Você pesquisou por y - Revista Brasileira de Ginecologia e Obstetrícia
You searched for:"Juraci Almeida Cesar"
We found (2) results for your search.Summary
Rev Bras Ginecol Obstet. 2012;34(7):304-309
DOI 10.1590/S0100-72032012000700003
PURPOSE: To evaluate the impact of body mass index (BMI) at the beginning of pregnancy and weight gain on pregnancy outcome so that this measure can be implemented and valued by prenatal care health services. METHOD: Cross-sectional population-based study of all births in the only two hospitals in Rio Grande city (Brazil), in 2007. Among the 2,557 mothers interviewed, it was possible to calculate BMI in only 1,117. The Stata 11 software was used for data analysis. Logist regression was applied to the outomes involving diabetes mellitus, premature labor and cesarean section. Regarding birth weight, data were adjusted by multinomial logistic regression using as base category the group of 2,500 to 4,000 g. The level of significance was set at p-value <0.05 in a two-tailed test. RESULTS: There was no increased risk of hypertension or diabetes in patients in the different groups of BMI and weight gain. The risk of preterm delivery was evident in the group with a weight gain ≤8 kg (p<0.05). Regarding the route of delivery, it was observed that the higher the BMI in early pregnancy (p=0.001) and the greater the weight gain during pregnancy (p=0.004), the greater the risk of surgical delivery, which reached 11% in the group of obese mothers (p=0.004) and 12% in the group with a weight gain ≥17 kg (p=0.001). The weight of the newborns was influenced by BMI and weight gain, and the higher the BMI in early pregnancy and the gestational weight gain, the greater the risk of macrosomia. CONCLUSION: The monitoring of BMI and weight gain during pregnancy is a low cost and useful procedure for the establishment of nutritional interventions aimed at reducing maternal and fetal risks.
Summary
Rev Bras Ginecol Obstet. 2012;34(7):304-309
DOI 10.1590/S0100-72032012000700003
PURPOSE: To evaluate the impact of body mass index (BMI) at the beginning of pregnancy and weight gain on pregnancy outcome so that this measure can be implemented and valued by prenatal care health services. METHOD: Cross-sectional population-based study of all births in the only two hospitals in Rio Grande city (Brazil), in 2007. Among the 2,557 mothers interviewed, it was possible to calculate BMI in only 1,117. The Stata 11 software was used for data analysis. Logist regression was applied to the outomes involving diabetes mellitus, premature labor and cesarean section. Regarding birth weight, data were adjusted by multinomial logistic regression using as base category the group of 2,500 to 4,000 g. The level of significance was set at p-value <0.05 in a two-tailed test. RESULTS: There was no increased risk of hypertension or diabetes in patients in the different groups of BMI and weight gain. The risk of preterm delivery was evident in the group with a weight gain ≤8 kg (p<0.05). Regarding the route of delivery, it was observed that the higher the BMI in early pregnancy (p=0.001) and the greater the weight gain during pregnancy (p=0.004), the greater the risk of surgical delivery, which reached 11% in the group of obese mothers (p=0.004) and 12% in the group with a weight gain ≥17 kg (p=0.001). The weight of the newborns was influenced by BMI and weight gain, and the higher the BMI in early pregnancy and the gestational weight gain, the greater the risk of macrosomia. CONCLUSION: The monitoring of BMI and weight gain during pregnancy is a low cost and useful procedure for the establishment of nutritional interventions aimed at reducing maternal and fetal risks.
Summary
Rev Bras Ginecol Obstet. 2012;34(11):518-523
DOI 10.1590/S0100-72032012001100007
PURPOSE: To determine the prevalence and risk factors associated with failure of voluntary screening for cervical cancer during the gestational period in Rio Grande, Rio Grande do Sul State, Southern Brazil. METHODS: Previously trained interviewers applied a standardized questionnaire in the maternity to all mothers from this municipality who had delivered from January 1st to December 31st 2010 to obtain information about the demographic characteristics of the pregnant women, family socioeconomic status, and prenatal care received. The χ² test was used to compare proportions and Poisson regression with robust adjustment of variance was used in the multivariate analysis. RESULTS: Among the 2,288 respondents, 33% were not submitted to the Pap smear during pregnancy. Two thirds of these women stated that they were not aware of the need to perform it, 18% were not screened out of fear or shame, and the rest for other reasons. After adjustment, the highest prevalence ratios (PR) for noncompliance with the Pap smear occurred among young women (PR=1.5; 95%CI 1.25 - 1.80), with lower educational level (PR=1.5; 95%CI 1.12 - 2.12), who were living without a partner (PR=1.4; 95%CI 1.24 - 1.62), smokers (PR=1.2; 95%CI 1.07 - 1.39), who did not plan the current pregnancy (PR=1.3; 95%CI 1,21 - 1.61), who had attended less than six medical visits during the prenatal period (PR=1.4; 95%CI 1.32 - 1.69) and among users of oral contraceptives (PR=1.2; 95%CI 1.04 - 1.38). CONCLUSIONS: The higher the risk for uterine cervical cancer, the less likely a pregnant woman is to undergo a Pap smear. This definitely contributed to the increased morbidity and mortality from this disease in this setting.
Summary
Rev Bras Ginecol Obstet. 2012;34(11):518-523
DOI 10.1590/S0100-72032012001100007
PURPOSE: To determine the prevalence and risk factors associated with failure of voluntary screening for cervical cancer during the gestational period in Rio Grande, Rio Grande do Sul State, Southern Brazil. METHODS: Previously trained interviewers applied a standardized questionnaire in the maternity to all mothers from this municipality who had delivered from January 1st to December 31st 2010 to obtain information about the demographic characteristics of the pregnant women, family socioeconomic status, and prenatal care received. The χ² test was used to compare proportions and Poisson regression with robust adjustment of variance was used in the multivariate analysis. RESULTS: Among the 2,288 respondents, 33% were not submitted to the Pap smear during pregnancy. Two thirds of these women stated that they were not aware of the need to perform it, 18% were not screened out of fear or shame, and the rest for other reasons. After adjustment, the highest prevalence ratios (PR) for noncompliance with the Pap smear occurred among young women (PR=1.5; 95%CI 1.25 - 1.80), with lower educational level (PR=1.5; 95%CI 1.12 - 2.12), who were living without a partner (PR=1.4; 95%CI 1.24 - 1.62), smokers (PR=1.2; 95%CI 1.07 - 1.39), who did not plan the current pregnancy (PR=1.3; 95%CI 1,21 - 1.61), who had attended less than six medical visits during the prenatal period (PR=1.4; 95%CI 1.32 - 1.69) and among users of oral contraceptives (PR=1.2; 95%CI 1.04 - 1.38). CONCLUSIONS: The higher the risk for uterine cervical cancer, the less likely a pregnant woman is to undergo a Pap smear. This definitely contributed to the increased morbidity and mortality from this disease in this setting.