Maternal anthropometry-based screening and pregnancy outcome: a decision analysis
- PMID: 9657506
- DOI: 10.1046/j.1365-3156.1998.00239.x
Maternal anthropometry-based screening and pregnancy outcome: a decision analysis
Abstract
Objective: To assess the impact of screening and intervention based on maternal height, prepregnancy weight and weight during weeks 16-19 or 24-27 in reducing adverse pregnancy outcomes (IUGR, preterm birth and assisted delivery) in developing country settings.
Methods: Decision analysis based on a recent multicentre WHO collaborative study of maternal anthropometry and pregnancy outcomes and meta-analyses of controlled clinical trials of balanced energy/protein supplementation (for IUGR and preterm birth) and support from caregivers during labour (for assisted delivery). Subjects for the analysis comprised pregnant women from Cali, Colombia (1989, n = 4598); urban and rural Pune, India (1990, n = 4307); and urban and rural Myanmar (1981-82, n = 3542) followed until delivery.
Results: Seven to 45% of pregnant women had positive screens, with preventive fractions (PFs) ranging from 0.034 to 0.109 for IUGR, 0.027-0.082 for preterm birth and 0.011-0.105 for assisted delivery. Screening prevention ratios (SPRs = ratios of the number of women treated to the number of cases of adverse outcome prevented) are high in all three study settings for preterm birth and assisted delivery (range 22.8-115.7) and low in settings with a high prevalence of the adverse outcome and high specificity of the anthropometric measure (India for IUGR, range 7.0-8.0). Sensitivity analyses demonstrate a marked linear fall in PF and an exponential rise in the SPR as the relative risk associated with intervention increases (i.e. as the protective benefit of intervention decreases) from 0.60 to 0.95.
Conclusions: A maternal anthropometry-based 'risk approach' is unlikely to result in a major reduction in adverse pregnancy outcomes in developing country settings. For risk-free and inexpensive interventions (e.g. caregiver support during labour), a better strategy would be to forego screening and instead treat all pregnant women.
Similar articles
-
A WHO Collaborative Study of Maternal Anthropometry and Pregnancy Outcomes.Int J Gynaecol Obstet. 1996 Jun;53(3):219-33. doi: 10.1016/0020-7292(96)02652-5. Int J Gynaecol Obstet. 1996. PMID: 8793624
-
[Risk factors for low birth weight and intrauterine growth retardation in Santiago, Chile].Rev Med Chil. 1993 Oct;121(10):1210-9. Rev Med Chil. 1993. PMID: 8191127 Spanish.
-
Can maternal height and weight be used to predict pregnancy outcome?Safe Mother. 1996;(22):10-1. Safe Mother. 1996. PMID: 12292433
-
Maternal anthropometry and pregnancy outcomes: a proposal for the monitoring of pregnancy weight gain in outpatient clinics in South Africa.Curationis. 2005 Nov;28(4):40-9. doi: 10.4102/curationis.v28i4.1012. Curationis. 2005. PMID: 16450558 Review.
-
Obstetrical complications associated with abnormal maternal serum markers analytes.J Obstet Gynaecol Can. 2008 Oct;30(10):918-932. doi: 10.1016/S1701-2163(16)32973-5. J Obstet Gynaecol Can. 2008. PMID: 19038077 Review. English, French.
Cited by
-
Infant mortality due to perinatal causes in Brazil: trends, regional patterns and possible interventions.Sao Paulo Med J. 2001 Jan 4;119(1):33-42. doi: 10.1590/s1516-31802001000100009. Sao Paulo Med J. 2001. PMID: 11175624 Free PMC article. Review.
Publication types
MeSH terms
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Medical