.
| Patient characteristics | Total | Alcohol consumption not reported in Group 1 | Alcohol consumption reported in Group 1 |
|
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Age | ||||
| <20 | 2 | 100.0% | 0.0% | |
| 20–30 | 116 | 81.9% | 18.1% | |
| 30–40 | 342 | 78.4% | 21.6% | |
| 40+ | 29 | 82.8% | 17.2% | |
| Total |
| 0.15 | ||
| Education | ||||
| No university-entrance diploma | 223 | 78.0% | 22.0% | |
| University-entrance diploma | 262 | 80.9% | 19.1% | |
| Total |
| 0.50 | ||
| Marital status | ||||
| Not married | 93 | 78.5% | 21.5% | |
| Married | 395 | 79.7% | 20.3% | |
| Total |
| 0.90 | ||
| Income | ||||
| <500€ | 0 | 0.0% | 0.0% | |
| 500–1000€ | 19 | 84.2% | 15.8% | |
| 1000–2000€ | 53 | 83.0% | 17.0% | |
| 2000–3000€ | 104 | 83.7% | 16.3% | |
| 3000–4000€ | 89 | 79.8% | 20.2% | |
| 4000–5000€ | 50 | 78.0% | 22.0% | |
| >5000€ | 45 | 77.8% | 22.2% | |
| Total |
| 0.27 | ||
| Smoking | ||||
| No | 453 | 79.0% | 21.0% | |
| Yes | 36 | 86.1% | 13.9% | |
| Total |
| 0.42 | ||
| EPDS | ||||
| No depression | 385 | 78.2% | 21.8% | |
| Slight depression | 33 | 84.8% | 15.2% | |
| Moderate-to-strong depression | 33 | 78.8% | 21.2% | |
| Total |
| 0.54 | ||
| HAMD | ||||
| No depression | 428 | 79.2% | 20.8% | |
| Slight-to-moderate depression | 51 | 80.4% | 19.6% | |
| Strong depression | 10 | 90.0% | 10.0% | |
| Total |
| 0.59 |
Association of socioeconomic parameters and reported alcohol abuse for Group 2 (EtG ≥ cutoff of 120 ng/g). Count, percentage, and P value of nonparametric test are shown.
| Patient characteristic | Total | Alcohol consumption not reported in Group 2 | Alcohol consumption reported in Group 2 |
|
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Age | ||||
| <20 | 1 | 100.0% | 0.0% | |
| 20–30 | 12 | 91.7% | 8.3% | |
| 30–40 | 38 | 68.4% | 31.6% | |
| 40+ | 3 | 33.3% | 66.7% | |
| Total |
| 0.03 | ||
| Education | ||||
| No university-entrance diploma | 20 | 80.0% | 20.0% | |
| University-entrance diploma | 34 | 67.6% | 32.4% | |
| Total |
| 0.51 | ||
| Marital status | ||||
| Not married | 17 | 82.4% | 17.6% | |
| Married | 37 | 67.6% | 32.4% | |
| Total |
| 0.34 | ||
| Income | ||||
| <500€ | 1 | 100.0% | 0.0% | |
| 500–1000€ | 0 | 0.0% | 0.0% | |
| 1000–2000€ | 6 | 66.7% | 33.3% | |
| 2000–3000€ | 18 | 72.2% | 27.8% | |
| 3000–4000€ | 5 | 80.0% | 20.0% | |
| 4000–5000€ | 6 | 66.7% | 33.3% | |
| >5000€ | 3 | 66.7% | 33.3% | |
| Total |
| 0.89 | ||
| Smoking | ||||
| No | 51 | 72.5% | 27.5% | |
| Yes | 3 | 66.7% | 33.3% | |
| Total |
| 0.31 | ||
| EPDS | ||||
| No depression | 43 | 67.4% | 32.6% | |
| Slight depression | 4 | 75.0% | 25.0% | |
| Moderate-to-strong depression | 3 | 100.0% | 0.0% | |
| Total |
| 0.32 | ||
| HAMD | ||||
| No depression | 48 | 72.9% | 27.1% | |
| Slight-to-moderate depression | 5 | 60.0% | 40.0% | |
| Strong depression | 1 | 100.0% | 0.0% | |
| Total |
| 0.79 |
Various multiple logistic regression analyses (final models). The area under the curve (AUC) and odds ratios with 95% confidence interval and corresponding P values are shown.
| Target variable | AUC | Predictive variables | Odds ratio | 95% confidence interval |
|
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Linoleate (0/>0) | 0.58 | Education | |||
| No university-entrance diploma | 1 | ||||
| University-entrance diploma | 1.74 | [0.93, 3.31] | 0.09 | ||
| Income | |||||
| <500€ | 1 | ||||
| Per category | 0.84 | [0.67, 1.05] | 0.13 | ||
|
| |||||
| Oleate (0/>0) | 0.53 | Smoking | |||
| No | 1 | ||||
| Yes | 2.05 | [0.91, 4.42] | 0.07 | ||
|
| |||||
| Palmitate (0/>0) | 0.54 | Marital status | |||
| Not married | 1 | ||||
| Married | 1.57 | [0.86, 2.79] | 0.13 | ||
|
| |||||
| Myristate (0/>0) | 0.58 | Age | |||
| <25 | 1 | ||||
| ≥25 | 3.15 | [1.06, 11.74] | 0.05 | ||
| Marital status | |||||
| Not married | 1 | ||||
| Married | 0.62 | [0.35, 1.09] | 0.09 | ||
| Income | |||||
| <500€ | 1 | ||||
| Per category | 0.85 | [0.72, 1.01] | 0.07 | ||
|
| |||||
| EtG (<120/≥120) | 0.59 | Education | |||
| No university-entrance diploma | 1 | ||||
| University-entrance diploma | 1.81 | [0.86, 3.92] | 0.12 | ||
| Income | |||||
| <500€ | 1 | ||||
| Per category | 0.79 | [0.60, 1.04] | 0.10 | ||