Endanghed lives: a reflexion about the relation between gestations number and maternal mortality

Authors

  • Vânia Muniz Néquer Soares Secretaria de Estado
  • Néia Schor Universidade de São Paulo; Faculdade de saúde; Departamento de Saúde Materno-infantil
  • Carlos Mendes Tavares Instituto Nacional de Estatística

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.7322/jhgd.19888

Keywords:

Pregnancy, multiparity, maternal mortality, reproductive risk

Abstract

This study had as objective to identify the risk and the factors associated to the multigesta's maternal mortality (gesta >; 5). It describes the tendency of the Total Fertility Rate (TFT) and of the Maternal Mortality Ratio (RMM) between 1998 to 2004 in Paraná. It presents an 822 maternal deaths analysis in this period, the calculation of the Specific Maternal Mortality Ratio, the Relative Risk, the frequency and the Odds Ratio for some variables, according to number of gestations. Analyzes also the causes and the prevent way the maternal deaths. The results aimed low TFT (1.8 children by woman) and to RMM elevated (69,7/100.000 been born alive) in Paraná in 2004. A quarter of the 822 maternal deaths (206) was of multigestas (gesta >; 5), the maternal death relative risk was six times higher than for the women with to two gestations, and the profiles sociodemographic and the reproductive one were more unfavorable for that group of women. Incomplete schooling, equal age or above 30 years and less than four prenatal medical consultations presented association with the most greatest number of gestations. The deaths proportion by indirect obstetric causes, hemorrhages and abortion was bigger between the multigestas and around 90% of the deaths of this group was considered avoidable. It concluded that monitoring of the multigestas with advanced age and in social disadvantage, as well as effective actions of family planning, and obstetric service qualified for high risk gestation are measures that can contribute for reduction of the maternal mortality in Paraná.

References

Say L, Shah I. Mortalidade materna e aborto não-seguro: evitáveis mas persistentes. Boletim Médico IPPF.Vol. 42-n.2-jun 2008.

Toohey JS, Keegan KA, Francis J, TaskS, Veciana M, et al. The dangerous multipara: fact or fiction? Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1995 Feb p. 683-5.

Bai J, Wong FWS, Bauman A, Mohsin M. Parity and pregnancy outcomes. Am J Gynecol. 2002 Feb; 186(2):274-8.

Simonsen SME, Lyon JL, Alder SC, Varner MW. Effect of multiparity onintrapartum and newborn complications in the young women. Obstetrics Ginecol. 2005;106:454-60.

Aliyu MH et al. High parity adverse birth outcomes: exploring the maze. Birth. 2005 Mar;32(1):45-59.

Zimicki S. The relationship between fertility and maternal mortality. In: Parmell AM (org.). Contraceptive use and controlled fertility. Washington, D.C.: National Academy Press; 1989.

Brasil. Ministério da Saúde. Pesquisa Nacional de Demografia e Saúde da Criança e da Mulher. PNDS2006.Relatório.Brasília/DF;2008.

Brasil. Saúde no Brasil 2004 – Uma análise da situação de saúde. Brasília: Ministério da Saúde; 2004.

Volochko A. A mensuração da mortalidade materna no Brasil. In: Berquó E (org.). Sexo e Vida –Panorama da Saúde Reprodutiva. Campinas: Editora da UNICAMP; 2003.

Organización Pan-americana de la Salud (OPS), Organización Mundial de la Salud (OMS). Estratégia regional para a redução da mortalidade e morbidade materna. In: 26ª Conferência Sanitária Pan-americana, 54ª Sessão do Comitê Regional. Washington; 2003.

Soares VMN, Martins, AL. Trajetória e experiência dos Comitês de Prevenção da Mortalidade Materna do Paraná. Rev Bras Mater Infant, Recife. 2006 Oct/Dec;6(4):453-60.

RIPSA – Rede Interagencial de Informações para a Saúde. Indicadores básicos para a saúde no Brasil: conceitos e aplicações. Ministério da Saúde. OPAS. Brasília; 2008.

Horta CJG, Fonseca MC. Evolução recente da fecundidade em Minas Gerais. In: IX Seminário sobre a Economia Mineira. Anais do IX Seminário sobre a Economia Mineira, Belo Horizonte, UFMG/CEDEPLAR; 29de agosto a 1º de setembro de 2000.

Berquó E, Cavenaghi S. Mapeamento sócio-econômico e demográfico dos regimes de fecundidade no Brasil e sua variação entre 1991 e 2000. In: 14º Encontro Nacional de Estudos Populacionais, 2004. (Acesso em 22maio de 2007). Disponível em: http://www.abep.nepo.unicamp.br.

Lang CT,e King JC. Maternal mortalityin the United States. Best Pract Res Clin Obstet Gynaecol. 22(3):517-31.

Ramos S et al. A comprehensive assessment of maternal deaths in Argentina: translating multicenter collaborate research into action. Bulletin of World Health Organization. 2007; 65(7).

Costa AAR et al Mortalidade materna no Recife. Rev Bras Ginecol Obstet. 2002;Vol 24(2).

Trevisan MR, Lorenzi DRS, Araújo NM, Esber K. Perfil da assistência pré-natal entre usuárias do Sistema Único de Saúde em Caxias do Sul. RBGO. 2002;24(5).

Villar J, Valladares E, Wojdyla D. Caesarean delivery rates and pregnancy outcomes: the 2005 WHO global survey on maternal and perinatal health in Latin America. Lancet. 2006;367:1819-29.

Calderon IMP, Cecatti JG, Vega CEP. Intervenções benéficas no pré-natal para prevenção da mortalidade materna. Rev Bras Ginecol Obstet 2006; 28(5):310-5.

Bonan C. e Galli, B. Transformando acultura da inevitabilidade: a prevenção da mortalidade materna como questão de justiça social. I Fórum Fluminense Maternidade Segura e Cidadania. 2003http://www.ipas.org.br/arquivos/opiniao.doc.

Gomes FA et al. Mortalidade materna na perspectiva do familiar. Rev Esc Enferm USP. 2006; 40(1):50-6.

Downloads

Published

2008-12-01

Issue

Vol. 18 No. 3 (2008)

Section

Original Research

License

CODE OF CONDUCT FOR JOURNAL  PUBLISHERS

 

Publishers who are Committee on Publication Ethics members and who support COPE membership for journal editors should:

 

Publishers should:

 

  • Define the relationship between publisher, editor and other parties in a contract
  • Respect privacy (for example, for research participants, for authors, for peer reviewers)
  • Protect intellectual property and copyright
  • Foster editorial independence

 

Publishers should work with journal editors to:

 

  • Set journal policies appropriately and aim to meet those policies, particularly with respect to:

–         Editorial  independence

–         Research ethics, including confidentiality, consent, and the special requirements for human and animal research

–         Authorship

–         Transparency and integrity (for example, conflicts of interest, research funding, reporting standards

–         Peer review and the role of the editorial team beyond that of the journal editor

–         Appeals and complaints

  • Communicate journal policies (for example, to authors, readers, peer reviewers)
  • Review journal policies periodically, particularly with respect to new recommendations from the COPE
  • Code of Conduct for Editors and the COPE Best Practice Guidelines
  • Maintain the integrity of the academic record
  • Assist the parties (for example, institutions, grant funders, governing bodies) responsible for the investigation of suspected research and publication misconduct and, where possible, facilitate in the resolution of these cases
  • Publish corrections, clarifications, and retractions
  • Publish content on a timely basis