Cargando…

Prevalence of iron deficiency in pregnant women: A prospective cross‐sectional Austrian study

The aim of the study was to determine, for the first time, in a prospective cross‐sectional multicenter study, the prevalence of iron deficiency (ID) in an Austrian pregnant population. A cohort of 425 pregnant women was classified into four groups of different weeks of gestation. Group 1 was monito...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Zeisler, Harald, Dietrich, Wolf, Heinzl, Florian, Klaritsch, Philipp, Humpel, Victoria, Moertl, Manfred, Obruca, Christian, Wimazal, Friedrich, Ramoni, Angela, Tiechl, Johanna, Wentzel‐Schwarz, Elisabeth
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2021
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8645778/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34925785
http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/fsn3.2588
_version_ 1784610379126538240
author Zeisler, Harald
Dietrich, Wolf
Heinzl, Florian
Klaritsch, Philipp
Humpel, Victoria
Moertl, Manfred
Obruca, Christian
Wimazal, Friedrich
Ramoni, Angela
Tiechl, Johanna
Wentzel‐Schwarz, Elisabeth
author_facet Zeisler, Harald
Dietrich, Wolf
Heinzl, Florian
Klaritsch, Philipp
Humpel, Victoria
Moertl, Manfred
Obruca, Christian
Wimazal, Friedrich
Ramoni, Angela
Tiechl, Johanna
Wentzel‐Schwarz, Elisabeth
author_sort Zeisler, Harald
collection PubMed
description The aim of the study was to determine, for the first time, in a prospective cross‐sectional multicenter study, the prevalence of iron deficiency (ID) in an Austrian pregnant population. A cohort of 425 pregnant women was classified into four groups of different weeks of gestation. Group 1 was monitored longitudinally, while groups 2–4, iron status, were sampled only once. Evaluation of the prevalence of ID was performed by comparing the diagnostic criteria of the WHO to the cutoff proposed by Achebe MM and Gafter‐Gvili A (Achebe) and the Austrian Nutrition Report (ANR). In comparison with the ANR, the prevalence of ID was lower in group 1 and higher in groups 2–4 (17.2% vs. 12.17%, 25.84%, 35.29%, and 41.76%, respectively) (p‐values < .01 except group 1). According to WHO, the prevalence in group 1 was 12.17% at inclusion, 2 months later 31.7%, and further 2 months later 65.71%, respectively. According to Achebe, the number of cases doubled; for group 1, the number of cases rose from 13 to 42 (115 patients total); for groups 2–4, we observed an increase from 112 to 230 (340 patients total). This study reported a prevalence of around 12% at the beginning of pregnancy, which increased during pregnancy up to 65%. ID can have a massive impact on quality of life, justifying screening, as iron deficiency would be easy to diagnose and treat.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-8645778
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2021
publisher John Wiley and Sons Inc.
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-86457782021-12-17 Prevalence of iron deficiency in pregnant women: A prospective cross‐sectional Austrian study Zeisler, Harald Dietrich, Wolf Heinzl, Florian Klaritsch, Philipp Humpel, Victoria Moertl, Manfred Obruca, Christian Wimazal, Friedrich Ramoni, Angela Tiechl, Johanna Wentzel‐Schwarz, Elisabeth Food Sci Nutr Original Research The aim of the study was to determine, for the first time, in a prospective cross‐sectional multicenter study, the prevalence of iron deficiency (ID) in an Austrian pregnant population. A cohort of 425 pregnant women was classified into four groups of different weeks of gestation. Group 1 was monitored longitudinally, while groups 2–4, iron status, were sampled only once. Evaluation of the prevalence of ID was performed by comparing the diagnostic criteria of the WHO to the cutoff proposed by Achebe MM and Gafter‐Gvili A (Achebe) and the Austrian Nutrition Report (ANR). In comparison with the ANR, the prevalence of ID was lower in group 1 and higher in groups 2–4 (17.2% vs. 12.17%, 25.84%, 35.29%, and 41.76%, respectively) (p‐values < .01 except group 1). According to WHO, the prevalence in group 1 was 12.17% at inclusion, 2 months later 31.7%, and further 2 months later 65.71%, respectively. According to Achebe, the number of cases doubled; for group 1, the number of cases rose from 13 to 42 (115 patients total); for groups 2–4, we observed an increase from 112 to 230 (340 patients total). This study reported a prevalence of around 12% at the beginning of pregnancy, which increased during pregnancy up to 65%. ID can have a massive impact on quality of life, justifying screening, as iron deficiency would be easy to diagnose and treat. John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2021-10-16 /pmc/articles/PMC8645778/ /pubmed/34925785 http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/fsn3.2588 Text en © 2021 The Authors. Food Science & Nutrition published by Wiley Periodicals LLC. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/This is an open access article under the terms of the http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) License, which permits use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Original Research
Zeisler, Harald
Dietrich, Wolf
Heinzl, Florian
Klaritsch, Philipp
Humpel, Victoria
Moertl, Manfred
Obruca, Christian
Wimazal, Friedrich
Ramoni, Angela
Tiechl, Johanna
Wentzel‐Schwarz, Elisabeth
Prevalence of iron deficiency in pregnant women: A prospective cross‐sectional Austrian study
title Prevalence of iron deficiency in pregnant women: A prospective cross‐sectional Austrian study
title_full Prevalence of iron deficiency in pregnant women: A prospective cross‐sectional Austrian study
title_fullStr Prevalence of iron deficiency in pregnant women: A prospective cross‐sectional Austrian study
title_full_unstemmed Prevalence of iron deficiency in pregnant women: A prospective cross‐sectional Austrian study
title_short Prevalence of iron deficiency in pregnant women: A prospective cross‐sectional Austrian study
title_sort prevalence of iron deficiency in pregnant women: a prospective cross‐sectional austrian study
topic Original Research
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8645778/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34925785
http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/fsn3.2588
work_keys_str_mv AT zeislerharald prevalenceofirondeficiencyinpregnantwomenaprospectivecrosssectionalaustrianstudy
AT dietrichwolf prevalenceofirondeficiencyinpregnantwomenaprospectivecrosssectionalaustrianstudy
AT heinzlflorian prevalenceofirondeficiencyinpregnantwomenaprospectivecrosssectionalaustrianstudy
AT klaritschphilipp prevalenceofirondeficiencyinpregnantwomenaprospectivecrosssectionalaustrianstudy
AT humpelvictoria prevalenceofirondeficiencyinpregnantwomenaprospectivecrosssectionalaustrianstudy
AT moertlmanfred prevalenceofirondeficiencyinpregnantwomenaprospectivecrosssectionalaustrianstudy
AT obrucachristian prevalenceofirondeficiencyinpregnantwomenaprospectivecrosssectionalaustrianstudy
AT wimazalfriedrich prevalenceofirondeficiencyinpregnantwomenaprospectivecrosssectionalaustrianstudy
AT ramoniangela prevalenceofirondeficiencyinpregnantwomenaprospectivecrosssectionalaustrianstudy
AT tiechljohanna prevalenceofirondeficiencyinpregnantwomenaprospectivecrosssectionalaustrianstudy
AT wentzelschwarzelisabeth prevalenceofirondeficiencyinpregnantwomenaprospectivecrosssectionalaustrianstudy