Interpregnancy interval raise odds of adverse perinatal outcome in high fertility region Mewat, Haryana

Abstract

Background: Objective of current study was to study association between various interpregnancy intervals and adverse perinatal outcome (preterm birth, low birth weight, small for gestational age) and to come out with optimum interpregnancy interval. Methods: Retrospective cross sectional study in which 400 meo women (para 2 to para 5) fulfilling inclusion and exclusion criteria having diverse interpregnancy intervals were selected. Statistical analysis was done using SPSS. We used multivariate logistic regression analysis to assess the risk of adverse perinatal outcome. Results: As compared with infants conceived within a time period of 16 to 48 months after a live birth, infants conceived within 16 months after a live birth had odds ratios of 2.1 (95% CI 1.3 to 3.5) for low birth weight, 2.2 (95% CI 1.3 to 3.8) for preterm birth, and 2.3 (95% CI 1.4 to 3.8) for small size for gestational age; infants conceived more than 48 months after a live birth had odds ratios of 1.88 (95% CI 1.1 to 3.1), 1.96 (95% CI 1.1 to 3.4), and 2.08 (95% CI 1.2 to 3.6) for these three adverse outcomes, respectively; P value <0.05. Conclusions: We came to conclusion that interpregnancy interval of 16-48 months is the optimal interval carrying least risk of adverse perinatal outcomes and both short as well as long interpregnancy intervals are significantly associated with birth of preterm, low birth weight and small for gestational age babies. Counselling regarding optimal interpregnancy interval and methods of contraception can go a long way in reducing adverse perinatal outcome.

Determinants of adverse birth outcome in Tigrai region, North Ethiopia: Hospital-based case-control study

“…Mothers with short (less than 24 months) interpregnancy interval were five times more likely to experience adverse birth outcome compared to their counterparts. This result is in line with studies in Indonesia, India, Tanzania and Ethiopia [25,41,[43][44][45][46], in which short inter-pregnancy interval was a risk factor for low birth weight and/or preterm birth. Likewise, the current finding is in agreement with similar study in Bangladesh [47], in which short interpregnancy interval has been a significant risk factor for stillbirth.…”

Critical Factors Influencing the Acceptability of Post-placental Insertion of Intrauterine Contraceptive Device: A Study in Six Public/Private Institutes in India

“…Unintended pregnancies are an important worldwide public health issue imposing socioeconomic burden on individuals and society [1][2][3]. In the postpartum period, unintended/ mistimed pregnancies reduce the birth-to-pregnancy interval, negatively affecting maternal health and perinatal outcomes [3][4][5][6][7][8][9] in addition to increasing rates of infant and children morbidity and mortality [6][7][8][9][10][11]. It has been estimated that 61% of all births in India occur at intervals that are shorter than the recommended birth-to-pregnancy interval of 36 months [12,13].…”

Prolonged Birth Intervals in Hamedan, Iran: Variations and Determinants

“…Systematic reviews of recent studies show that short interpregnancy intervals (<16 months) are associated with maternal nutritional depletion, folate depletion, cervical insufficiency, vertical transmission of infections, sibling competition, transmission of infectious diseases among siblings and abnormal remodelling of endometrial blood vessels (Conde-Agudelo et al, 2012), and very long intervals (>71 months) increase the risk of fetal death, preterm births and low birth weight births. In contrast, the least risk is found in women with 18-35 month birth intervals (WHO, 2005;Conde-Agudelo, 2006;Haq et al, 2014).…”