Why the study?
Do unfavorable maternal socioeconomic and lifestyle factors during pregnancy increase the risk of congenital heart defects in newborns?
Do unfavorable maternal socioeconomic and lifestyle factors during pregnancy increase the risk of congenital heart defects in newborns?
Unfavorable maternal socioeconomic factors, such as lower education and being a housewife, are associated with an increased risk of congenital heart defects in newborns.
Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Maternal low education and housewife status associated with higher CHD risk; hypothesis-generating and should not yet change prenatal counseling.
The objective of study was to estimate the importance of maternal socioeconomic and lifestyle factors during pregnancy in the risk of congenital heart defects in Kaunas infant population in 1999–2005. Material and methods. An epidemiological case-control study was conducted. The study comprised 187 newborns with congenital heart defects (cases) and 643 randomly selected newborns without any defects (controls), born in Kaunas city during 1999–2005. Modern epidemiological methods were used for data analysis. A multivariate logistic regression was used to determine adjusted risk factors of congenital heart defects. Results. The logistic multivariate regression analysis showed that low and moderate maternal education significantly increased the risk of congenital heart defects (primary or basic [OR=3.43; 95% CI, 1.54–7.64] and secondary [OR=1.56; 95% CI, 1.00–2.45] vs advanced vocational or higher education). The housewives and workers had a higher risk of delivering a newborn with congenital heart defects than the office workers (OR=2.34; 95% CI, 1.34–4.10 and OR=1.28; 95% CI, 0.79–2.07, respectively). Maternal smoking during pregnancy tended to increase the risk of congenital heart defects by 48% (OR=1.48; 95% CI, 0.82–2.67). Conclusions. According to our study results, unfavorable maternal socioeconomic factors and smoking during pregnancy increased the risk of congenital heart defects.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Kučienė et al. (2009) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: