Relationship between Maternal Body Mass Index and Obstetric and Perinatal Complications
by
, , and
Ana Ballesta-Castillejos
1, 
Juan Gómez-Salgado
2,3,
Julián Rodríguez-Almagro
4,*,
Inmaculada Ortiz-Esquinas
5 and
Antonio Hernández-Martínez
4,5 1
Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Talavera de la Reina, 45600 Toledo, Spain
2
Department of Sociology, Social Work and Public Health, University of Huelva, 21071 Huelva, Spain
3
Safety and Health Posgrade Program, Universidad Espíritu Santo, Guayaquil 091650, Ecuador
4
Department of Nursing, Faculty of Nursing of Ciudad Real, University of Castilla-La Mancha, 13071 Ciudad Real, Spain
5
Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Alcázar de San Juan,13600 Ciudad Real, Spain
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
J. Clin. Med. 2020, 9(3), 707; https://doi.org/10.3390/jcm9030707
Submission received: 10 February 2020
/
Revised: 28 February 2020
/
Accepted: 3 March 2020
/
Published: 5 March 2020
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Health in Preconception Pregnancy and Postpartum)
Abstract
:Over the past few decades, overweight and obesity have become a growing health problem of particular concern for women of reproductive age as obesity in pregnancy has been associated with increased risk of obstetric and neonatal complications. The objective of this study is to describe the incidence of obstetric and perinatal complications in relation to maternal body mass index (BMI) at the time prior to delivery within the Spanish Health System. For this purpose, a cross-sectional observational study was conducted aimed at women who have been mothers between 2013 and 2018 in Spain. Data were collected through an online survey of 42 items that was distributed through lactation associations and postpartum support groups. A total of 5871 women answered the survey, with a mean age of 33.9 years (SD = 4.26 years). In the data analysis, crude odds ratios (OR) and adjusted odds ratios (AOR) were calculated through a multivariate analysis. A linear relationship was observed between the highest BMI figures and the highest risk of cephalopelvic disproportion (AOR of 1.79 for obesity type III (95% CI: 1.06–3.02)), preeclampsia (AOR of 6.86 for obesity type III (3.01–15.40)), labor induction (AOR of 1.78 for obesity type III (95% CI: 1.16–2.74)), emergency C-section (AOR of 2.92 for obesity type III (95% CI: 1.68–5.08)), morbidity composite in childbirth (AOR of 3.64 for obesity type III (95% CI: 2.13–6.24)), and macrosomia (AOR of 6.06 for obesity type III (95% CI: 3.17–11.60)), as compared with women with normoweight. Women with a higher BMI are more likely to develop complications during childbirth and macrosomia.
1. Introduction
Over the past few decades, overweight and obesity have become a growing health problem in the Western world [1], so much so that WHO now considers it one of the most relevant health problems [2]. The distribution of this problem is not homogeneous among the population, being women’s rates higher than men’s [3], and this makes obesity a problem that greatly affects women of reproductive age.
Maternal obesity has emerged globally as one of the main obstetric challenges [4,5], whose prevalence increases linearly not only in developed countries, but also in developing countries [6]. At European level, more than 30% of pregnant women are obese, and the prevalence of overweight women reaches 50% (2).
Many experimental and epidemiological studies show that nutritional changes in the prenatal and postnatal stages of life can have a significant impact on the child’s health and development [2,3,7,8,9]. Maternal overweight, obesity, and morbid obesity are already known to be associated with adverse obstetric and neonatal outcomes [3,10]. In particular, maternal obesity is associated with gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM) [11,12], preeclampsia [12], congenital malformations and macrosomia [3], preterm birth [3], low Apgar scores [4], admittance to neonatal intensive care unit [13], low-weight newborns [3,14], and with an increase in obstetric interventions such as pregnancy caesarean section [12,15] and labor induction [16,17]. In the long term, maternal obesity is associated with an increased risk of diabetes mellitus and cardiovascular diseases in women, and with an increased risk of childhood obesity in the newborn [2,4]. Postnatally, obese women are less likely to successfully breastfeed [18,19], tend to have longer hospital stays, and are at an increased risk of postnatal infections [16].
In Spain, data indicate that the average population weight has increased since records exist and, if this trend continues [20], obesity rates will have increased by 16% by 2030 [21]. Despite this, we do not currently have studies that relate these data to obstetric and perinatal results. Moreover, the evaluated results have been studied based on pregestational obesity, with weight gain being highly variable among pregnant women. For these reasons, we consider that it would be relevant to describe the incidence of obstetric and perinatal complications in relation to maternal body mass index (BMI) at the time prior to delivery within the Spanish Health System.
2. Material and Methods
2.1. Design and Selection of Study Subjects
This cross-sectional observational study was aimed at women who have been mothers between 2013 and 2018 in Spain. This study has received the approval of the Ethics and Clinical Research Committee of Alcázar de San Juan, in Spain, with protocol number 92-C.
The participants were women over the age of 18, who understood Spanish, and who agreed to fill in the questionnaire. Before doing so, the participants had to read an information sheet about the purpose of the study and give their consent to participate in it. After this, they were provided with the necessary information to be able to complete the questionnaire. Participants could voluntarily provide an e-mail address or phone number through which they would be contacted in case any additional information related to the study was needed.
For the sample size estimation, the maximum modelling criterion, that requires 10 events for each independent variable to be included in the multivariate model, has been used [22]. The main event used for this calculation was the emergency C-section rate, located in other studies at around 27% [23]. Considering a minimum of 15 independent variables, a minimum of 150 women with emergency C-section would be required, representing a minimum total population of 555 women under study within this scenario.
For data collection, an anonymous online questionnaire was designed with 42 items (36 yes/no questions and 6 multiple answer questions) on sociodemographic variables, obstetric variables, and complications during pregnancy, delivery, and postpartum (Supplementary material). The questionnaire was disseminated among the Spanish lactation and postpartum support associations and groups. Those responsible for these groups were in charge of disseminating the said questionnaire among their members.
The variables included in the study were as follows:
The main independent variable: body mass index (calculated by dividing kilograms of weight by the squared height in meters), categorized into normoweight (18.5–24.9), overweight (25–29.9), obesity grade I (30.0–34.5), obesity grade II (35.0–39.9), and obesity grade III (>40.0) [4,5].
