Postpartum Contraceptive Use, Pregnancy Intentions in Women With and Without a Delivery of a NAS-Affected Infant in Delaware, 2012-2018.

Delaware journal of public health Pub Date : 2023-06-12 eCollection Date: 2023-06-01 DOI:10.32481/djph.2023.06.025
Khaleel Hussaini, George Yocher
{"title":"Postpartum Contraceptive Use, Pregnancy Intentions in Women With and Without a Delivery of a NAS-Affected Infant in Delaware, 2012-2018.","authors":"Khaleel Hussaini, George Yocher","doi":"10.32481/djph.2023.06.025","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>Assess differences in postpartum contraceptive use and pregnancy intentions in women with a recent live birth who delivered a neonatal abstinence syndrome (NAS) affected infant.</p><p><strong>Study design: </strong>Using linked Delaware Birth Certificate Data, Hospital Discharge Data and PRAMS data for 2012-2018 (n = 6,358 singleton births), we assessed differences among women with and without a delivery of an NAS-affected infant by effective postpartum contraceptive use and pregnancy intentions. We calculated prevalence estimates, crude (cPOR), and prevalence odds ratios adjusted (aPOR) for NAS by maternal characteristics. We used alpha ≤ 0.05 to determine statistical significance.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Prevalence of NAS was 2.2% (95% CI: 1.8 - 2.6). Effective postpartum contraceptive use was 60.4% (95% CI: 51.9-69.0) among women with delivery of an NAS-affected infant compared with a non-NAS delivery 56.4% (95% CI: 55.1-57.8%) and cPOR was 1.2 (95% CI: 0.8-1.7). Prevalence of intended pregnancy was 26.5% (95% CI: 18.9-34.0) among women with delivery of an NAS-affected infant compared with a non-NAS delivery 53.0% (95% CI: 51.7-54.4) and cPOR was 0.3 (95% CI: 0.2-0.5). After adjustment, women who delivered an NAS-affected infant had lower odds (aPOR = 0.5; 95% CI: 0.3-0.8) of indicating that their pregnancy was intended as compared to those who did not deliver an NAS-affected infant.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Our study found no association between delivery of an NAS-affected infant and use of an effective postpartum contraceptive method. However, we found that pregnancy intendedness was lower among women delivering an NAS-affected infant compared with women without an NAS delivery even after accounting for maternal characteristics.</p>","PeriodicalId":72774,"journal":{"name":"Delaware journal of public health","volume":"9 2","pages":"134-140"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-06-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://ftp.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pub/pmc/oa_pdf/84/21/djph-92-025.PMC10445619.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Delaware journal of public health","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.32481/djph.2023.06.025","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2023/6/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objective: Assess differences in postpartum contraceptive use and pregnancy intentions in women with a recent live birth who delivered a neonatal abstinence syndrome (NAS) affected infant.

Study design: Using linked Delaware Birth Certificate Data, Hospital Discharge Data and PRAMS data for 2012-2018 (n = 6,358 singleton births), we assessed differences among women with and without a delivery of an NAS-affected infant by effective postpartum contraceptive use and pregnancy intentions. We calculated prevalence estimates, crude (cPOR), and prevalence odds ratios adjusted (aPOR) for NAS by maternal characteristics. We used alpha ≤ 0.05 to determine statistical significance.

Results: Prevalence of NAS was 2.2% (95% CI: 1.8 - 2.6). Effective postpartum contraceptive use was 60.4% (95% CI: 51.9-69.0) among women with delivery of an NAS-affected infant compared with a non-NAS delivery 56.4% (95% CI: 55.1-57.8%) and cPOR was 1.2 (95% CI: 0.8-1.7). Prevalence of intended pregnancy was 26.5% (95% CI: 18.9-34.0) among women with delivery of an NAS-affected infant compared with a non-NAS delivery 53.0% (95% CI: 51.7-54.4) and cPOR was 0.3 (95% CI: 0.2-0.5). After adjustment, women who delivered an NAS-affected infant had lower odds (aPOR = 0.5; 95% CI: 0.3-0.8) of indicating that their pregnancy was intended as compared to those who did not deliver an NAS-affected infant.

Conclusions: Our study found no association between delivery of an NAS-affected infant and use of an effective postpartum contraceptive method. However, we found that pregnancy intendedness was lower among women delivering an NAS-affected infant compared with women without an NAS delivery even after accounting for maternal characteristics.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
2012-2018 年特拉华州分娩过和未分娩过受 NAS 影响婴儿的妇女的产后避孕药具使用情况、怀孕意向。
目标:评估最近分娩过新生儿禁欲综合症(NAS)婴儿的活产妇女产后避孕药具使用情况和怀孕意愿的差异:评估最近分娩过新生儿禁欲综合征(NAS)患儿的活产妇女在产后避孕药具使用和怀孕意愿方面的差异:利用 2012-2018 年特拉华州出生证明数据、医院出院数据和 PRAMS 数据(n = 6358 例单胎新生儿),我们评估了分娩过受 NAS 影响婴儿的女性与未分娩过受 NAS 影响婴儿的女性在有效产后避孕药具使用和怀孕意愿方面的差异。我们按产妇特征计算了NAS的流行率估计值、粗略值(cPOR)和调整后的流行率几率比(aPOR)。我们使用α≤0.05来确定统计显著性:NAS发生率为2.2%(95% CI:1.8 - 2.6)。分娩受 NAS 影响婴儿的妇女产后有效避孕率为 60.4%(95% CI:51.9-69.0),而未分娩受 NAS 影响婴儿的妇女产后有效避孕率为 56.4%(95% CI:55.1-57.8%),cPOR 为 1.2(95% CI:0.8-1.7)。分娩过受 NAS 影响婴儿的妇女中,计划怀孕率为 26.5%(95% CI:18.9-34.0),而未分娩过受 NAS 影响婴儿的妇女中,计划怀孕率为 53.0%(95% CI:51.7-54.4),cPOR 为 0.3(95% CI:0.2-0.5)。经调整后,与未分娩受 NAS 影响婴儿的妇女相比,分娩受 NAS 影响婴儿的妇女表示其怀孕是有意的几率较低(aPOR = 0.5;95% CI:0.3-0.8):我们的研究发现,分娩受 NAS 影响的婴儿与使用有效的产后避孕方法之间没有关联。然而,我们发现,与未分娩受 NAS 影响婴儿的妇女相比,分娩受 NAS 影响婴儿的妇女的妊娠意愿较低,即使考虑了母亲的特征也是如此。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
0.50
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Investing in Delaware's Early Care and Education to Improve Public Health. Delaware Ranks 45th Nationally in Education Outcomes: Measuring Academic Success and Improving Educational Outcomes for Delaware's Youth. Delaware's Progress and Potential in Early Childhood. Early Brain Development and Public Health. Early Education is the Civil Rights and Public Health Issue of the Century.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1