Interpregnancy interval and risk of stillbirth: a population-based case control study

Priya M. Gupta*, Alexa A. Freedman, Michael R. Kramer, Robert L. Goldenberg, Marian Willinger, Barbara J. Stoll, Robert M. Silver, Donald J. Dudley, Corette B. Parker, Carol J.R. Hogue

*Corresponding author for this work

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

14 Scopus citations

Abstract

Purpose: We examined the association between interpregnancy intervals (IPIs) and stillbirth (defined as fetal death ≥20 weeks), as both short and long IPIs have been associated with adverse perinatal outcomes. Prior pregnancy loss is also a known risk factor for stillbirth, and women who suffer a prior loss often have shorter IPIs. For these reasons, we also sought to quantify the proportion of the association between prior pregnancy loss and subsequent stillbirth risk that may be attributed to a short IPI. Methods: We used data from the Stillbirth Collaborative Research Network, a multisite case-control study conducted in 2006–2008, restricted to singleton pregnancies among multiparous or multigravid women (985 controls and 291 cases). We accounted for complex sample design and nonparticipation with weighted multivariable logistic regression. Results: In the adjusted models, IPIs <6 months, as compared with a reference of 18–23 months, were associated with increased odds of stillbirth (aOR 1.6, 95% CI: 0.8, 3.4). Long IPIs (60–100 months) were also associated with an increased odds of stillbirth (aOR 2.4, 95% CI: 1.2, 4.5). After control for covariates, about one-fifth (21.2%) of the association of prior pregnancy loss (stillbirth, ectopic pregnancy, molar pregnancy, or spontaneous abortion) and stillbirth may be attributable to a short IPI. Conclusions: Our results suggest that women who experience a prior pregnancy loss may benefit from additional counseling on adequate birth spacing to reduce subsequent stillbirth risk.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)35-41
Number of pages7
JournalAnnals of Epidemiology
Volume35
DOIs
StatePublished - Jul 2019

Funding

The authors' responsibilities were as follows: P.M.G., A.A., and C.J.H. had full access to all data in this study and were responsible for the integrity of the data and accuracy of the data analysis. A.A., M.R.K., and C.J.H. were responsible for critical revision of the manuscript; P.M.G. and A.A. for drafting the manuscript and statistical analyses. The Stillbirth Collaborative Research Network was supported by grant funding from the Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development (NICHD) (Grants U10-HD045953 (Brown University) , U10-HD045925 (Emory University) , U10-HD045952 (University of Texas Medical Branch at Galveston) , U10- HD045955 (University of Texas Health Sciences Center at San Antonio) , UK10-HD045944 (University of Utah Health Sciences Center) , U10-HD045954 (RTI International)). None of the authors had a financial or personal interest in any company or organization connected with the research represented in the article.

Keywords

  • Birth spacing
  • Inter-pregnancy interval
  • Maternal and child health
  • Stillbirth

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Epidemiology

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'Interpregnancy interval and risk of stillbirth: a population-based case control study'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this