| Literature DB >> 32492055 |
Nieves Jaén-Sánchez1,2, Gloria González-Azpeitia2,3,4, Pedro Saavedra-Santana5, Esther Saavedra-Sanjuán5, Aniceto-Alberto Manguiza6, Nicholas Manwere6, Cristina Carranza-Rodriguez1,2,4, José Luis Pérez-Arellano1,2,4, Lluis Serra-Majem2,4,7.
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: In sub-Saharan Mozambique, high adolescent fertility rates are a significant public health problem. Understanding the consequences of teenage pregnancies facilitates effective strategies for improving the quality of care of both mother and the newborn. AIMS: To identify the factors associated with adolescent motherhood in Tete (Mozambique).Entities:
Year: 2020 PMID: 32492055 PMCID: PMC7269336 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0233985
Source DB: PubMed Journal: PLoS One ISSN: 1932-6203 Impact factor: 3.240
Fig 1Geographical situation of the study area.
Fig 2Distribution of study subjects according to their age.
Characteristics of the mothers.
| 23.5 ± 6.3 | 26.5 ± 5.4 | 17.1 ± 1.5 | < .001 | |
| 24.4 ± 4.2 | 25.0 ± 4.4 | 23.2 ± 3.7 | 0.001 | |
| 0.280 | ||||
| Urban | 669 (89.0) | 466 (90.0) | 203 (86.8) | |
| Peri-urban | 35 (4.7) | 20 (3.9) | 15 (6.4) | |
| Rural | 48 (6.4) | 32 (6.2) | 16 (6.8) | |
| 2 (1;3) | 3 (2;4) | 1 (1;1) | < .001 | |
| 134 (16.3) | 117 (20.7) | 17 (6.7) | < .001 | |
Data are presented as means ± SD and frequencies (%)
Characteristics of the pregnancies and deliveries.
| Overall = 821 | No N = 566 | Yes N = 255 | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 348 (56.9) | 271 (63.0) | 78 (42.6) | < .001 | |
| 92 (11.2) | 64 (11.3) | 28 (11.0) | 0.899 | |
| 9 (1.1) | 6 (1.1) | 3 (1.2) | 1 | |
| 101 (12.5) | 89 (16.0) | 12 (4.8) | < .001 | |
| 125 (117;139) | 124 (118;138) | 128 (117;140) | 0.236 | |
| 80 (70;90) | 80 (70;90) | 80 (70;90) | 0.697 | |
| 15 (1.8) | 9 (1.6) | 6 (2.4) | 0.574 | |
| 32 (3.9) | 23 (4.1) | 9 (3.6) | 0.731 | |
| 48 (5.9) | 36 (6.4) | 12 (4.7) | 0.351 | |
| 33 (4.1) | 23 (4.1) | 10 (4.0) | 0.930 | |
| 101 (13.2) | 76 (14.5) | 25 (10.3) | 0.108 | |
| 32 (6.9) | 11 (3.4) | 21 (14.7) | < .001 | |
| 0.255 | ||||
| Normal | 697 (84.9) | 483 (85.3) | 214 (83.9) | |
| Preeclampsia | 84 (10.2) | 60 (10.6) | 24 (9.4) | |
| Eclampsia | 40 (4.9) | 23 (4.1) | 17 (6.7) | |
| 0.588 | ||||
| Pre-term | 107 (13.2) | 72 (12.9) | 35 (13.9) | |
| Post-term | 9 (1.1) | 5 (0.9) | 4 (1.6) | |
| At term | 694 (85.7) | 481 (86.2) | 213 (84.5) | |
| 0.080 | ||||
| Single | 793 (96.8) | 543 (96.1) | 250 (98.4) | |
| Multiple | 26 (3.2) | 22 (3.9) | 4 (1.6) | |
| 0.349 | ||||
| Eutocic | 555 (68.0) | 374 (66.5) | 181 (71.3) | |
| Caesarean section | 235 (28.8) | 168 (29.9) | 67 (26.4) | |
| Vacuum | 26 (3.2) | 20 (3.6) | 6 (2.4) | |
Data are presented as means ± SD and frequencies (%)
Characteristics of the newborns.
| Overall N = 821 | No N = 566 | Yes N = 255 | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 252 (44.1) | 185 (46.7) | 67 (38.1) | 0.054 | |
| 3.0 (2.6; 3.3) | 3.0 (2.7; 3.3) | 2.9 (2.6; 3.1) | < .001 | |
| 47 (43; 49) | 47 (43; 49) | 47 (43; 49) | 0.839 | |
| 33 (32; 35) | 33 (32; 35) | 33 (32; 34) | 0.994 | |
| 9 (8; 9) | 9 (8; 9) | 8 (7; 9) | 0.047 | |
| 48 (6.2) | 25 (4.6) | 23 (9.7) | 0.007 | |
| 60 (7.3) | 39 (6.9) | 21 (8.2) | 0.493 | |
Data are presented as medians (IQR) and frequencies (%)
Multivariate binomial regression for the teenage motherhood.
| Coefficient (SE) | OR (95% CI) | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| (Intercept) | 1.638(0.211) | < .001 | |
| -1.805 (0.204) | < .001 | 0.164 (0.110; 0.245) | |
| 1.286 (0.312) | < .001 | 3.617 (1.962; 6.667) | |
| -0.354 (0.088) | < .001 | 0.702 (0.591; 0.833) |
Additive models for the effects of the age on several factors.
| Dependent variable | Co-variable | |
|---|---|---|
| < 0.001 | None | |
| < 0.001 | None | |
| < 0.001 | None | |
| 0.023 | ||
| < 0.001 | None | |
| 0.007 | None | |
| 0.052 | ||
| 0.011 | None |
aFor continuous dependent variables, data were fitted by an ordinary additive model.
bFor binary dependent variables, data were fitted by a logistic additive model.
Fig 3Analysis of the age of the mother versus A) Body mass index, B) Arterial hypertension, C) HIV infection, D) Previous abortions. Adjusted by the number of gestation.
Fig 4Analysis of the age of the mother versus A) follow-up of the pregnancy, B) episiotomy, C) weight of the newborn. Adjusted to the gestation week, D) neonatal respiratory distress.