Literature DB >> 26616215

An antenatal prediction model for adverse birth outcomes in an urban population: The contribution of medical and non-medical risks.

A G Posthumus1, E Birnie2, M J van Veen3, E A P Steegers4, G J Bonsel4.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: in the Netherlands the perinatal mortality rate is high compared to other European countries. Around eighty percent of perinatal mortality cases is preceded by being small for gestational age (SGA), preterm birth and/or having a low Apgar-score at 5 minutes after birth. Current risk detection in pregnancy focusses primarily on medical risks. However, non-medical risk factors may be relevant too. Both non-medical and medical risk factors are incorporated in the Rotterdam Reproductive Risk Reduction (R4U) scorecard. We investigated the associations between R4U risk factors and preterm birth, SGA and a low Apgar score.
DESIGN: a prospective cohort study under routine practice conditions.
SETTING: six midwifery practices and two hospitals in Rotterdam, the Netherlands. PARTICIPANTS: 836 pregnant women.
INTERVENTIONS: the R4U scorecard was filled out at the booking visit. MEASUREMENTS: after birth, the follow-up data on pregnancy outcomes were collected. Multivariate logistic regression was used to fit models for the prediction of any adverse outcome (preterm birth, SGA and/or a low Apgar score), stratified for ethnicity and socio-economic status (SES).
FINDINGS: factors predicting any adverse outcome for Western women were smoking during the first trimester and over-the-counter medication. For non-Western women risk factors were teenage pregnancy, advanced maternal age and an obstetric history of SGA. Risk factors for high SES women were low family income, no daily intake of vegetables and a history of preterm birth. For low SES women risk factors appeared to be low family income, non-Western ethnicity, smoking during the first trimester and a history of SGA. KEY
CONCLUSIONS: the presence of both medical and non-medical risk factors early in pregnancy predict the occurrence of adverse outcomes at birth. Furthermore the risk profiles for adverse outcomes differed according to SES and ethnicity. IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: to optimise effective risk selection, both medical and non-medical risk factors should be taken into account in midwifery and obstetric care at the booking visit.
Copyright © 2016. Published by Elsevier Ltd.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Adverse outcomes; Antenatal risk assessment; Ethnicity; Prediction; Socio-economic status

Mesh:

Year:  2015        PMID: 26616215     DOI: 10.1016/j.midw.2015.11.006

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Midwifery        ISSN: 0266-6138            Impact factor:   2.372


  11 in total

1.  The Effects of Fetal Movement Counting on Pregnancy Outcomes.

Authors:  Masoumeh Delaram; Lobat Jafarzadeh
Journal:  J Clin Diagn Res       Date:  2016-02-01

Review 2.  A Systematic Review of Antenatal Risk Scoring Systems in India to Predict Adverse Neonatal Outcomes.

Authors:  Dinesh Raj Pallepogula; Adhisivam Bethou; Vishnu Bhat Ballambatu; Gowri Dorairajan; Ganesh Kumar Saya; Sureshkumar Kamalakannan; Sandhya Karra
Journal:  J Obstet Gynaecol India       Date:  2021-07-12

3.  Association of influenza vaccination during pregnancy with birth outcomes in Nicaragua.

Authors:  Carmen S Arriola; Nancy Vasconez; Mark G Thompson; Sonja J Olsen; Ann C Moen; Joseph Bresee; Alba María Ropero
Journal:  Vaccine       Date:  2017-04-29       Impact factor: 3.641

4.  Comparison of logistic regression with machine learning methods for the prediction of fetal growth abnormalities: a retrospective cohort study.

Authors:  Stefan Kuhle; Bryan Maguire; Hongqun Zhang; David Hamilton; Alexander C Allen; K S Joseph; Victoria M Allen
Journal:  BMC Pregnancy Childbirth       Date:  2018-08-15       Impact factor: 3.007

5.  Reducing growth and developmental problems in children: Development of an innovative postnatal risk assessment.

Authors:  Minke R C van Minde; Lyne M G Blanchette; Hein Raat; Eric A P Steegers; Marlou L A de Kroon
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2019-06-05       Impact factor: 3.240

6.  Did an urban perinatal health programme in Rotterdam, the Netherlands, reduce adverse perinatal outcomes? Register-based retrospective cohort study.

Authors:  Hendrik Cc de Jonge; Jacqueline Lagendijk; Unnati Saha; Jasper V Been; Alex Burdorf
Journal:  BMJ Open       Date:  2019-10-22       Impact factor: 2.692

7.  Development of a Comprehensive Antenatal Risk Assessment Tool to Predict Adverse Maternal and Perinatal Outcomes in Rural Areas: An Exploratory Study.

Authors:  Sakthi Arasu; Geethu Maria Joseph; Lijiya Mathew; Josephine S Antoniammal; Rajitha K Manolas; Avita Rose Johnson
Journal:  J Family Reprod Health       Date:  2020-12

8.  Antenatal non-medical risk assessment and care pathways to improve pregnancy outcomes: a cluster randomised controlled trial.

Authors:  Jacqueline Lagendijk; Amber A Vos; Loes C M Bertens; Semiha Denktas; Gouke J Bonsel; Ewout W Steyerberg; Jasper V Been; Eric A P Steegers
Journal:  Eur J Epidemiol       Date:  2018-03-31       Impact factor: 8.082

9.  The prevalence of adverse postnatal outcomes for mother and infant in the Netherlands.

Authors:  Nynke de Groot; Erwin Birnie; Jolanda H Vermolen; Jacqueline J A Dorscheidt; Gouke J Bonsel
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2018-09-11       Impact factor: 3.240

10.  Satisfaction with obstetric care in a population of low-educated native Dutch and non-western minority women. Focus group research.

Authors:  Ingrid A Peters; Anke G Posthumus; Eric A P Steegers; Semiha Denktaş
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2019-01-31       Impact factor: 3.240

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.