medigraphic.com
ISSN 0035-0052 (Print)

2018, Number 6

<< Back Next >>

Rev Mex Pediatr 2018; 85 (6)

Short interpregnancy intervals and chronic malnutrition in less than 5 years old children, Lima-Peru 2016

Gutiérrez-Flores P, Mucching-Toscano S, Alvarado-Gamarra G

Language: Spanish
References: 23
Page: 216-221
PDF size: 244.33 Kb.


ABSTRACT

Introduction: The short interpregnancy intervals have been commonly associated with adverse perinatal outcomes; however, little is known about their role in the health of children in the medium and long term, such as chronic malnutrition. Objective: To determine the association of interpregnancy intervals and chronic malnutrition in children under five years of age at the National Hospital Sergio E. Bernales (HNSEB), Comas, Lima, Peru. Material and methods: Unpaired case-control study, carried out from June to October 2016. The relationship of the short interpregnancy intervals and other factors in relation to chronic malnutrition was evaluated. Bivariate and multivariate analyses were performed, using binary logistic regression. Results: 154 cases and 154 controls were analyzed. In the multivariate analysis, the short interval between pregnancies (OR = 2.64, 95% CI 1.61-4.34), and the lower/marginal low socioeconomic level (OR = 10.69; IC 95% 4.60-24.82) were associated with chronic malnutrition independent of other factors. Conclusions: The short interpregnancy interval was associated to the presence of chronic malnutrition in children who attended the growth and development program of a general hospital in Lima, Peru.


REFERENCES

  1. Instituto Nacional de Estadística e Informática. Encuesta Nacional Demográfica y de Salud Familiar. ENDES 2016. Lima: INEI; 2017.

  2. Galván M, Amigo H. Programas destinados a disminuir la desnutrición crónica. Una revisión en América Latina. Arch Latinoam Nutr. 2007; 57(4): 316-326.

  3. De Onis M, Blöster M, Borgui E. Prevalence and trends of stunting among pre-school children, 1990–2020. Public Health Nutr. 2012; 15(1): 142-148.

  4. Zhu BP, Rolfs RT, Nangle BE, Horan JM. Effect of the interval between pregnancies on perinatal outcomes. N Engl J Med. 1999; 340(8): 589-594.

  5. Conde-Agudelo A, Rosas-Bermúdez A, Kafury-Goeta AC. Birth spacing and risk of adverse perinatal outcomes: a meta-analysis. JAMA. 2006; 295(15): 1809-1823.

  6. Conde-Agudelo A, Belizán JM, Norton MH, Rosas-Bermúdez A. Effect of the interpregnancy interval on perinatal outcomes in Latin America. Obstet Gynecol. 2005; 106(2): 359-366.

  7. Hayes H, Luchok K, Martin AB, McKeown RE, Evans A. Short birth intervals and the risk of school unreadiness among a Medicaid population in South Carolina. Child Care Health Dev. 2006; 32(4): 423-430.

  8. Conde-Agudelo A, Rosas-Bermudez A, Castaño F, Norton MH. Effects of birth spacing on maternal, perinatal, infant, and child health: a systematic review of causal mechanisms. Stud Fam Plann. 2012; 43(2): 93-114.

  9. Rutstein S. Further evidence of the effects of preceding birth intervals on neonatal, infant, and under-five-years mortality and nutritional status in developing countries: evidence from the demographic and health surveys. DHS Working Papers No. 41. Calverton, Maryland, USA: Macreo International; 2008.

  10. Ministerio de Salud del Perú. Hospital Nacional Sergio E. Bernales: Análisis de la Situación de Salud 2013. Lima: HNSEB, Oficina de Epidemiología y Salud Ambiental; 2013.

  11. Danforth. Tratado de obstetricia y ginecología. 9a ed. México: McGraw-Hill; 2005.

  12. Ministerio de Salud del Perú. Escala de evaluación del desarrollo psicomotor para niños de 0 a 2 años. Lima: MINSA; 1995.

  13. Ministerio de Salud del Perú. Test de desarrollo psicomotor para niños de 2 a 5 años. Lima: MINSA; 1995.

  14. Organización Mundial de las Naciones Unidas. Comité de Expertos de la OMS sobre el estado físico: uso e interpretación de la antropometría. Ginebra: OMS; 1993.

  15. Centro de Investigación y Desarrollo. Factores asociados a la desnutrición crónica infantil en el Perú 1996-2007. Lima: INEI, USAID; 2009.

  16. Gribble JN, Murray NJ, Menotti EP. Reconsidering childhood undernutrition: can birth spacing make a difference? An analysis of the 2002-2003 El Salvador National Family Health Survey. Matern Child Nutr. 2009; 5(1): 49-63.

  17. Dewey KG, Cohen RJ. Does birth spacing affect maternal or child nutritional status? A systematic literature review. Matern Child Nutr. 2007; 3(3): 151-173.

  18. King J. The risk of maternal nutritional depletion and poor outcomes increases in early or closely spaced pregnancies. J Nutr. 2003; 5(2): 1732S-1736S.

  19. Acosta AM. Analysing success in the fight against malnutrition in Peru. Brighton, UK: Institute of Development Studies (IDS); 2011. pp. 2-49. [IDS Working Paper No. 367]

  20. Gutiérrez M. La planificación familiar como herramienta básica para el desarrollo. Rev Peru Med Exp Salud Publica. 2013; 30(3): 465-470.

  21. Ahmed S, Ahmed S, McKaig C, Begum N, Mungia J, Norton M, et al. The effect of integrating family planning with a maternal and newborn health program on postpartum contraceptive use and optimal birth spacing in rural Bangladesh. Stud Fam Plann. 2015; 46(3): 297-312.

  22. White K, Teal SB, Potter JE. Contraception after delivery and short interpregnancy intervals among women in the United States. Obstet Gynecol. 2015; 125(6): 1471-1477.

  23. Desta H, Teklemariam G, Yinager W. Barriers to adherence of optimal birth spacing: a qualitative study among mothers and their husbands in Arba Minch Zuria District, Ethiopia. Am J Health Res. 2014; 2(4): 188-195.




2020     |     www.medigraphic.com