Can the date of last menstrual period be trusted in the first trimester? Comparisons of gestational age measures from a prospective cohort study in six low-income to middle-income countries.
Epidemiology
NEONATOLOGY
OBSTETRICS
Ultrasonography
Journal
BMJ open
ISSN: 2044-6055
Titre abrégé: BMJ Open
Pays: England
ID NLM: 101552874
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
20 09 2023
20 09 2023
Historique:
medline:
22
9
2023
pubmed:
21
9
2023
entrez:
20
9
2023
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
We examined gestational age (GA) estimates for live and still births, and prematurity rates based on last menstrual period (LMP) compared with ultrasonography (USG) among pregnant women at seven sites in six low-resource countries. Prospective cohort study SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS: This study included data from the Global Network's population-based Maternal and Newborn Health Registry which follows pregnant women in six low-income and middle-income countries (Democratic Republic of the Congo, Guatemala, India, Kenya, Pakistan and Zambia). Participants in this analysis were 42 803 women, including their 43 230 babies, who registered for the study in their first trimester based on GA estimated either by LMP or USG and had a live or stillbirth with an estimated GA of 20-42 weeks. GA was estimated in weeks and days based on LMP and/or USG. Prematurity was defined as GA of 20 weeks+0 days through 36 weeks+6 days, calculated by both USG and LMP. Overall, average GA varied ≤1 week between LMP and USG. Mean GA for live births by LMP was lower than by USG (adjusted mean difference (95% CI) = -0.23 (-0.29 to -0.17) weeks). Among stillbirths, a higher GA was estimated by LMP than USG (adjusted mean difference (95% CI)= 0.42 (0.11 to 0.72) weeks). Preterm birth rates for live births were significantly higher when dated by LMP (adjusted rate difference (95% CI)= 4.20 (3.56 to 4.85)). There was no significant difference in preterm birth rates for stillbirths. The small differences in GA for LMP versus USG in the Guatemalan and Indian sites suggest that LMP may be a useful alternative to USG for GA dating during the first trimester until availability of USG improves in those areas. Further research is needed to assess LMP for first-trimester GA dating in other regions with limited access to USG. NCT01073475.
Identifiants
pubmed: 37730415
pii: bmjopen-2022-067470
doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2022-067470
pmc: PMC10514667
doi:
Banques de données
ClinicalTrials.gov
['NCT01073475']
Types de publication
Journal Article
Research Support, N.I.H., Extramural
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
e067470Subventions
Organisme : NICHD NIH HHS
ID : UG1 HD076461
Pays : United States
Organisme : NICHD NIH HHS
ID : U24 HD092094
Pays : United States
Organisme : NICHD NIH HHS
ID : U10 HD078438
Pays : United States
Organisme : NICHD NIH HHS
ID : UG1 HD078439
Pays : United States
Organisme : NICHD NIH HHS
ID : U10 HD076461
Pays : United States
Organisme : NICHD NIH HHS
ID : UG1 HD076465
Pays : United States
Organisme : NICHD NIH HHS
ID : U01 HD040636
Pays : United States
Organisme : NICHD NIH HHS
ID : U10 HD078437
Pays : United States
Organisme : NICHD NIH HHS
ID : UG1 HD078437
Pays : United States
Organisme : NICHD NIH HHS
ID : UG1 HD078438
Pays : United States
Organisme : NICHD NIH HHS
ID : UG1 HD076457
Pays : United States
Organisme : NICHD NIH HHS
ID : U10 HD076457
Pays : United States
Organisme : NICHD NIH HHS
ID : UG1 HD076474
Pays : United States
Organisme : NICHD NIH HHS
ID : U10 HD076474
Pays : United States
Organisme : NICHD NIH HHS
ID : U10 HD078439
Pays : United States
Informations de copyright
© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2023. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.
Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts
Competing interests: None declared.
Références
Curr Probl Diagn Radiol. 2017 May - Jun;46(3):210-215
pubmed: 28057388
Lancet. 2020 Jan 25;395(10220):285-293
pubmed: 31982074
Reprod Health. 2015;12 Suppl 2:S2
pubmed: 26062714
Lancet Glob Health. 2019 Jan;7(1):e37-e46
pubmed: 30389451
Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand. 2011 Dec;90(12):1379-85
pubmed: 21916854
Ultrasound Q. 2014 Dec;30(4):262-6
pubmed: 25415862
PLoS One. 2020 Mar 3;15(3):e0229871
pubmed: 32126117
Int J Gynaecol Obstet. 2012 Sep;118(3):190-3
pubmed: 22738806
BMC Public Health. 2019 Jul 8;19(1):895
pubmed: 31286930
Semin Perinatol. 2019 Aug;43(5):297-307
pubmed: 31005357
BMC Public Health. 2018 Dec 10;18(1):1359
pubmed: 30526560
Am J Epidemiol. 2008 Mar 15;167(6):646-52
pubmed: 18182378
Reprod Health. 2015;12 Suppl 2:S4
pubmed: 26062899
J Health Popul Nutr. 2009 Jun;27(3):332-8
pubmed: 19507748
Reprod Health. 2020 Nov 30;17(Suppl 2):159
pubmed: 33256778
J Health Popul Nutr. 2016 Oct 21;35(1):34
pubmed: 27769295
Paediatr Perinat Epidemiol. 2016 Nov;30(6):541-549
pubmed: 27555359
BMC Pregnancy Childbirth. 2020 Sep 11;20(1):529
pubmed: 32917163
Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2002 Dec;187(6):1660-6
pubmed: 12501080
BMC Pregnancy Childbirth. 2017 May 3;17(1):135
pubmed: 28468653
BMC Pregnancy Childbirth. 2019 Jan 8;19(1):12
pubmed: 30621604
Paediatr Perinat Epidemiol. 2008 Nov;22(6):587-96
pubmed: 19000297
Lancet Glob Health. 2020 Apr;8(4):e545-e554
pubmed: 32199122
Reprod Health. 2020 Nov 30;17(Suppl 2):177
pubmed: 33256779
Semin Fetal Neonatal Med. 2015 Oct;20(5):293-9
pubmed: 26043962
BMC Pregnancy Childbirth. 2006 Aug 07;6:26
pubmed: 16893459
BMC Pregnancy Childbirth. 2017 Jan 11;17(1):25
pubmed: 28077098
BMJ Open. 2020 Dec 13;10(12):e036994
pubmed: 33318107