Inter-Pregnancy Interval and the Incidence of Preterm Birth

Asgharnia, M; Varasteh, Tahereh; Pourmarzi, Davoud

doi:10.18502/jfrh.v14i1.3788

Cited by 3 publications

(4 citation statements)

References 21 publications

(32 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…As the interval between births gets shorter, the baby becomes weaker and withered. 12,13 In addition, it has been found that babies born to mothers with shorter birth intervals are at high risk of small for gestational age, 14,15 stillbirth, 16 low birth weight, 17 preterm delivery, 18,19 and birth defects. 20,21 Global countries attempt to slow population growth, but it continues to grow rapidly.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Determinants of short birth interval among ever married reproductive age women living in Jigjiga, Eastern Ethiopia 2020 (unmatched case–control study)

et al. 2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objectives: A short birth interval is a universal public health problem resulting in adverse maternal, neonatal, and child outcomes. Therefore, the aim of this study was to identify determinants of short birth interval among ever married reproductive age mothers who live in Jigjiga city administration, Eastern Ethiopia, 2020. Methods: A community-based unmatched case–control study was used among 194 cases and 194 controls in Jigjiga city administration from September to December 2020. Cases were women with short birth interval (less than 3 years) and controls were women with optimum birth interval (3–5 years). Simple random sampling technique was employed to select cases and controls. Data were entered into Epi data version 4.2 and analysis with SPSS version 22. Binary logistic regression with 95% confidence interval at p < 0.05 is used to declare significantly associated predictors of short birth interval. Result: This study reported that women who have not attended formal education (adjusted odds ratio = 5.28, 95% confidence interval: (2.25–12.36)), attended primary education (adjusted odds ratio = 2.79, 95% confidence interval: (1.46–5.34)), women who married to a polygamous husband (adjusted odds ratio = 3.69, 95% confidence interval: (1.80–7.58)), having a history of neonatal death (adjusted odds ratio = 2.15, 95% confidence interval: (1.07–4.32)), preceding child being female (adjusted odds ratio = 3.69, 95% confidence interval: (2.02–6.72)), and never used contraceptive methods (adjusted odds ratio = 3.69, 95% confidence interval: (2.02–6.72)) were identified as determinants of the short birth interval. Conclusion: Short birth intervals were associated with educational level of the women, sex of the baby, husband marriage types, history of neonatal death, and contraceptive utilization. Strategy should be engaged to enhance women education, contraceptive uses, and to decrease neonatal death.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Determinants of short birth interval among ever married reproductive age women living in Jigjiga, Eastern Ethiopia 2020 (unmatched case–control study)

et al. 2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Of these, articles were further excluded because of lack of risk estimates ( n = 89), having two or fewer birth spacing strata ( n = 80), birth spacing not measured ( n = 36), irrelevant or nonspecific outcomes ( n = 53), reviews or conference abstracts ( n = 15), short birth spacing ( n = 6), and overlapping population ( n = 4). With additional manual search, 129 studies comprising 46 874 843 participants were ultimately included in the systematic review (Figure S1), including 90 cohort studies, 11‐14,17‐19,34‐116 23 cross‐sectional studies, 10,117‐138 15 case–control studies, 8,139‐152 and 1 cluster‐randomized trial 153 . The baseline characteristics of the eligible studies are presented in Table S2.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Birth spacing and risk of adverse pregnancy and birth outcomes: A systematic review and dose–response meta‐analysis

Ni,

Gao,

et al. 2023

Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

IntroductionThe association between extreme birth spacing and adverse outcomes is controversial, and available evidence is fragmented into different classifications of birth spacing.Material and methodsWe conducted a systematic review of observational studies to evaluate the association between birth spacing (i.e., interpregnancy interval and interoutcome interval) and adverse outcomes (i.e., pregnancy complications, adverse birth outcomes). Pooled odds ratios (ORs) with 95% confidence intervals (CI) were calculated using a random‐effects model, and the dose–response relationships were evaluated using generalized least squares trend estimation.ResultsA total of 129 studies involving 46 874 843 pregnancies were included. In the general population, compared with an interpregnancy interval of 18–23 months, extreme intervals (<6 months and ≥ 60 months) were associated with an increased risk of adverse outcomes, including preterm birth, small for gestational age, low birthweight, fetal death, birth defects, early neonatal death, and premature rupture of fetal membranes (pooled OR range: 1.08–1.56; p < 0.05). The dose–response analyses further confirmed these J‐shaped relationships (pnon‐linear < 0.001–0.009). Long interpregnancy interval was only associated with an increased risk of preeclampsia and gestational diabetes (pnon‐linear < 0.005 and pnon‐linear < 0.001, respectively). Similar associations were observed between interoutcome interval and risk of low birthweight and preterm birth (pnon‐linear < 0.001). Moreover, interoutcome interval of ≥60 months was associated with an increased risk of cesarean delivery (pooled OR 1.72, 95% CI 1.04–2.83). For pregnancies following preterm births, an interpregnancy interval of 9 months was not associated with an increased risk of preterm birth, according to dose–response analyses (pnon‐linear = 0.008). Based on limited evidence, we did not observe significant associations between interpregnancy interval or interoutcome interval after pregnancy losses and risk of small for gestational age, fetal death, miscarriage, or preeclampsia (pooled OR range: 0.76–1.21; p > 0.05).ConclusionsExtreme birth spacing has extensive adverse effects on maternal and infant health. In the general population, interpregnancy interval of 18–23 months may be associated with potential benefits for both mothers and infants. For women with previous preterm birth, the optimal birth spacing may be 9 months.

show abstract

“…Premature birth is associated with a raised risk of complications among newborns. Preterm delivery problems are the most prevalent cause of death among neonates and the second most prevalent factor of death in children under the age of five years, after pneumonia [2][3][4] . The WHO reports that premature birth affects around 11% of all births worldwide 3 .…”

Section: Inroductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The WHO reports that premature birth affects around 11% of all births worldwide 3 . According to UNICEF, around 860,000 preterm births occur in Pakistan each year, with nearly 102,000 children dying as a result of complications 4 . Despite the fact that there are multiple risk factors for preterm birth, roughly two-thirds of preterm birth cannot be attributable to any of them 5 .…”

Section: Inroductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Association Between Pre-Term Labour and Inter Pregnancy Interval

Fatima¹,

Naz²,

Hira³

et al. 2021

PJMHS

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objectives: To determine the frequency of preterm labour in association with interpregnancy interval among pregnant women visiting tertiary care Hospital. Subject and Methods: This prospective cross-sectional study was performed at Unit-I, Obstetrics and Gynaecology Department, Civil Hospital Karachi; from June to November 2020. A total of 190 women with singleton pregnancy confirmed by ultrasound were included. After taking detailed medical history regarding previous fetal death and C-section was recorded either patient goes into preterm labour or not and confirmed by history for short and prolong interpregnancy interval (IPI). Data was collected by pre-designed study proforma. Results: The average age of study subjects was 26.27±4.07 years. The frequency of preterm labour among the pregnant women was 51.05%. The rate of preterm was significantly higher in those women who had with short inter interpregnancy interval (p=0.0005). Conclusion: Our findings clearly show that a short interval in inter-pregnancy is a cause of premature birth. Preterm birth can also be indicated by the antenatal care visits, inter-pregnancy complications, and having a birth defect. Premature birth minimization can enhance overall newborn's health and can lead to considerable minimization of neonatal death in the future. Keywords: Preterm labor, prolong pregnancy interval, neonatal health

show abstract

Inter-Pregnancy Interval and the Incidence of Preterm Birth

Cited by 3 publications

References 21 publications

Determinants of short birth interval among ever married reproductive age women living in Jigjiga, Eastern Ethiopia 2020 (unmatched case–control study)

Determinants of short birth interval among ever married reproductive age women living in Jigjiga, Eastern Ethiopia 2020 (unmatched case–control study)

Birth spacing and risk of adverse pregnancy and birth outcomes: A systematic review and dose–response meta‐analysis

Association Between Pre-Term Labour and Inter Pregnancy Interval

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About