The independent adjustment variables were maternal age, income level, level of education, tobacco consumption, assistance to maternal education, number of births, twin pregnancy, preeclampsia during pregnancy, diet-controlled gestational diabetes, insulin-controlled gestational diabetes, hyperthyroidism, hypothyroidism, anemia, intrahepatic cholestasis, risk of preterm birth, deep vein thrombosis, oligoamines, polyhydramnios, altered fetal heart rate (FHR) during delivery, stained amniotic fluid (AF), vaginal bleeding, uterine rupture, nonprogression of delivery, cephalopelvic disproportion, intrapartum fever, intrapartum preeclampsia, labor induction, end of delivery, tearing, low weight (2500 g), macrosomia (>4000 g), newborn admission, postpartum-related subsequent maternal surgery, maternal admission into intensive care unit, and maternal readmission.
In addition, four “composite” morbidity variables were created: pregnancy (including preeclampsia during pregnancy, diet-controlled gestational diabetes, insulin-controlled gestational diabetes, hyperthyroidism, hypothyroidism, anemia, intrahepatic cholestasis, risk of preterm birth, deep vein thrombosis); delivery (including altered fetal heart rate (FHR) during delivery, stained amniotic fluid (AF), vaginal bleeding, nonprogression of delivery, cephalopelvic disproportion, intrapartum fever, intrapartum preeclampsia, labor induction, end of delivery by caesarean, and severe tearing (type III-IV)); neonatal (including prematurity, low weight (<2500 g), macrosomia (>4000 g), and maternal admission to intensive care unit); and postpartum (including maternal postpartum surgery related to the delivery, maternal admission to intensive care unit, and maternal readmission).
2.2. Statistical Analysis Used
First, a descriptive analysis was performed using absolute and relative frequencies for categorical variables. Then, a bivariate analysis was performed between the main sociodemographic, clinical characteristics, and complications regarding the BMI during pregnancy, childbirth, and postpartum, using the Pearson’s chi-squared test. Then, the crude odds ratios (OR) and adjusted odds ratios (AOR) were calculated with their respective 95% confidence intervals (95% CI) to determine the relationship between the BMI and the obstetric and neonatal complications. To do this, a multivariate analysis was performed by means of binary logistic regression and multinomial logistic regression (for the birth-type variable). Regarding collinearity treatment, the authors opted for an automatic forward and backward stepwise regression. Therefore, although the whole set of variables was included in each analysis, those predictors which did not show a statistical relationship were progressively eliminated, thus reducing the risk of collinearity.
All analyses were performed using the SPSS v24.0 statistical package.
3. Results
The studied population was 5871 women. Of these, 27.30% (n = 1607) had normoweight, 46.40% (n = 2722) were overweight, 19.60 (n = 1153) had obesity type I, 5.00% (n = 293) obesity type II, and 0.13% (n = 96) obesity type III.
A bivariate analysis was then performed to determine the sociodemographic, obstetric, neonatal, and admittance characteristics in relation to the BMI at the time of delivery.
Regarding the relationship between the BMI and the most important sociodemographic characteristics, we found a statistical association with maternal age, academic level, family income level, smoking habit, and attendance to childbirth and maternity classes. However, we did not find any statistically significant differences with respect to nationality. All the details of this analysis can be found in Table 1.
When analyzing obstetric factors in relation to BMI, a relationship was found between BMI and the number of births, twin pregnancy, prematurity, hypertensive pregnancy disorders, gestational diabetes, both insulin-controlled and diet-controlled, risk of preterm birth, deep vein thrombosis, oligoamines, and polyhydramnios (Table 2).
In the next step, a multivariate analysis was carried out in which all the variables that could potentially be related to BMI were incorporated. Regarding the variables related to complications during childbirth, we observed a linear trend in five of them (Table 3) among women with different degrees of obesity as compared with women with normoweight: cephalopelvic disproportion, preeclampsia, induced delivery, emergency C-section and Composite morbidity delivery.
Finally, in the composite morbidity birth variable, an AOR of 1.47 (95% CI: 1.29–1.68) was obtained for overweight women, an AOR of 2.00 (95% CI: 1.69–2.37) in the case of obesity type I, AOR 3.51 (95% CI: 2.55–4.83) for women with obesity type II, and an AOR of 3.64 (95% IQ: 2.13–6.24) in the case of obesity type III.
The same process was followed with those variables related to maternal and fetal complications during the postpartum, finding a linear relationship with the presence of macrosomia. All the details of this analysis can be found in Table 4.
4. Discussion
In this study, we have analyzed the relationship between BMI and the incidence of obstetric and perinatal complications. While multiple associations have been identified, we consider those where a clear linear trend has been observed as more relevant. Specifically, an association was found between higher figures of BMI and pelvic-cephalic disproportion, preeclampsia, induced delivery, and emergency C-section. As for the newborn, we have described a relationship between maternal BMI and higher rates of macrosomia.
In several studies, obesity or maternal overweight have been linked to complications during pregnancy, such as hypertensive disorders or macrosomia [24], that may increase the risk of C-section [1,25]. Regarding the data from our study, the increase in emergency C-section rates may be related not only to the factors previously indicated, but also to the increase in altered fetal heart rate frequency and the higher rate of cephalopelvic disproportion in this population. However, some studies point to abnormalities in uterine contractility and an increase in fat deposits in the soft areas of the pelvis [26]. This increase in C-section rates has already been described in other studies [1,10,24,25,27] and may also influence the risk of neonatal complications and the possibilities of newborn admission.
In this sense, the adjustment of maternal BMI would reduce induction rates, the risk of an emergency caesarean, and neonatal admissions. Thus, this improvement would not only imply health-related aspects, but also an important reduction of healthcare expenses.
The higher incidence of newborns with macrosomia in this group of mothers has been explained by the hypothesis proposed by Pedersen [28], who suggested that increased glucose concentrations in the diabetic mother leads to hyperglycemia and fetal hyperinsulinemia that causes higher fetal growth [26]. In short, after birth, these newborns are more likely to suffer from hypoglycemia [29] and hospital admissions [30].
On the other hand, macrosomia is an independent risk factor of child obesity [31,32]. This fact is especially relevant as macrosomia is seen as an intermediate factor in the relationship between maternal obesity and child obesity. This way, all the efforts aimed at adjusting maternal BMI would imply a positive improvement regarding both maternal and child health.
For all this, Spain, where obesity rates have progressively increased until reaching about 18.4% [33] of the population, may greatly benefit from implementing prevention programs and encouraging women access to preconception consultations so as to reach the optimum BMI prior to gestation.
