The second pregnancy has no effect in the incidence of macrosomia: a cross-sectional survey in two western Chinese regions.
China
Cross-sectional study
Fetal macrosomia
Incidence
Parity
Journal
Journal of health, population, and nutrition
ISSN: 2072-1315
Titre abrégé: J Health Popul Nutr
Pays: Bangladesh
ID NLM: 100959228
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
13 04 2021
13 04 2021
Historique:
received:
09
11
2018
accepted:
31
03
2021
entrez:
14
4
2021
pubmed:
15
4
2021
medline:
7
10
2021
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
After the implementation of the universal two-child policy in China, the increase in parity has led to an increase in adverse pregnancy outcomes. The impact of one and two fetuses on the incidence of fetal macrosomia has not been fully confirmed in China. This study aimed to explore the differences in the incidence of fetal macrosomia in first and second pregnancies in Western China after the implementation of the universal two-child policy. A total of 1598 pregnant women from three hospitals were investigated by means of a cross-sectional study from August 2017 to January 2018. Participants were recruited by convenience and divided into first and second pregnancy groups. These groups included 1094 primiparas and 504 women giving birth to their second child. Univariate and multivariate logistic regression analyses were performed to discuss the differences in the incidence of fetal macrosomia in first and second pregnancies. No significant difference was found in the incidence of macrosomia in the first pregnancy group (7.2%) and the second pregnancy group (7.1%). In the second-time pregnant mothers, no significant association was found between the macrosomia of the second child (5.5%) and that of the first child (4.7%). The multivariate logistic regression model showed that mothers older than 30 years are not likely to give birth to children with macrosomia (odds ratio (OR) 0.6, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.4,0.9). The incidence of macrosomia in Western China is might not be affected by the birth of the second child and is not increased by low parity.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
After the implementation of the universal two-child policy in China, the increase in parity has led to an increase in adverse pregnancy outcomes. The impact of one and two fetuses on the incidence of fetal macrosomia has not been fully confirmed in China. This study aimed to explore the differences in the incidence of fetal macrosomia in first and second pregnancies in Western China after the implementation of the universal two-child policy.
METHODS
A total of 1598 pregnant women from three hospitals were investigated by means of a cross-sectional study from August 2017 to January 2018. Participants were recruited by convenience and divided into first and second pregnancy groups. These groups included 1094 primiparas and 504 women giving birth to their second child. Univariate and multivariate logistic regression analyses were performed to discuss the differences in the incidence of fetal macrosomia in first and second pregnancies.
RESULTS
No significant difference was found in the incidence of macrosomia in the first pregnancy group (7.2%) and the second pregnancy group (7.1%). In the second-time pregnant mothers, no significant association was found between the macrosomia of the second child (5.5%) and that of the first child (4.7%). The multivariate logistic regression model showed that mothers older than 30 years are not likely to give birth to children with macrosomia (odds ratio (OR) 0.6, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.4,0.9).
CONCLUSIONS
The incidence of macrosomia in Western China is might not be affected by the birth of the second child and is not increased by low parity.
Identifiants
pubmed: 33849665
doi: 10.1186/s41043-021-00244-z
pii: 10.1186/s41043-021-00244-z
pmc: PMC8045374
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
19Références
Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2003 May;188(5):1372-8
pubmed: 12748514
Lancet. 2016 Oct 15;388(10054):1930-1938
pubmed: 27751400
Biol Neonate. 2006;90(2):98-103
pubmed: 16549906
N Y State J Med. 1984 Jun;84(6):302-5
pubmed: 6589512
Curr Opin Obstet Gynecol. 2012 Dec;24(6):387-94
pubmed: 23014142
Lancet. 2013 Feb 9;381(9865):476-83
pubmed: 23290494
Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol. 2003 Nov 10;111(1):9-14
pubmed: 14557004
Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1969 May 15;104(2):195-204
pubmed: 5305281
J Sci Med Sport. 2011 Jul;14(4):299-305
pubmed: 21420359
Matern Child Health J. 2014 Oct;18(8):1814-22
pubmed: 24374730
BMC Pregnancy Childbirth. 2016 Aug 24;16:243
pubmed: 27557930
Clin Nutr Res. 2015 Apr;4(2):104-9
pubmed: 25954731
Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand. 2008;87(4):423-9
pubmed: 18382868
J Biomed Res. 2012 Jul;26(4):235-40
pubmed: 23554754
BMC Public Health. 2011 Oct 20;11:818
pubmed: 22011362
Int J Gynaecol Obstet. 2002 Apr;77(1):79-81
pubmed: 12053898
Pan Afr Med J. 2017 Feb 02;26:62
pubmed: 28451039
Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2014 Jan;43(1):3-10
pubmed: 24395685
Am Fam Physician. 2001 Jul 1;64(1):169-70
pubmed: 11456432
Midwifery. 2009 Aug;25(4):430-8
pubmed: 18063253
BJOG. 2011 Jan;118(1):93-8
pubmed: 21197680
Niger J Clin Pract. 2006 Dec;9(2):114-9
pubmed: 17319341
Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2017 Apr;216(4):340-351
pubmed: 28161306
Paediatr Perinat Epidemiol. 2000 Jul;14(3):194-210
pubmed: 10949211
Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2009 Jun;200(6):672.e1-4
pubmed: 19376489
Paediatr Perinat Epidemiol. 2003 Jul;17(3):244-9
pubmed: 12839535
Sci Rep. 2018 Feb 21;8(1):3393
pubmed: 29467433
Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2016 Jul 07;13(7):
pubmed: 27399752
Obstet Gynecol. 2004 Oct;104(4):720-6
pubmed: 15458892
Pediatrics. 2005 Mar;115(3):e290-6
pubmed: 15741354