Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2013 Jul;122(1):64-71.
doi: 10.1097/AOG.0b013e3182955e58.

Short interpregnancy intervals in the United States

Affiliations

Short interpregnancy intervals in the United States

Alison Gemmill et al. Obstet Gynecol. 2013 Jul.

Abstract

Objective: To investigate the prevalence and correlates of short interpregnancy intervals in the United States.

Methods: We analyzed pregnancy data from a nationally representative sample of 12,279 women from the 2006-2010 National Survey of Family Growth. We limited our sample to second and higher-order births within 5 years of the interview. Interpregnancy intervals were calculated as the interval between the delivery date of the preceding live birth and the conception date of the index pregnancy, with short interpregnancy intervals defined as intervals less than 18 months. We used simple and multivariate logistic regression analyses to examine associations between short interpregnancy intervals and maternal demographic and childbearing characteristics, including pregnancy intention.

Results: Among the 2,253 pregnancies in our sample, one third (35%) were conceived within 18 months of a previous birth. After adjusting for sociodemographic and childbearing characteristics, women were significantly more likely to have a short interpregnancy interval if they were aged 15-19 years or married at the time of conception of the index pregnancy, initiated childbearing after age 30 years, or reported the pregnancy as unintended. Short interpregnancy intervals were more likely to be intended among more advantaged women (married, non-Hispanic white, college-educated, or non-Medicaid delivery). We estimate that preventing unintended pregnancies would reduce the proportion of short interpregnancy intervals from 35% to 23%.

Conclusion: Providing counseling about the potential negative consequences of short interpregnancy intervals and improving women's contraceptive use to reduce rates of unintended pregnancy likely would reduce the proportion of short interpregnancy interval pregnancies in the United States.

Level of evidence: II.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

Financial Disclosure: The authors did not report any potential conflicts of interest.

References

    1. Conde-Agudelo A, Rosas-Bermudez A, Kafury-Goeta AC. Birth spacing and risk of adverse perinatal outcomes: a meta analysis. JAMA. 2006;295:1809–1823. - PubMed
    1. Conde-Agudelo A, Rosas-Bermudez A, Castaño F, Norton MH. Effects of birth spacing on maternal, perinatal, infant, and child health: a systematic review of causal mechanisms. Stud Fam Plan. 2012;43:93–114. - PubMed
    1. Khoshnood B, Lee KS, Wall S, Hsieh HL, Mittendorf R. Short interpregnancy intervals and the risk of adverse birth outcomes among five racial/ethnic groups in the United States. Am J Epidemiol. 1998;148:798–805. - PubMed
    1. Klerman LV, Cliver SP, Goldenberg RL. The impact of short interpregnancy intervals on pregnancy outcomes in a low-income population. Am J Public Health. 1998;88:1182–1185. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Zhu BP, Rolfs RT, Nangle BE, Horan JM. Effect of the interval between pregnancies on perinatal outcomes. N Engl J Med. 1999;340:589–594. - PubMed

Publication types