Strengths and Limitations
As for the study limitations, an information bias is acknowledged as data was collected using self-reported questionnaires which surveyed the participants’ perception. In order to reduce the confounding factors, the design of the questionnaire did not require a high level of education to be completed. In this regard, the questions were asked in a basic and simple way, and any participant could understand them, regardless of their level of education. It is not possible to completely rule out the confusion bias inherent in observational studies, but it has been attempted to be controlled by using multivariate analysis techniques.
Among the main strengths of the study, we can highlight the large sample size and the scarcity of studies carried out in women assisted by the Spanish Health System. On the other hand, the prevalence figures for obesity are in line with other studies, such as the one by Parveen et al. [4], in which a prevalence of obesity of 23.2% was found. The relationship between excessive maternal weight and adverse obstetric and neonatal outcomes has already been researched. Most of the previous studies took pregestational BMI into account and gestational weight gain above established standards during pregnancy [34]. Instead, we have used weight at birth as a criterion, thus encompassing previous weight and total gestational weight gain. However, although BMI measurement prior to delivery provides a broader view of weight gain during pregnancy, it also introduces a bias since weight gain may be multicausal and an amalgamation of pre-pregnancy weight, gestational weight gain, and the fetus’ weight.
For all the previously described aspects and, especially, due to the cross-sectional nature of the study, casual inference is limited in this case. However, there are shared outcomes with those from other authors’ research which highlight the negative impact of maternal obesity on obstetric and perinatal results.
5. Conclusions
Therefore, we consider that excessive BMI at the time of delivery implies an independent risk of increased maternal and fetal morbidity. It is for this reason that the professionals responsible for the surveillance of mothers must have an impact on proper weight gain during pregnancy and, especially, in the pregestational stage. Health education covering healthy lifestyles is a key element for women to have a low-risk pregnancy and delivery.
Supplementary Materials
The following are available online at https://www.mdpi.com/2077-0383/9/3/707/s1, QUESTIONNAIRE.
Author Contributions
Conceptualization, A.B.-C. and J.R.-A.; Methodology, I.O.-E. and A.H.-M.; Formal Analysis, J.G.-S. and A.B.-C.; Writing—Original Draft Preparation, A.B.-C. and J.R.-A.; Writing—Review & Editing, I.O.-E. and A.H.-M.; Supervision, J.R.-A. and A.H.-M.; Project Administration, J.G.-S.; All authors have approved the final manuscript. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.
Funding
None received.
Conflicts of Interest
The authors declare no conflict of interest.
References
- Pettersen-Dahl, A.; Murzakanova, G.; Sandvik, L.; Laine, K. Maternal body mass index as a predictor for delivery method. Acta Obstet Gynecol. Scand. 2018, 97, 212–218. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Simko, M.; Totka, A.; Vondrova, D.; Samohyl, M.; Jurkovicova, J.; Trnka, M.; Cibulkova, A.; Stofko, J.; Argalasova, L. Maternal body mass index and gestational weight gain and their association with pregnancy complications and perinatal conditions. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2019, 16, 1751. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
- Liu, L.; Ma, Y.; Wang, N.; Lin, W.; Liu, Y.; Wen, D. Maternal body mass index and risk of neonatal adverse outcomes in China: A systematic review and meta-analysis. BMC Pregnancy Childbirth 2019, 19, 105. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Tehmina, P.; Farah Hameed, J.A.K. The impact of maternal obesity on neonatal Apgar score and neonatal Intensive care unit admissions in a tertiary care hospital. Pak. J. Surj. 2018, 34, 161–165. [Google Scholar]
- Zhu, T.; Tang, J.; Zhao, F.; Qu, Y.; Mu, D. Association between maternal obesity and offspring Apgar score or cord pH: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Sci. Rep. 2015, 5, 18386. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Cervantes Ramírez, D.L.; Haro Acosta, M.E.; Ayala Figueroa, R.I.; Haro Estrada, I.; Fausto Pérez, J.A. Prevalencia de obesidad y ganancia de peso en mujeres embarazadas. Atención. Fam. 2019, 26, 43. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Heslehurst, N.; Vieira, R.; Akhter, Z.; Bailey, H.; Slack, E.; Ngongalah, L.; Pemu, A.; Rankin, J. The association between maternal body mass index and child obesity: A systematic review and meta-analysis. PLoS Med. 2019, 16, e1002817. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lei, X.Y.; Li, Y.J.; Ou, J.J.; Li, Y.M. Association between parental body mass index and autism spectrum disorder: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Eur. Child. Adolesc. Psychiatry 2019, 28, 933–947. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Sanchez, C.E.; Barry, C.; Sabhlok, A.; Russell, K.; Majors, A.; Kollins, S.H.; Fuemmeler, B.F. Maternal pre-pregnancy obesity and child neurodevelopmental outcomes: A meta-analysis. Obes. Rev. 2018, 19, 464–484. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Yeşilçiçek Çalik, K.; Korkmaz Yildiz, N.; Erkaya, R. Effects of gestational weight gain and body mass index on obstetric outcome. Saudi J. Biol. Sci. 2018, 25, 1085–1089. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Najafi, F.; Hasani, J.; Izadi, N.; Hashemi-Nazari, S.-S.; Namvar, Z.; Mohammadi, S.; Sadeghi, M. The effect of prepregnancy body mass index on the risk of gestational diabetes mellitus: A systematic review and dose-response meta-analysis. Obes Rev. 2019, 20, 472–486. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Rahman, M.M.; Abe, S.K.; Kanda, M.; Narita, S.; Rahman, M.S.; Bilano, V.; Ota, E.; Gilmour, S.; Shibuya, K. Maternal body mass index and risk of birth and maternal health outcomes in low- and middle-income countries: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Obes. Rev. 2015, 16, 758–770. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Timur, B.B.; Timur, H.; Tokmak, A.; Isik, H.; Eyi, E.G.Y. The Influence of Maternal Obesity on Pregnancy Complications and Neonatal Outcomes in Diabetic and Nondiabetic Women. Geburtshilfe Frauenheilkd 2018, 78, 400–406. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
