OBJECTIVES: To characterize women receiving poor antenatal care and assess their perinatal risk. DESIGN: Computerized data. SETTING: Public hospital setting Paris (1987-1990). Comparison with representative sample in Ile-de-France region (n = 6423). METHODS: Poor attenders with less than 3 visits (n = 210) were compared with good attenders with 3 visits or more (n = 5631). RESULTS: Poor attenders were younger and had higher rates of perinatal mortality (4.7%), preterm delivery (Odds ratio 5.2:4.3-6.3) and low birth weight (Odds ratio 4.6:3.7-5.6). CONCLUSION: Women with poor antenatal care have a greater risk for adverse pregnancy outcome. This risk cannot be attributed to unfavourable living conditions only.
OBJECTIVES: To characterize women receiving poor antenatal care and assess their perinatal risk. DESIGN: Computerized data. SETTING: Public hospital setting Paris (1987-1990). Comparison with representative sample in Ile-de-France region (n = 6423). METHODS: Poor attenders with less than 3 visits (n = 210) were compared with good attenders with 3 visits or more (n = 5631). RESULTS: Poor attenders were younger and had higher rates of perinatal mortality (4.7%), preterm delivery (Odds ratio 5.2:4.3-6.3) and low birth weight (Odds ratio 4.6:3.7-5.6). CONCLUSION:Women with poor antenatal care have a greater risk for adverse pregnancy outcome. This risk cannot be attributed to unfavourable living conditions only.
Authors: Blandina T Mmbaga; Rolv T Lie; Gibson S Kibiki; Raimos Olomi; Gunnar Kvåle; Anne K Daltveit Journal: BMC Pregnancy Childbirth Date: 2011-10-04 Impact factor: 3.007
Authors: Alison Carter Ramirez; Jessica Liauw; Alice Cavanagh; Dustin Costescu; Laura Holder; Hong Lu; Fiona G Kouyoumdjian Journal: JAMA Netw Open Date: 2020-08-03