Stephanie A Leonard1, Suzan L Carmichael1, Elliott K Main2,3, Deirdre J Lyell2, Barbara Abrams4. 1. Division of Neonatal and Developmental Medicine, Department of Pediatrics and Center for Population Health Sciences, School of Medicine, Stanford University, Stanford, California. 2. Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, School of Medicine, Stanford University, Stanford, California. 3. California Maternal Quality Care Collaborative, Stanford, California. 4. Division of Epidemiology, School of Public Health, University of California, Berkeley, California.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: An association between prepregnancy body mass index (BMI) and severe maternal morbidity (SMM) has been reported, but evidence has been mixed and potential explanations have not been examined. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the association between prepregnancy BMI and SMM in a large, diverse birth cohort and assess potential mediation by obesity-related co-morbidities and caesarean birth. METHODS: This cohort study used linked birth certificate and hospitalisation discharge records from Californian births during 2007-2012. We assessed associations between prepregnancy BMI and SMM, and used inverse probability weighting for multiple mediators to estimate relative and absolute natural direct and indirect effects accounting for mediation by co-morbidities (hypertensive conditions, diabetes, asthma) and caesarean birth. RESULTS: Among 2 650 182 births, the prevalence of SMM was 1.42%. Adjusted risk ratios for the total association between prepregnancy BMI category and SMM were 1.12 (95% confidence interval [CI] 1.07, 1.18) for underweight, 1.02 (95% CI 0.99, 1.04) for overweight, 1.04 (95% CI 1.00, 1.07) for obesity class 1, 1.14 (95% CI 1.09, 1.20) for obesity class 2, and 1.28 (95% CI 1.22, 1.36) for obesity class 3 compared to women with normal weight. After accounting for mediation by co-morbidity and caesarean birth, the risk ratios were 1.19 (95% CI 1.14, 1.26) for underweight, 0.91 (95% CI 0.89, 0.94) for overweight, 0.86 (95% CI 0.84, 0.89) for obesity class 1, 0.88 (95% CI 0.84, 0.92) for obesity class 2, and 0.89 (95% CI 0.83, 0.95) for obesity class 3. CONCLUSIONS: Co-morbidities and caesarean birth explained an association between high prepregnancy BMI and SMM. These findings suggest that promotion of healthy prepregnancy weight, along with management of co-morbidities and support of vaginal birth in pregnant women with high BMI, could reduce the risk of SMM. However, these mediators did not reduce the elevated risk of SMM observed in women with low BMI.
BACKGROUND: An association between prepregnancy body mass index (BMI) and severe maternal morbidity (SMM) has been reported, but evidence has been mixed and potential explanations have not been examined. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the association between prepregnancy BMI and SMM in a large, diverse birth cohort and assess potential mediation by obesity-related co-morbidities and caesarean birth. METHODS: This cohort study used linked birth certificate and hospitalisation discharge records from Californian births during 2007-2012. We assessed associations between prepregnancy BMI and SMM, and used inverse probability weighting for multiple mediators to estimate relative and absolute natural direct and indirect effects accounting for mediation by co-morbidities (hypertensive conditions, diabetes, asthma) and caesarean birth. RESULTS: Among 2 650 182 births, the prevalence of SMM was 1.42%. Adjusted risk ratios for the total association between prepregnancy BMI category and SMM were 1.12 (95% confidence interval [CI] 1.07, 1.18) for underweight, 1.02 (95% CI 0.99, 1.04) for overweight, 1.04 (95% CI 1.00, 1.07) for obesity class 1, 1.14 (95% CI 1.09, 1.20) for obesity class 2, and 1.28 (95% CI 1.22, 1.36) for obesity class 3 compared to women with normal weight. After accounting for mediation by co-morbidity and caesarean birth, the risk ratios were 1.19 (95% CI 1.14, 1.26) for underweight, 0.91 (95% CI 0.89, 0.94) for overweight, 0.86 (95% CI 0.84, 0.89) for obesity class 1, 0.88 (95% CI 0.84, 0.92) for obesity class 2, and 0.89 (95% CI 0.83, 0.95) for obesity class 3. CONCLUSIONS: Co-morbidities and caesarean birth explained an association between high prepregnancy BMI and SMM. These findings suggest that promotion of healthy prepregnancy weight, along with management of co-morbidities and support of vaginal birth in pregnant women with high BMI, could reduce the risk of SMM. However, these mediators did not reduce the elevated risk of SMM observed in women with low BMI.
Authors: Mona T Lydon-Rochelle; Victoria L Holt; Vicky Cárdenas; Jennifer C Nelson; Thomas R Easterling; Carolyn Gardella; William M Callaghan Journal: Am J Obstet Gynecol Date: 2005-07 Impact factor: 8.661
Authors: Michael S Kramer; Cynthia Berg; Haim Abenhaim; Mourad Dahhou; Jocelyn Rouleau; Azar Mehrabadi; K S Joseph Journal: Am J Obstet Gynecol Date: 2013-07-16 Impact factor: 8.661
Authors: Stephen J McCall; Zhuoyang Li; Jennifer J Kurinczuk; Elizabeth Sullivan; Marian Knight Journal: BMJ Open Date: 2018-08-10 Impact factor: 2.692
Authors: Heather A Frey; Robert Ashmead; Alyssa Farmer; Yoshie H Kim; Cynthia Shellhaas; Reena Oza-Frank; Rebecca D Jackson; Maged M Costantine; Courtney D Lynch Journal: JAMA Netw Open Date: 2022-06-01
Authors: Stephanie A Leonard; Barbara Abrams; Elliott K Main; Deirdre J Lyell; Suzan L Carmichael Journal: Am J Clin Nutr Date: 2020-04-01 Impact factor: 7.045
Authors: Jonathan M Snowden; Audrey Lyndon; Peiyi Kan; Alison El Ayadi; Elliott Main; Suzan L Carmichael Journal: Am J Epidemiol Date: 2021-09-01 Impact factor: 5.363
Authors: Lisa M Korst; Kimberly D Gregory; Lisa A Nicholas; Samia Saeb; David J Reynen; Jennifer L Troyan; Naomi Greene; Moshe Fridman Journal: Matern Health Neonatol Perinatol Date: 2021-01-06
Authors: J A Masterson; I Adamestam; M Beatty; J P Boardman; P Johnston; J Joss; H Lawrence; K Litchfield; T S Walsh; A Wise; R Wood; C J Weir; F C Denison; N I Lone Journal: Anaesthesia Date: 2022-07-12 Impact factor: 12.893
Authors: Stephanie A Leonard; Chris J Kennedy; Suzan L Carmichael; Deirdre J Lyell; Elliott K Main Journal: Obstet Gynecol Date: 2020-09 Impact factor: 7.623