Body Mass Index (BMI) in women booking for antenatal care: Comparison between selfreported and digital measurements

Fattah, Chro; Farah, Nadine; O'Toole, F; Barry, Sinead; Stuart, Bernard; Turner, Michael J.

doi:10.1016/j.ejogrb.2009.01.015

Cited by 79 publications

(62 citation statements)

References 6 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The BMI data were routinely collected by the five hospitals and, at the time of the data collection, is likely to have been derived from self reported height and, in some cases, weight. Fattah et al 33 showed that approximately a fifth of women booking for antenatal care in their sample underestimated their BMI, mainly because of underreporting of weight. BMI was missing for almost a quarter of our sample.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Maternal body mass index and congenital anomaly risk: a cohort study

et al. 2010

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objective: To investigate the association between maternal body mass index (BMI) and major, structural congenital anomalies. Design: Cohort study using prospectively collected data. Methods: Data on all singleton pregnancies booked at five maternity units in the north of England between 01 January 2003 and 31 December 2005 and data on congenital anomalies notified to the Northern Congenital Abnormality Survey were linked using key variables. Maternal pre-gestational diabetic status was derived from the Northern Diabetes in Pregnancy Survey. Adjusted odds ratios (aORs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were estimated by maximum-likelihood logistic regression models, with missing values modelled as explicit categories.Results: There was a total of 41 013 singleton pregnancies during the study period, of which 682 were affected by a structural congenital anomaly, a total prevalence of 166 (95% CI: 154, 179) per 10 000 registered births. Overall, the risk of a congenital anomaly was significantly increased among the maternal underweight (BMIp18.5 kg m -2 ; aOR ¼ 1.60, 95% CI: 1.09, 2.36; P ¼ 0.02) and maternal obese groups (BMIX30 kg m -2 ; aOR ¼ 1.30, 95% CI: 1.03, 1.63; P ¼ 0.03), but not for maternal overweight (BMI ¼ 25-29.9 kg m -2 ; aOR ¼ 0.85, 95% CI: 0.68, 1.06; P ¼ 0.15), compared with mothers of recommended BMI. Maternal obesity was associated with significantly increased risk of ventricular septal defect (aOR ¼ 1.56, 95% CI: 1.01, 2.40; P ¼ 0.04), cleft lip (aOR ¼ 3.71, 95% CI: 1.05, 13.10; P ¼ 0.04) and eye anomalies (aOR ¼ 11.36, 95% CI: 2.25, 57.28; P ¼ 0.003). Maternal underweight was associated with significantly increased risks of atrial septal defect (aOR ¼ 2.86, 95% CI: 1.18, 6.96; P ¼ 0.02), genital anomalies (aOR ¼ 6.30, 95% CI: 1.58, 25.08; P ¼ 0.009) and hypospadias (aOR ¼ 8.77, 95% CI: 1.42, 54.29; P ¼ 0.02). Conclusions: We found an overall increased risk of congenital anomalies in women who are obese and women who are underweight compared with women of recommended weight. Women should be made aware of these risks and supported to optimize their weight before pregnancy.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Maternal body mass index and congenital anomaly risk: a cohort study

et al. 2010

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Also previous studies based on self-reporting of weight may have assigned moderate to severely obese women to the mild obesity category [15][16][17] .…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In our study, BMI was measured and not based on self-reporting. Self-reporting has been shown to be inaccurate and can lead to exaggeration of the risks of obesity [15][16][17] . The hospital policy of performing a dating scan at the woman's booking visit allowed us to date the pregnancy and detect a foetal heart beat.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Miscarriage after Sonographic Confirmation of an Ongoing Pregnancy in Women with Moderate and Severe Obesity

O’Dwyer¹,

Monaghan²,

Fattah³

et al. 2012

Obes Facts

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objective:To compare the incidence of spontaneous miscarriage in women with moderate to severe obesity to that in women with a normal BMI after sonographic confirmation of the foetal heart rate in the first trimester. Methods: Women were enrolled in a prospective observational study at their convenience in the first trimester after an ultrasound confirmed an ongoing singleton pregnancy with foetal heart activity present. Maternal height and weight were measured digitally and BMI was calculated. Results: In the 3,000 women enrolled, the miscarriage rate overall was 3.9% (n = 117). The mean gestational age at enrolment was 11.1 weeks. In the class 2-3 (BMI 1 34.9 kg/m 2 ) obese primigravidas the miscarriage rate was 11.3% (n = 8) compared with 2.7% (n = 24) in the normal BMI category (p = 0.003), and 3.7% (n = 5) in the class 1 obese category (not significant). In multigravidas, there was no increased rate of miscarriage among class 2-3 obese women compared with multigravidas in the normal BMI category. The mean body composition values showed that primigravidas who miscarried had both increased fat and fat-free masses compared with those who did not, but multigravidas who miscarried had a similar fat mass and fat-free mass with those who did not. Conclusions: In women with sonographic evidence of foetal heart activity in the first trimester, the rate of spontaneous miscarriage is low. It was increased in moderate to severely obese primigravidas, but was not increased in other obese women compared to women in the normal BMI category.

show abstract

“…As the women tended to either under-report their weight or over-report their height [7]. Furthermore, 22% of women were misclassified by BMI category when self-reported BMI was compared with digital measurement.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Maternal Morbid Obesity and Obstetric Outcomes

Farah¹,

Maher²,

Barry³

et al. 2009

Obes Facts

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objective: The purpose of this retrospective cohort study was to review pregnancy outcomes in morbidly obese women who delivered a baby weighing 500 g or more in a large tertiary referral university hospital in Europe. Methods: Morbid obesity was defined as a BMI ≧40.0 kg/m² (WHO). Only women whose BMI was calculated at their first antenatal visit were included. The obstetric out-comes were obtained from the hospital’s computerised database. Results: The incidence of morbid obesity was 0.6% in 5,824 women. Morbidly obese women were older and were more likely to be multigravidas than women with a normal BMI. The pregnancy was compli-cated by hypertension in 35.8% and diabetes mellitus in 20.0% of women. Obstetric interventions were high, with an induction rate of 42.1% and a caesarean section rate of 45.3%. Conclusions: Our findings show that maternal morbid obesity is associated with an alarmingly high incidence of medical complications and an increased level of obstetric interventions. Consideration should be given to developing specialised antenatal services for morbidly obese women. The results also highlight the need to evaluate the effectiveness of prepregnancy interventions in morbidly obese women.

show abstract

Body Mass Index (BMI) in women booking for antenatal care: Comparison between selfreported and digital measurements

Cited by 79 publications

References 6 publications

Maternal body mass index and congenital anomaly risk: a cohort study

Maternal body mass index and congenital anomaly risk: a cohort study

Miscarriage after Sonographic Confirmation of an Ongoing Pregnancy in Women with Moderate and Severe Obesity

Maternal Morbid Obesity and Obstetric Outcomes

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About