Cargando…

The role of intervening pregnancy loss in the association between interpregnancy interval and adverse pregnancy outcomes

OBJECTIVE: To investigate whether intervening miscarriages and induced abortions impact the associations between interpregnancy interval after a live birth and adverse pregnancy outcomes. DESIGN: Population‐based cohort study. SETTING: Norway. PARTICIPANTS: A total of 165 617 births to 143 916 women...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Tessema, Gizachew A., Håberg, Siri E., Pereira, Gavin, Magnus, Maria C.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2022
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9541236/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35596254
http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/1471-0528.17223
_version_ 1784803880310145024
author Tessema, Gizachew A.
Håberg, Siri E.
Pereira, Gavin
Magnus, Maria C.
author_facet Tessema, Gizachew A.
Håberg, Siri E.
Pereira, Gavin
Magnus, Maria C.
author_sort Tessema, Gizachew A.
collection PubMed
description OBJECTIVE: To investigate whether intervening miscarriages and induced abortions impact the associations between interpregnancy interval after a live birth and adverse pregnancy outcomes. DESIGN: Population‐based cohort study. SETTING: Norway. PARTICIPANTS: A total of 165 617 births to 143 916 women between 2008 and 2016. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: We estimated adjusted relative risks for adverse pregnancy outcomes using log‐binomial regression, first ignoring miscarriages and induced abortions in the interpregnancy interval estimation (conventional interpregnancy interval estimates) and subsequently accounting for intervening miscarriages or induced abortions (correct interpregnancy interval estimates). We then calculated the ratio of the two relative risks (ratio of ratios, RoR) as a measure of the difference. RESULTS: The proportion of short interpregnancy interval (<6 months) was 4.0% in the conventional interpregnancy interval estimate and slightly increased to 4.6% in the correct interpregnancy interval estimate. For interpregnancy interval <6 months, compared with 18–23 months, the RoR was 0.97 for preterm birth (PTB) (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.83–1.13), 0.97 for spontaneous PTB ( 95% CI 0.80–1.19), 1.00 for small‐for‐gestational age ( 95% CI 0.86–1.14), 1.00 for large‐for‐gestational age (95% CI 0.90–1.10) and 0.99 for pre‐eclampsia (95% CI 0.71–1.37). Similarly, conventional and correct interpregnancy intervals yielded associations of similar magnitude between long interpregnancy interval (≥60 months) and the pregnancy outcomes evaluated. CONCLUSION: Not considering intervening pregnancy loss due to miscarriages or induced abortions, results in negligible difference in the associations between short and long interpregnancy intervals and adverse pregnancy outcomes. TWEETABLE ABSTRACT: Not considering pregnancy loss in interpregnancy interval estimation resulted no meaningful differences in observed risks of adverse pregnancy outcomes.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-9541236
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2022
publisher John Wiley and Sons Inc.
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-95412362022-10-14 The role of intervening pregnancy loss in the association between interpregnancy interval and adverse pregnancy outcomes Tessema, Gizachew A. Håberg, Siri E. Pereira, Gavin Magnus, Maria C. BJOG Research Articles OBJECTIVE: To investigate whether intervening miscarriages and induced abortions impact the associations between interpregnancy interval after a live birth and adverse pregnancy outcomes. DESIGN: Population‐based cohort study. SETTING: Norway. PARTICIPANTS: A total of 165 617 births to 143 916 women between 2008 and 2016. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: We estimated adjusted relative risks for adverse pregnancy outcomes using log‐binomial regression, first ignoring miscarriages and induced abortions in the interpregnancy interval estimation (conventional interpregnancy interval estimates) and subsequently accounting for intervening miscarriages or induced abortions (correct interpregnancy interval estimates). We then calculated the ratio of the two relative risks (ratio of ratios, RoR) as a measure of the difference. RESULTS: The proportion of short interpregnancy interval (<6 months) was 4.0% in the conventional interpregnancy interval estimate and slightly increased to 4.6% in the correct interpregnancy interval estimate. For interpregnancy interval <6 months, compared with 18–23 months, the RoR was 0.97 for preterm birth (PTB) (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.83–1.13), 0.97 for spontaneous PTB ( 95% CI 0.80–1.19), 1.00 for small‐for‐gestational age ( 95% CI 0.86–1.14), 1.00 for large‐for‐gestational age (95% CI 0.90–1.10) and 0.99 for pre‐eclampsia (95% CI 0.71–1.37). Similarly, conventional and correct interpregnancy intervals yielded associations of similar magnitude between long interpregnancy interval (≥60 months) and the pregnancy outcomes evaluated. CONCLUSION: Not considering intervening pregnancy loss due to miscarriages or induced abortions, results in negligible difference in the associations between short and long interpregnancy intervals and adverse pregnancy outcomes. TWEETABLE ABSTRACT: Not considering pregnancy loss in interpregnancy interval estimation resulted no meaningful differences in observed risks of adverse pregnancy outcomes. John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2022-06-01 2022-10 /pmc/articles/PMC9541236/ /pubmed/35596254 http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/1471-0528.17223 Text en © 2022 The Authors. BJOG: An International Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/This is an open access article under the terms of the http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/) License, which permits use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited and is not used for commercial purposes.
spellingShingle Research Articles
Tessema, Gizachew A.
Håberg, Siri E.
Pereira, Gavin
Magnus, Maria C.
The role of intervening pregnancy loss in the association between interpregnancy interval and adverse pregnancy outcomes
title The role of intervening pregnancy loss in the association between interpregnancy interval and adverse pregnancy outcomes
title_full The role of intervening pregnancy loss in the association between interpregnancy interval and adverse pregnancy outcomes
title_fullStr The role of intervening pregnancy loss in the association between interpregnancy interval and adverse pregnancy outcomes
title_full_unstemmed The role of intervening pregnancy loss in the association between interpregnancy interval and adverse pregnancy outcomes
title_short The role of intervening pregnancy loss in the association between interpregnancy interval and adverse pregnancy outcomes
title_sort role of intervening pregnancy loss in the association between interpregnancy interval and adverse pregnancy outcomes
topic Research Articles
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9541236/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35596254
http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/1471-0528.17223
work_keys_str_mv AT tessemagizachewa theroleofinterveningpregnancylossintheassociationbetweeninterpregnancyintervalandadversepregnancyoutcomes
AT habergsirie theroleofinterveningpregnancylossintheassociationbetweeninterpregnancyintervalandadversepregnancyoutcomes
AT pereiragavin theroleofinterveningpregnancylossintheassociationbetweeninterpregnancyintervalandadversepregnancyoutcomes
AT magnusmariac theroleofinterveningpregnancylossintheassociationbetweeninterpregnancyintervalandadversepregnancyoutcomes
AT tessemagizachewa roleofinterveningpregnancylossintheassociationbetweeninterpregnancyintervalandadversepregnancyoutcomes
AT habergsirie roleofinterveningpregnancylossintheassociationbetweeninterpregnancyintervalandadversepregnancyoutcomes
AT pereiragavin roleofinterveningpregnancylossintheassociationbetweeninterpregnancyintervalandadversepregnancyoutcomes
AT magnusmariac roleofinterveningpregnancylossintheassociationbetweeninterpregnancyintervalandadversepregnancyoutcomes