- Chen, Y.H.; Li, L.; Chen, W.; Liu, Z.B.; Ma, L.; Gao, X.X.; He, J.L.; Wang, H.; Zhao, M.; Yang, Y.Y.; et al. Pre-pregnancy underweight and obesity are positively associated with small-for-gestational-age infants in a Chinese population. Sci. Rep. 2019, 9, 15544. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Denham, S.H.; Humphrey, T.; deLabrusse, C.; Dougall, N. Mode of birth after caesarean section: Individual prediction scores using Scottish population data. BMC Pregnancy Childbirth 2019, 19, 84. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Scott-Pillai, R.; Spence, D.; Cardwell, C.R.; Hunter, A.; Holmes, V.A. The impact of body mass index on maternal and neonatal outcomes: A retrospective study in a UK obstetric population, 2004–2011. BJOG Int. J. Obstet Gynaecol. 2013, 120, 932–939. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lima, R.J.C.P.; Batista, R.F.L.; Ribeiro, M.R.C.; Ribeiro, C.C.C.; Simões, V.M.F.; Neto, P.M.L.; Silva, A.A.M.D.; Bttiol, H. Prepregnancy body mass index, gestational weight gain, and birth weight in the BRISA cohort. Rev. Saude Publica 2018, 52, 46. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Flores, T.R.; Mielke, G.I.; Wendt, A.; Nunes, B.P.; Bertoldi, A.D. Prepregnancy weight excess and cessation of exclusive breastfeeding: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Eur. J. Clin. Nutr. 2018, 72, 480–488. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Garcia, A.H.; Voortman, T.; Baena, C.P.; Chowdhurry, R.; Muka, T.; Jaspers, L.; Warnakula, S.; Tielemans, M.J.; Troup, J.; Bramer, W.M.; et al. Maternal weight status, diet, and supplement use as determinants of breastfeeding and complementary feeding: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Nutr. Rev. 2016, 74, 490–516. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ramón-Arbués, E.; Martínez-Abadía, B.; Gracía-Tabuenca, T.; Yuste-Gran, C.; Pellicer-García, B.; Juárez-Vela, R.; Guerrero-Portillo, S.; Sáez-Guinoa, M. Prevalence of overweight/obesity and its association with diabetes, hypertension, dyslipidemia and metabolic syndrome: A cross-sectional study of a sample of workers in Aragón, Spain. Nutr. Hosp. 2019, 36, 51–59. [Google Scholar]
- Hernáez, Á.; Zomeño, M.D.; Dégano, I.R.; Pérez-Fernández, S.; Goday, A.; Vila, J.; Civeira, F.; Moure, R.; Marrugat, J. Excess Weight in Spain: Current Situation, Projections for 2030, and Estimated Direct Extra Cost for the Spanish Health System. Rev. Esp. Cardiol. 2019, 72, 916–924. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Peduzzi, P.; Concato, J.; Kemper, E.; Holford, T.R.; Feinstein, A.R. A simulation study of the number of events per variable in logistic regression analysis. J. Clin. Epidemiol. 1996, 49, 1373–1379. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Riley, L.; Wertz, M.; McDowell, I. Obesity in pregnancy: Risks and management. Am. Acad. Fam. Physicians 2018, 97, 559–561. [Google Scholar]
- Xiong, C.; Zhou, A.; Cao, Z.; Zhang, Y.; Qiu, L.; Yao, C.; Wang, Y.; Zhang, B. Association of pre-pregnancy body mass index, gestational weight gain with cesarean section in term deliveries of China. Sci. Rep. 2016, 6, 37168. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Poobalan, A.S.; Aucott, L.S.; Gurung, T.; Smith, W.C.S.; Bhattacharya, S. Obesity as an independent risk factor for elective and emergency caesarean delivery in nulliparous women—Systematic review and meta-analysis of cohort studies. Obes. Rev. 2009, 10, 28–35. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Sebire, N.J.; Jolly, M.; Harris, J.P.; Wadsworth, J.; Joffe, M.; Beard, R.W.; Regan, L.; Robinson, S. Maternal obesity and pregnancy outcome: A study of 287 213 pregnancies in London. Int. J. Obes. 2001, 25, 1175–1182. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Vahratian, A.; Siega-Riz, A.M.; Savitz, D.A.; Zhang, J. Maternal pre-pregnancy overweight and obesity and the risk of cesarean delivery in nulliparous women. Ann. Epidemiol. 2005, 15, 467–474. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Pedersen, J.; Bojsen-Møller, B.; Poulsen, H. Blood sugar in newborn infants of diabetic mothers. Acta Endocrinol. 1954, 15, 33–52. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Weissmann-Brenner, A.; Simchen, M.J.; Zilberberg, E.; Kalter, A.; Weisz, B.; Achiron, R.; Dulitzky, M. Maternal and neonatal outcomes of macrosomic pregnancies. Med. Sci. Monit. 2012, 18, PH77–PH81. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Alvarez Villalobos, Y.A. Morbimortalidad Neonatal Asociada a Macrosomía; Universidad Nacional Autónoma de Nicaragua UNAN-Managua: Managua, Nicaragua, 2016. [Google Scholar]
- Pan, X.F.; Tang, L.; Lee, A.H.; Binns, C.; Yang, C.X.; Xu, Z.P.; Zhang, J.L.; Yang, Y.; Wang, H.; Sun, X. Association between fetal macrosomia and risk of obesity in children under 3 years in Western China: A cohort study. World J. Pediatr. 2019, 15, 153–160. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Sparano, S.; Ahrens, W.; De Henauw, S.; Marild, S.; Molnar, D.; Moreno, L.A.; Suling, M.; Tornaritis, M.; Veidebaum, T.; Siani, A.; et al. Being macrosomic at birth is an independent predictor of overweight in children: Results from the IDEFICS study. Matern. Child. Health J. 2013, 17, 1373–1381. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Goday, A.; Castañer, O.; Benaiges, D. We have a problem with obesity. Nutr. Hosp. 2019, 36, 3–4. [Google Scholar]
- Voerman, E.; Santos, S.; Inskip, H.; Amiano, P.; Barros, H.; Charles, M.A. Association of Gestational Weight Gain With Adverse Maternal and Infant Outcomes. JAMA 2019, 321, 1702–1715. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
Table 1.
Sociodemographic and obstetric characteristics of the women according to the body mass index (BMI).
Table 1.
