| Literature DB >> 32002041 |
Aljohara S Almeneessie1,2, Nada Alyousefi2, Maha Alzahrani1, Aisha Alsafi1, Raneem Alotaibi1, Awad H Olaish1, Yasser Sabr3, Ahmed S Bahammam1.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: This cross-sectional case-control study aimed to assess the prevalence of restless legs syndrome (RLS) and its correlates and severity among Arab (Saudi) pregnant women attending antenatal care clinics.Entities:
Keywords: Anemia; Vitamin D; diabetes mellitus; movement disorders; parity; sleep
Year: 2020 PMID: 32002041 PMCID: PMC6967142 DOI: 10.4103/atm.ATM_206_19
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Ann Thorac Med ISSN: 1998-3557 Impact factor: 2.219
Comparison between pregnant women (case) and nonpregnant women (control) groups
| Variable total ( | Mean±SD/ | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Cases ( | Controls ( | ||
| Age (years) | 29.4±5.6 | 29.2±5.7 | 0.743 |
| <20 | 16 (2.1) | 21 (2.8) | |
| 20-35 | 605 (81.5) | 607 (81.8) | |
| >35 | 121 (16.3) | 114 (15.4) | |
| BMI (Kg/m2) | 29.8±6.1 | 26.3±10.2 | <0.001 |
| Comorbidities | |||
| Diabetes mellitus | 104 (14) | 21 (2.8) | <0.001 |
| Vitamin D deficiency | 113 (15.2) | 444 (59.9) | <0.001 |
| Anemia (Hb <110 g/L) | 243 (32.7) | 186 (25.1) | <0.001 |
| RLS diagnosis | 223 (30) | 197 (26.5) | 0.134 |
| RLS severity | |||
| Mild | 41 (18) | 61 (31) | <0.001 |
| Moderate | 127 (57) | 107 (54) | |
| Severe | 53 (24) | 23 (12) | |
| Very severe | 2 (1) | 6 (3) | |
| RLS severity | |||
| Severe/very severe RLS | 55 (25) | 29 (15) | <0.001 |
| Mild/moderate RLS | 168 (75) | 168 (85) | |
SD=Standard deviation, BMI=Body mass index, Hb=Hemoglobin, RLS=Restless legs syndrome
A comparison between pregnant women with and without restless legs syndrome
| Variable total ( | Mean±SD/ | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| No RLS ( | RLS ( | ||
| Age (years) | 28.8±5.3 | 30.1±5.9 | 0.006 |
| BMI (kg/m2) | 29.6±6.4 | 30.1±5.8 | 0.211 |
| Smoking | 7 (1.3) | 11 (5) | 0.004 |
| Educational level | |||
| Illiterate | 11 (2.1) | 4 (1.9) | 0.384 |
| General education | 209 (40.3) | 101 (45.3) | |
| High education | 299 (57.6) | 118 (53) | |
| Parity | 1.4±1.6 | 1.8±1.9 | 0.01 |
| Primigravida (0) | 188 (36.3) | 67 (30.2) | 0.02 |
| Grand (1-3) | 274 (52.7) | 116 (52) | |
| Multiparty (>3) | 57 (11) | 40 (18) | |
| Anemia (Hb <110 g/L) | 153 (29.5) | 90 (40.3) | 0.004 |
| Vitamin D deficiency | 66 (12.7) | 47 (21) | 0.005 |
| Diabetes mellitus | 52 (10) | 52 (23.3) | <0.001 |
| None | 467 (90) | 171 (76.7) | 0.002 |
| Type I | 4 (0.7) | 1 (0.4) | |
| Type II | 5 (1) | 7 (3.1) | |
| Gestational | 43 (8.3) | 44 (19.7) | |
| Hypertension | 11 (2.6) | 12 (3.7) | 0.388 |
| Hypothyroidism | 32 (7.6) | 18 (5.6) | 0.275 |
| Medications | |||
| Iron | 361 (69.5) | 172 (77.1) | 0.02 |
| Multivitamin | 232 (44.8) | 11 (49.3) | 0.2 |
| Folic acid | 189 (36.4) | 93 (41.7) | 0.128 |
| Calcium | 286 (55.2) | 141 (63.2) | 0.026 |
| Vitamin D | 59 (11.4) | 45 (20.2) | 0.001 |
SD=Standard deviation, BMI=Body mass index, Hb=Hemoglobin, RLS=Restless legs syndrome
Univariate and multivariate binary logistic regression analyses* to predict restless legs syndrome among pregnant women (n=742)
| Variables in the equation | OR (95% CI) | |
|---|---|---|
| Univariate analysis | ||
| Age (years) | 1.043 (1.016-1.071) | 0.002 |
| Parity (multiparty [>3]) | 1.984 (1.234-3.188) | 0.005 |
| Gestational age (weeks) | 1.019 (1.002-1.037) | 0.026 |
| Anemia (Hb <110 g/L) | 1.553 (1.129-2.135) | 0.007 |
| Diabetes mellitus | 2.146 (1.407-3.274) | 0.001 |
| Vitamin D deficiency | 1.96 (1.307-2.94) | 0.001 |
| On iron supplement | 1.495 (1.071-2.087) | 0.018 |
| On calcium supplement | 1.401 (1.041-1.886) | 0.026 |
| On Vitamin D supplement | 1.96 (1.307-2.94) | 0.001 |
| Multivariable analysis | ||
| Parity | 1.113 (1.012-1.223) | 0.027 |
| Anemia (Hb <110 g/L) | 1.452 (1.033-2.042) | 0.032 |
| Diabetes mellitus | 1.734 (1.084-2.774) | 0.022 |
| Vitamin D deficiency | 2.376 (1.488-3.794) | <0.001 |
| Current smoking | 3.839 (1.463-10.074) | 0.006 |
*Multicollinearity=No, Overall accuracy=63%, Sensitivity=38.2%, Specificity=82.3%, Area under the curve=62.6%, Omnibus tests of model=P<0.001, Hosmer–Lemeshow goodness of fit=P=0.851, Nagelkerke R2=8.3%. OR=Odds ratio, CI=Confidence interval, Hb=Hemoglobin