RT Journal Article
SR Electronic
T1 Comparisons of newborn birthweights with maternal factors at Phalombe District Hospital, Malawi: a retrospective record review
JF medRxiv
FD Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory Press
SP 2023.09.05.23295074
DO 10.1101/2023.09.05.23295074
A1 Mfipa, Dumisani
A1 Hajison, Precious L.
A1 Mpachika-Mfipa, Felistas
YR 2023
UL http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2023/09/06/2023.09.05.23295074.abstract
AB Background Birthweight is an important indicator of the newborn’s future health. Maternal factors, including age, HIV status, parity and obstetric complications ([pre]-eclampsia, antepartum hemorrhage [APH] and sepsis), however, have been shown as risk factors of low birthweight (LBW). For data-guided interventions, we compared newborn birthweights with these factors at Phalombe District Hospital, Malawi.Methods Using a retrospective record review study design, we extracted data of 1,308 women and their newborns from maternity registers (October, 2022-March, 2023). Data were skewed. Its distribution in each group had different variabilities/shapes. We used Mann-Whitney U/Kruskal- Wallis H tests to compare mean rank of birthweights.Results Prevalence of LBW was 17.4% and median birthweight was 2,900.00g (interquartile range [IQR] 2,600.00g-3,200.00g). We observed significant difference in newborn birthweights among adolescent girls (≤19 years), young women (20-24 years), older women (25-34 years) and women of advanced maternal age (≥35 years), (mean ranks: 600.32, 650.85, 690.62 and 735.34, respectively, H[3] = 20.30, p<.001, η2 = 0.01). Pairwise comparisons showed significant differences in newborn birthweights of adolescent girls and older women (p = .006), adolescent girls and women of advanced maternal age (p<.001). We observed no significant differences in newborn birthweights between HIV+ and HIV- women (mean ranks: 608.86 and 659.28, respectively, U = 67,748.50, Z = -1.417, p = .157, r = 0.04). We found significant differences in newborn birthweights between primiparous and multiparous women (mean ranks: 600.95 and 697.16, respectively, U = 180,062.00, Z = -4.584, p<.001, r = 0.13), women with and women with no (pre)-eclampsia, APH and sepsis (mean ranks: 340.09 and 662.64, respectively, U = 10,662.00, Z = -4.852, p<.001, r=0.13).Conclusion Significant differences reported notwithstanding, small effect sizes and a high prevalence of LBW were observed. Thus, all pregnant women should be prioritized to improve birthweight outcomes. Those with complications, however, require special care.Competing Interest StatementThe authors have declared no competing interest.Funding StatementThis study did not receive any fundingAuthor DeclarationsI confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.YesThe details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:The research was performed in accordance with the Declaration of Helsinki and written ethical approvals were obtained from the Phalombe District Health Office (DHO) Research Committee and the Malawi National Health Sciences Research Committee (NHRSC) [Approval Number 4131]. This was a retrospective study and both Committees waived the requirement for informed consent.I confirm that all necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived, and that any patient/participant/sample identifiers included were not known to anyone (e.g., hospital staff, patients or participants themselves) outside the research group so cannot be used to identify individuals.YesI understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).Yes I have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines, such as any relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material, if applicable.Yes