Sociodemographic and obstetric characteristics of the women according to the body mass index (BMI).
| Variable | BMI | p Value * | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Normoweight n (%) | Overweight n (%) | Obesity Type I n (%) | Obesity Type II n (%) | Obesity Type III n (%) | ||
| Maternal age | <0.001 | |||||
| <25 years | 38 (2.4) | 60 (2.2) | 34 (2.9) | 10 (3.4) | 7 (7.3) | |
| 25–35 | 938 (58.4) | 1545 (56.8) | 697 (60.5) | 192 (65.5) | 66 (68.8) | |
| >35 years | 631 (39.3) | 1117 (41.0) | 422 (36.6) | 91 (31.1) | 23 (24.0) | |
| Level of education | <0.001 | |||||
| None | 0 (0.0) | 4 (0.1) | 2 (0.2) | 2 (0.7) | 0 (0.0) | |
| Primary | 28 (1.7) | 48 (1.8) | 21 (1.8) | 6 (2.0) | 3 (3.1) | |
| Secondary | 340 (21.2) | 715 (26.3) | 379 (32.9) | 132 (45.1) | 45 (46.9) | |
| University | 1239 (77.1) | 1955 (71.8) | 751 (65.1) | 153 (52.2) | 48 (50.0) | |
| Monthly family income (euros) | <0.001 | |||||
| <1000 | 81 (5.0) | 139 (5.1) | 74 (6.4) | 30 (10.2) | 9 (9.4) | |
| 1000–2000 | 469 (29.2) | 891 (32.7) | 416 (36.1) | 128 (43.7) | 45 (46.9) | |
| 2000–3000 | 571 (35.5) | 924 (33.9) | 397 (34.4) | 83 (28.3) | 29 (30.2) | |
| 3000–4000 | 331 (20.6) | 533 (19.6) | 202 (17.5) | 41 (14.0) | 9 (9.4) | |
| >4000 | 155 (9.6) | 235 (8.6) | 64 (5.6) | 11 (3.8) | 4 (4.2) | |
| Nationality | 0.861 | |||||
| Spanish | 1508 (93.8) | 2557 (93.9) | 1076 (93.3) | 276 (94.2) | 92 (95.8) | |
| Foreign | 99 (6.2) | 165 (6.1) | 77 (6.7) | 17 (5.8) | 4 (4.2) | |
| Childbirth and maternity classes | 0.017 | |||||
| No | 375 (23.3) | 602 (22.1) | 271 (23.5) | 61 (20.8) | 35 (36.5) | |
| Yes | 1232 (76.7) | 2120 (77.9) | 882 (76.5) | 232 (79.2) | 61 (63.5) | |
| Pre-pregnancy smoking habits | <0.001 | |||||
| No | 1296 (80.6) | 2104 (77.3) | 834 (72.3) | 201 (68.6) | 69 (71.9) | |
| Yes | 311 (19.4) | 618 (22.7) | 319 (27.7) | 92 (31.4) | 27 (28.1) | |
* Pearson’s χ2 test.
Table 2.
Obstetric characteristics of the women according to the BMI.
| Variable | BMI | p Value * | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Normoweight n (%) | Overweight n (%) | Obesity Type I n (%) | Obesity Type II n (%) | Obesity Type III n (%) | ||
| Number of pregnancies | 0.058 | |||||
| One | 860 (53.5) | 1456 (53.5) | 611 (53.0) | 149 (50.9) | 50 (52.1) | |
| Two | 562 (35.0) | 910 (33.4) | 356 (30.9) | 99 (33.8) | 31 (32.3) | |
| Three | 137 (8.5) | 232 (8.5) | 120 (10.4) | 33 (11.3) | 11 (11.5) | |
| Four | 36 (2.2) | 84 (3.1) | 39 (3.4) | 8 (2.7) | 2 (2.1) | |
| Five or more | 12 (0.7) | 40 (1.5) | 27 (2.3) | 4 (1.4) | 2 (2.1) | |
| Number of deliveries | <0.001 | |||||
| None | 259 (16.1) | 595 (21.9) | 311 (27.0) | 98 (33.4) | 33 (34.4) | |
| One | 869 (54.1) | 1391 (51.1) | 542 (47.0) | 132 (45.1) | 40 (41.7) | |
| Two | 422 (26.3) | 645 (23.7) | 261 (22.6) | 50 (17.1) | 20 (20.8) | |
| Three | 48 (3.0) | 80 (2.9) | 33 (2.9) | 10 (3.4) | 3 (3.1) | |
| Four | 9 (0.6) | 10 (0.4) | 4 (0.3) | 1 (0.3) | 0 (0.0) | |
| Five or more | 0 (0.0) | 1 (0.0) | 2 (0.2) | 2 (0.7) | 0 (0.0) | |
| Twin pregnancy | 0.045 | |||||
| No | 1583 (98.5) | 2652 (97.4) | 1118 (97.0) | 284 (96.9) | 92 (95.8) | |
| Yes | 24 (1.5) | 70 (26) | 35 (3.0) | 9 (3.1) | 4 (4.2) | |
| Prematurity | 0.011 | |||||
| >37 | 1472 (91.6) | 2557 (93.9) | 1065 (92.4) | 278 (94.9) | 93 (96.9) | |
| <37 | 135 (8.4) | 165 (6.1) | 88 (7.6) | 15 (5.1) | 3 (3.1) | |
| Hypertensive states | <0.001 | |||||
| No | 1550 (96.5) | 2568 (94.3) | 1032 (89.5) | 239 (81.6) | 77 (80.2) | |
| Yes | 57 (3.5) | 154 (5.7) | 121 (10.5) | 54 (18.4) | 19 (19.8) | |
| Gestational diabetes-diet | <0.001 | |||||
| No | 1429 (88.9) | 2463 (90.5) | 988 (85.7) | 223 (76.1) | 75 (78.1) | |
| Yes | 178 (11.1) | 259 (9.5) | 165 (14.3) | 70 (23.9) | 21 (21.9) | |
| Gestational diabetes-insulin | <0.001 | |||||
| No | 1575 (98.0) | 2660 (97.7) | 1124 (97.5) | 275 (93.9) | 89 (92.7) | |
