Author:
Souza Renato T.,Vieira Matias C.,Esteves-Pereira Ana Paula,Domingues Rosa Maria Soares Madeira,Moreira Maria Elisabeth Lopes,da Cunha Filho Edson Vieira,Sandall Jane,Cecatti Jose G.,do Carmo Leal Maria,Dias Marcos Augusto Bastos,Pasupathy Dharmintra
Abstract
AbstractRisk-stratification screening for SGA has been proposed in high-income countries to prevent perinatal morbidity and mortality. There is paucity of data from middle-income settings. The aim of this study is to explore risk factors for SGA in Brazil and assess potential for risk stratification. This population-based study is a secondary analysis of Birth in Brazil study, conducted in 266 maternity units between 2011 and 2012. Univariate and multivariate logistic regressions were performed, and population attributable fraction estimated for early and all pregnancy factors. We calculated absolute risk, odds ratio, and population prevalence of single or combined factors stratified by parity. Factors associated with SGA were maternal lupus (ORadj 4.36, 95% CI [2.32–8.18]), hypertensive disorders in pregnancy (ORadj 2.72, 95% CI [2.28–3.24]), weight gain < 5 kg (ORadj 2.37, 95% CI [1.99–2.83]), smoking at late pregnancy (ORadj 2.04, 95% CI [1.60–2.59]), previous low birthweight (ORadj 2.22, 95% CI [1.79–2.75]), nulliparity (ORadj 1.81, 95% CI [1.60–2.05]), underweight (ORadj 1.61, 95% CI [1.36–1.92]) and socioeconomic status (SES) < 5th centile (ORadj 1.23, 95% CI [1.05–1.45]). Having two or more risk factors (prevalence of 4.4% and 8.0%) was associated with a 2 and fourfold increase in the risk for SGA in nulliparous and multiparous, respectively. Early and all pregnancy risk factors allow development of risk-stratification for SGA. Implementation of risk stratification coupled with specific strategies for reduction of risk and increased surveillance has the potential to contribute to the reduction of stillbirth in Brazil through increased detection of SGA, appropriate management and timely delivery.
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Reference25 articles.
1. McCowan, L. M., Figueras, F. & Anderson, N. H. Evidence-based national guidelines for the management of suspected fetal growth restriction: comparison, consensus, and controversy. Am. J. Obstet. Gynecol. 218, S855–S868 (2018).
2. ACOG Practice Bulletin No. 204: Fetal Growth Restriction. Obstet. Gynecol. 133, e97–e109 (2019).
3. Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists. The investigation and management of the small-for-gestational-age fetus. Green-top guideline no. 31. 2nd ed. (2013). https://www.rcog.org.uk/globalassets/documents/guidelines/gtg_31.pdf. 2013. Accessed May 10th 2019.
4. Lindqvist, P. G. & Molin, J. Does antenatal identification of small-for-gestational age fetuses significantly improve their outcome?. Ultrasound Obstet. Gynecol. 25, 258–264 (2005).
5. Gardosi, J., Madurasinghe, V., Williams, M., Malik, A. & Francis, A. Maternal and fetal risk factors for stillbirth: population based study. BMJ 346, f108–f108 (2013).
Cited by
8 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献