| HOME | HELP | FEEDBACK | SUBSCRIPTIONS | ARCHIVE | SEARCH | TABLE OF CONTENTS |
|
|
|
|||||||
|
|||||||||
ORIGINAL RESEARCH |
From the Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Fundacion Clinica Valle del Lili, Cali, Colombia; Latin American Center for Perinatology and Human Development (CLAP), Division of Health Promotion and Protection, Pan American Health Organization, World Health Organization, Montevideo, Uruguay; Institute for Clinical Effectiveness and Health Policy, Buenos Aires, Argentina; Office of Population and Reproductive Health, Bureau for Global Health, USAID, Washington, DC; and Universidad Autonoma de Occidente, Cali, Colombia.
Objective: To estimate whether interpregnancy interval is independently associated with increased risk of perinatal death and other adverse perinatal outcomes.
Methods: We investigated the effect of interpregnancy interval on perinatal outcomes in 1,125,430 pregnancies recorded in the Perinatal Information System database of the Latin American Center for Perinatology and Human Development, Montevideo, Uruguay, between 1985 and 2004. Odds ratios (ORs) were adjusted for 16 major confounding factors using multiple logistic regression models.
Results: Compared with infants with interpregnancy intervals of 18–23 months, those born to women with intervals shorter than 6 months had an increased risk of early neonatal death (adjusted OR 1.49, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.06–1.96), fetal death (adjusted OR 1.54, 95% CI 1.28–1.83), low birth weight (adjusted OR 1.88, 95% CI 1.78–1.90), very low birth weight (adjusted OR 2.01, 95% CI 1.73–2.31), preterm birth (adjusted OR 1.80, 95% CI 1.71–1.89), very preterm birth (adjusted OR 1.95, 95% CI 1.67–2.26), and small for gestational age (adjusted OR 1.30, 95% CI 1.25–1.36). Intervals of 6–11 months and 60 months and longer were also associated with a significantly greater risk for the 7 adverse perinatal outcomes.
Conclusion: In Latin America, interpregnancy intervals shorter than 12 months and longer than 59 months are independently associated with increased risk of adverse perinatal outcomes. These data suggest that spacing pregnancies appropriately could prevent perinatal deaths and other adverse perinatal outcomes in the developing world.
Level of Evidence: II-2
This article has been cited by other articles:
|
|
 |
|
  M. van Eijsden, L. J. Smits, M. F van der Wal, and G. J Bonsel Association between short interpregnancy intervals and term birth weight: the role of folate depletion Am. J. Clinical Nutrition, July 1, 2008; 88(1): 147 - 153. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 D. M. Stamilio, E. DeFranco, E. Pare, A. O. Odibo, J. F. Peipert, J. E. Allsworth, E. Stevens, and G. A. Macones Short Interpregnancy Interval: Risk of Uterine Rupture and Complications of Vaginal Birth After Cesarean Delivery Obstet. Gynecol., November 1, 2007; 110(5): 1075 - 1082. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
F. C. Barros and M. d. P. Velez Temporal trends of preterm birth subtypes and neonatal outcomes. Obstet. Gynecol., May 1, 2006; 107(5): 1035 - 1041. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 A. Conde-Agudelo, A. Rosas-Bermudez, and A. C. Kafury-Goeta Birth spacing and risk of adverse perinatal outcomes: a meta-analysis. JAMA, April 19, 2006; 295(15): 1809 - 1823. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
R. A. Royce Birth spacing--the long and short of it. JAMA, April 19, 2006; 295(15): 1837 - 1838. [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
| HOME | HELP | FEEDBACK | SUBSCRIPTIONS | ARCHIVE | SEARCH | TABLE OF CONTENTS |