| Yes | 32 (2.0) | 62 (2.3) | 29 (2.5) | 18 (6.1) | 7 (7.3) | |
| Hyperthyroidism | 0.292 | |||||
| No | 1528 (95.1) | 2601 (95.6) | 1100 (95.4) | 272 (92.8) | 90 (93.8) | |
| Yes | 79 (4.9) | 121 (4.4) | 53 (4.6) | 21 (7.2) | 6 (6.3) | |
| Hypothyroidism | 0.457 | |||||
| No | 1398 (87.0) | 2375 (87.3) | 984 (85.3) | 251 (85.7) | 86 (89.6) | |
| Yes | 209 (13.0) | 347 (12.7) | 169 (14.7) | 42 (14.3) | 10 (10.4) | |
| Anemia | 0.056 | |||||
| No | 967 (60.2) | 1605 (59.0) | 732 (63.5) | 186 (63.5) | 63 (65.6) | |
| Yes | 640 (39.8) | 1117 (41.0) | 421 (36.5) | 107 (36.5) | 33 (34.4) | |
| Intrahepatic cholestasis | 0.794 | |||||
| No | 1584 (98.6) | 2691 (98.9) | 1137 (98.6) | 291 (99.3) | 95 (99.0) | |
| Yes | 23 (1.4) | 31 (1.1) | 16 (1.4) | 2 (0.7) | 1 (1.0) | |
| Risk of preterm birth | <0.001 | |||||
| No | 1433 (89.2) | 2529 (92.9) | 1062 (92.1) | 276 (94.2) | 87 (90.6) | |
| Yes | 174 (10.8) | 193 (7.1) | 91 (7.9) | 17 (5.8) | 9 (9.4) | |
| Deep vein thrombosis | 0.042 | |||||
| No | 1580 (98.3) | 2695 (99.0) | 1138 (98.7) | 289 (98.6) | 92 (95.8) | |
| Yes | 27 (1.7) | 27 (1.0) | 15 (1.3) | 4 (1.4) | 4 (4.2) | |
| Oligoamines | 0.018 | |||||
| No | 1561 (97.1) | 2618 (96.2) | 1092 (94.7) | 285 (97.3) | 93 (96.9) | |
| Yes | 46 (2.9) | 104 (3.8) | 61 (5.3) | 8 (2.7) | 3 (3.1) | |
| Polyhydramnios | 0.001 | |||||
| No | 1502 (93.5) | 2480 (91.1) | 1037 (89.9) | 259 (88.4) | 82 (85.4) | |
| Yes | 105 (6.5) | 242 (8.9) | 116 (10.1) | 34 (11.6) | 14 (14.6) | |
| Composite pregnancy morbidity | 0.088 | |||||
| No | 621 (38.6) | 1051 (38.6) | 419 (36.3) | 93 (31.7) | 31 (32.3) | |
| Yes | 986 (61.4) | 1671 (61.4) | 734 (63.7) | 200 (68.3) | 65 (67.7) | |
* Pearson’s χ2 test.
Table 3.
Complications during delivery according to the BMI.
| Variable | BMI | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Normoweight n (%) | Overweight n (%) | Obesity Type I n (%) | Obesity Type II n (%) | Obesity Type III n (%) | |
| Altered FHR | |||||
| No | 1451 (90.3) | 2379 (87.4) | 989 (85.8) | 248 (84.6) | 82 (85.4) |
| Yes | 156 (9.7) | 343 (12.6) | 164 (14.2) | 45 (15.4) | 62 (14.6) |
| OR CI 95% | [1] | 1.34 (1.10–1.64) | 1.54 (1.22–1.95) | 1.69 (1.18–2.41) | 1.59 (0.88–2.87) |
| a AOR CI 95% | [1] | 1.36 (1.11–1.67) | 1.54 (1.21–1.96) | 1.62 (1.12–2.35) | 1.60 (0.87–2.95) |
| Stained AF | |||||
| No | 1540 (95.8) | 2545 (93.5) | 1067 (92.5) | 274 (93.5) | 82 (85.4) |
| Yes | 67 (4.2) | 177 (6.5) | 86 (7.5) | 19 (6.5) | 14 (14.6) |
| OR CI 95% | [1] | 1.60 (1.20–2.13) | 1.85 (1.33–2.57) | 1.59 (0.94–2.70) | 3.92 (2.12–7.28) |
| a AOR CI 95% | [1] | 1.57 (1.17–2.10) | 1.81 (1.30–2.53) | 1.53 (0.89–2.62) | 4.01 (2.13–7.58) |
| Vaginal bleeding | |||||
| No | 1530 (95.2) | 2587 (95.0) | 1087 (94.3) | 273 (93.2) | 89 (92.7) |
| Yes | 77 (4.8) | 135 (5.0) | 66 (5.7) | 20 (6.8) | 7 (7.3) |
| OR CI 95% | [1] | 1.04 (0.78–1.38) | 1.21 (0.86–1.69) | 1.46 (0.88–2.42) | 1.56 (0.70–3.49) |
| b AOR CI 95% | [1] | 1.07 (0.80–1.66) | 1.16 (0.82–1.66) | 1.33 (0.78–2.28) | 1.58 (0.69–3.63) |
| Uterine rupture | |||||
| No | 1595 (99.3) | 2708 (99.5) | 1148 (99.6) | 288 (98.3) | 95 (99.0) |
| Yes | 12 (0.7) | 14 (0.5) | 5 (0.4) | 5 (1.7) | 1 (1.0) |
| OR CI 95% | [1] | 0.69 (0.32–1.49) | 0.58 (0.20–1.65) | 2.31 (0.81–6.60) | 1.40 (0.18–10.87) |
| b AOR CI 95% | [1] | 0.52 (0.24–1.16) | 0.38 (0.13–1.16) | 1.21 (0.39–3.68) | 0.67 (0.08–5.55) |
| Nonprogression of delivery | |||||
| No | 1349 (83.9) | 2205 (81.0) | 893 (77.5) | 223 (76.1) | 75 (78.1) |
| Yes | 258 (16.1) | 517 (19.0) | 260 (22.5) | 70 (23.9) | 21 (21.9) |
| R CI 95% | [1] | 1.23 (1.04–1.44) | 1.52 (1.26–1.84) | 1.64 (1.22–2.22) | 1.46 (0.89–2.42) |
| a AOR CI 95% | [1] | 1.09 (0.92–1.30) | 1.26 (1.02–1.55) | 1.24 (0.89–1.71) | 1.03 (0.89–1.71) |
| Cephalopelvic disproportion | |||||
| No | 1424 (88.6) | 2303 (84.6) | 935 (81.1) | 234 (79.9) | 74 (77.1) |
| Yes | 183 (11.4) | 419 (15.4) | 218 (18.9) | 59 (20.1) | 22 (22.9) |
| OR CI 95% | [1] | 1.42 (1.18–1.71) | 1.81 (1.47–2.25) | 1.96 (1.42–2.71) | 2.31 (1.10–3.82) |
| a AOR CI 95% | [1] | 1.35 (1.11–1.63) | 1.59 (1.28–1.99) | 1.62 (1.15–2.29) | 1.79 (1.06–3.02) |
| Fever | |||||
| No | 1540 (95.8) | 2574 (94.6) | 1081 (93.8) | 275 (93.9) | 84 (87.5) |
| Yes | 67 (4.2) | 148 (5.4) | 72 (6.2) | 18 (6.1) | 12 (12.5) |
| R CI 95% | [1] | 1.33 (0.98–1.77) | 1.53 (1.09–2.15) | 1.50 (0.88–2.57) | 3.28 (1.71–6.31) |
| b AOR CI 95% | [1] | 1.23 (0.91–1.67) | 1.39 (1.97–1.98) | 1.31 (0.75–2.31) | 2.58 (1.29–5.17) |
| Preeclampsia | |||||
| No | 1577 (98.1) | 2654 (97.5) | 1103 (95.7) | 266 (90.8) | 85 (88.5) |
| Yes | 30 (1.9) | 68 (2.5) | 50 (4.3) | 27 (9.2) | 11 (11.5) |
| OR CI 95% | [1] | 1.35 (0.87–2.08) | 2.38 (1.51–3.77) | 5.34 (3.12–9.12) | 6.80 (3.30–14.04) |
| a AOR CI 95% | [1] | 1.46 (0.93–2.31) | 1.98 (1.22–3.23) | 4.15 (2.31–7.47) | 6.86 (3.01–15.40) |
| Labor induction | |||||
| No | 1121 (69.8) | 1708 (62.7) | 688 (59.7) | 151 (51.5) | 52 (54.2) |
| Yes | 486 (30.2) | 1014 (37.3) | 465 (40.3) | 142 (48.5) | 44 (45.8) |
| OR CI 95% | [1] | 1.37 (1.20–1.56) | 1.56 (1.33–1.83) | 2.17 (1.69–2.79) | 1.95 (1.29–2.96) |
| AOR CI 95% | [1] | 1.37 (1.20–1.57) | 1.44 (1.22–1.70) | 1.94 (1.49–2.53) | 1.78 (1.16–2.74) |
| Mode of delivery | |||||
| Vaginal | 1075 (66.9) | 1629 (59.8) | 639 (55.4) | 136 (46.4) | 47 (49.0) |
| Instrumental | 264 (16.4) | 449 (16.5) | 176 (15.3) | 46 (15.7) | 14 (14.6) |
| OR CI 95% | [1] | 1.12 (0.95–1.33) | 1.12 (0.91–1.39) | 1.38 (0.96–1.98) | 1.21 (0.66–2.24) |
| c AOR CI 95% | [1] | 1.09 (0.91–1.30) | 1.04 (0.93–1.31) | 1.27 (0.86–1.86) | 1.11 (0.58–2.11) |
| Planned caesarean | 89 (5.5) | 220 (8.1) | 108 (9.4) | 41 (14.0) | 6 (6.3) |
| OR CI 95% | [1] | 1.63 (1.26–2.11) | 2.04 (1.52–2.75) | 3.64 (2.42–5.49) | 1.54 (0.64–3.71) |
| AOR CI 95% | [1] | 1.41 (1.06–1.86) | 1.72 (1.24–2.38) | 2.83 (1.78–4.50) | 1.09 (0.42–2.79 |
| Emergency caesarean | 179 (11.1) | 424 (15.6) | 230 (19.9) | 70 (23.9) | 29 (30.2) |
| OR CI 95% | [1] | 1.56 (1.29–1.89) | 2.16 (1.74–2.69) | 3.09 (2.23–4.30) | 3.71 (2.27–6.04) |
| AOR CI 95% | [1] | 1.44 (1.17–1.76) | 1.89 (1.49–2.40) | 2.49 (1.73–3.59) | 2.92 (1.68–5.08) |
| III-IV tearing | |||||
| No | 1589 (98.9) | 2689 (98.8) | 1136 (98.5) | 284 (96.9) | 95 (99.0) |
| Yes | 18 1.1 | 33 (1.2) | 17 (1.5) | 9 (3.1) | 1 (1.0) |
| OR CI 95% | [1] | 1.08 (0.61–1.93) | 1.32 (0.68–2.57) | 2.80 (1.24–6.29) | 0.93 (0.12–7.04) |
| d AOR CI 95% | [1] | 1.06 (0.59–1.91) | 1.34 (0.67–2.66) | 3.04 (1.30–7.15) | 1.04 (0.13–8.11) |
| Composite morbidity delivery | |||||
| No | 728 (45.3) | 995 (36.6) | 336 (29.1) | 57 (19.5) | 18 (18.8) |
| Yes | 879 (54.7) | 1727 (63.4) | 817 (70.9) | 236 (80.5) | 78 (81.3) |
| OR CI 95% | [1] | 1.44 (1.27–1.63) | 2.01 (1.72–2.37) | 3.43 (2.53–4.65) | 3.59 (2.13–6.05) |
| e AOR CI 95% | [1] | 1.47 (1.29–1.68) | 2.00 (1.69–2.37) | 3.51 (2.55–4.83) | 3.64 (2.13–6.24) |
All the results were adjusted by the following variables: Maternal age, nulliparity, twin pregnancy, maternity training, previous C-section, newborn weight, economic income, level of education, nationality, composite pregnancy morbidity, and smoking habit. a Complementary adjusted by the following: induced delivery, epidural analgesia, and gestational age. b Complementary adjusted by the following: induced delivery, episiotomy, severe tearing, and type of delivery. c Complementary adjusted by the following: induced delivery, and epidural analgesia. d Complementary adjusted by the following: episiotomy, and type of delivery. e Complementary adjusted by the following: composite pregnancy morbidity. FHR, fetal heart rate; AF, amniotic fluid; OR, odds ratio; AOR, adjusted odds ratio. Bold means statistically significant.
Table 4.
Postpartum maternal/fetal complications according to the BMI.
| Variable | BMI | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Normoweight n (%) | Overweight n (%) | Obesity Type I n (%) | Obesity Type II n (%) | Obesity Type III n (%) | |
| Prematurity | |||||
| No | 1472 (91.6) | 2557 (93.9) | 1065 (92.4) | 278 (94.9) | 93 (96.9) |
| Yes | 135 (8.4) | 165 (6.1) | 88 (7.6) | 15 (5.1) | 3 (3.1) |
| OR CI 95% | [1] | 0.70 (0.56–0.89) | 0.90 (0.68–1.19) | 0.59 (0.34–1.02) | 0.35 (0.11–1.13) |
| AOR CI 95% | [1] | 0.67 (0.53–0.86) | 0.79 (0.59–1.06) | 0.49 (0.28–0.87) | 0.27 (0.08–0.89) |
| Low weight | |||||
| No | 1488 (92.7) | 2560 (94.3) | 1076 (93.4) | 271 (93.1) | 95 (99.0) |
| Yes | 118 (7.3) | 155 (5.7) | 76 (6.6) | 20 (6.9) | 1 (1.0) |
| OR CI 95% | [1] | 0.76 (0.60–0.98) | 0.89 (0.66–1.20) | 0.93 (0.57–1.52) | 0.13 (0.02–0.96) |
| a AOR CI 95% | [1] | 0.74 (0.55–1.01) | 0.67 (0.55–0.97) | 0.88 (0.47–1.58) | 0.10 (0.02–0.96) |
| Macrosomia | |||||
| No | 1561 (97.2) | 2608 (96.1) | 1072 (93.1) | 267 (91.8) | 81 (84.4) |
| Yes | 45 (2.8) | 107 (3.9) | 80 (6.9) | 24 (8.2) | 15 (15.6) |
| OR CI 95% | [1] | 1.42 (0.99–2.03) | 2.59 (1.78–3.76) | 3.12 (1.87–5.20) | 6.24 (3.44–12.01) |
| a AOR CI 95% | [1] | 1.32 (0.93–1.89) | 2.51 (1.72–3.8) | 2.75 (1.62–4.68) | 6.06 (3.17–11.60) |
| Newborn admission | |||||
| No | 1422 (88.5) | 2399 (88.1) | 991 (85.9) | 231 (78.8) | 82 (85.4) |
| Yes | 185 (11.5) | 323 (11.9) | 162 (14.1) | 62 (21.2) | 14 (14.6) |
| OR CI 95% | [1] | 1.04 (0.85–1.25) | 1.26 (1.00–1.58) | 2.06 (1.50–2.84) | 1.31 (0.73–2.36) |
| b AOR CI 95% | [1] | 1.17 (0.95–1.46) | 1.33 (1.03–1.72) | 2.55 (1.78–3.65) | 1.75 (0.93–3.31) |
| Postpartum surgery related to delivery | |||||
| No | 1551 (96.5) | 2634 (96.8) | 1105 (95.8) | 280 (95.6) | 90 (93.8) |
| Yes | 56 (3.5) | 88 (3.2) | 48 (4.2) | 13 (4.4) | 6 (6.3) |
| OR CI 95% | [1] | 0.93 (0.66–1.30) | 1.20 (0.81–1.78) | 1.29 (0.69–2.38) | 1.85 (0.78–4.40) |
| c AOR CI 95% | [1] | 0.85 (0.60–1.20) | 1.01 (0.68–1.52) | 0.98 (0.52–1.85) | 1.51 (0.62–3.68) |
| Postpartum maternal ICU admission | |||||
| No | 1575 (98.0) | 2681 (98.5) | 1128 (97.8) | 285 (97.3) | 94 (97.9) |
| Yes | 32 (2.0) | 41 (1.5) | 25 (2.2) | 8 (2.7) | 2 (2.1) |
| OR CI 95% | [1] | 0.75 (0.47–1.20) | 1.09 (0.64–1.85) | 1.38 (0.63–3.03) | 1.05 (0.25–4.44) |
| c AOR CI 95% | [1] | 0.69 (0.43–1.12) | 0.81 (0.47–1.41) | 0.98 (0.44–2.22) | 0.84 (0.19–3.65) |
| Readmission after discharge | |||||
| No | 1580 (98.3) | 2666 (97.9) | 1132 (98.2) | 281 (95.9) | 94 (97.9) |
| Yes | 27 (1.7) | 56 (2.1) | 21 (1.8) | 12 (4.1) | 2 (2.1) |
| OR CI 95% | [1] | 1.23 (0.77–1.95) | 1.09 (0.61–1.93) | 2.50 (1.25–4.99) | 1.25 (0.29–5.32) |
| c AOR CI 95% | [1] | 1.16 (0.72–1.85) | 0.94 (0.53–1.69) | 1.98 (0.97–4.06) | 1.02 (0.24–4.40) |
| Composite postpartum morbidity | |||||
| No | 1507 (93.8) | 2558 (94.0) | 1071 (92.9) | 265 (90.4) | 86 (89.6) |
| Yes | 100 (6.2) | 164 (6.0) | 82 (7.1) | 28 (9.6) | 10 (10.4) |
| OR CI 95% | [1] | 0.97 (0.75–1.30) | 1.15 (0.85–1.56) | 1.59 (1.03–2.47) | 1.75 (0.88–3.48) |
| d AOR CI 95% | [1] | 0.90 (0.69–1.17) | 0.96 (0.70–1.31) | 1.22 (0.78–1.93) | 1.45 (0.72–2.93) |
All the results were adjusted by the following variables: Maternal age, nulliparity, twin pregnancy, maternity training, previous caesarean, economic income, level of education, nationality, composite pregnancy morbidity, and smoking habit. a Complementary adjusted by the following: prematurity. b Complementary adjusted by the following: type of delivery, altered FHR, and stained amniotic fluid. c Complementary adjusted by the following: severe tearing, type of delivery, pregnancy complications, preeclampsia, vaginal bleeding during delivery, fever, and uterine rupture. d Complementary adjusted by the following: composite pregnancy morbidity, and composite delivery morbidity. Bold means statistically significant.
© 2020 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Share and Cite
MDPI and ACS Style
Ballesta-Castillejos, A.; Gómez-Salgado, J.; Rodríguez-Almagro, J.; Ortiz-Esquinas, I.; Hernández-Martínez, A. Relationship between Maternal Body Mass Index and Obstetric and Perinatal Complications. J. Clin. Med. 2020, 9, 707. https://doi.org/10.3390/jcm9030707
AMA Style
Ballesta-Castillejos A, Gómez-Salgado J, Rodríguez-Almagro J, Ortiz-Esquinas I, Hernández-Martínez A. Relationship between Maternal Body Mass Index and Obstetric and Perinatal Complications. Journal of Clinical Medicine. 2020; 9(3):707. https://doi.org/10.3390/jcm9030707
Chicago/Turabian StyleBallesta-Castillejos, Ana, Juan Gómez-Salgado, Julián Rodríguez-Almagro, Inmaculada Ortiz-Esquinas, and Antonio Hernández-Martínez. 2020. "Relationship between Maternal Body Mass Index and Obstetric and Perinatal Complications" Journal of Clinical Medicine 9, no. 3: 707. https://doi.org/10.3390/jcm9030707
Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.
