Characteristics of the social portrait of pregnant women associated with the degree of prenatal risk of complicated pregnancy
Year: 2025, volume 21 Issue: №1 Pages: 86-89
Heading: Public health, organization and sociology of health care Article type: Original article
Authors: Rebrova А.А., Krom I.L., Erugina M.V., Dolgova E.M., Andriyanova E.A., Fedonnikov A.S.
Organization: Saratov State Medical University
Heading: Public health, organization and sociology of health care Article type: Original article
Authors: Rebrova А.А., Krom I.L., Erugina M.V., Dolgova E.M., Andriyanova E.A., Fedonnikov A.S.
Organization: Saratov State Medical University
Summary:
Objective: to verify the characteristics of the social portrait of pregnant women with complicated pregnancies associated with prenatal risk. Material and methods. The study included 385 pregnant women. The average age is 29.0±0.5 years. Questionnaire and differentiation of respondents according to the degree of prenatal risk were carried out using the scale of prenatal risk factors V. E. Radzinsky et al., According to which respondents are divided into low, medium and high prenatal risk groups. Spearman's correlation coefficient was used for correlation analysis of the characteristics of the social portrait of respondents and the degree of prenatal risk of complicated pregnancy. Results. The characteristics of the social portrait of pregnant women associated with prenatal risk include: age and education of respondents, age and education of the husband of respondents, family composition, number of children, number of minor children, number of previous pregnancies, smoking and alcohol consumption. The most correlated with the degree of prenatal risk: the number of previous pregnancies +0.45 (p<0.001), the age of the husband +0.39 (p<0.001), the age of the woman +0.34 (p<0.001). Conclusion. The study verified the characteristics of the social portrait of pregnant women associated with the prenatal risk of complicated pregnancy. The relationship between the social characteristics of respondents and the degree of prenatal risk of complicated pregnancy was established.
Bibliography:
1. Aleksandrova GA, Golubev NA, Tyurina EM, et al. Main indicators of maternal and child health, activities of maternal and child health care and obstetrics in the Russian Federation. Moscow: Ministry of Health of the Russian Federation, Department of monitoring, analysis and strategic development of health care FGBU 'Central Research Institute of Health Care Organisation and Informatisation' of the Ministry of Health of the Russian Federation, 2020; 169.
2. Sokolovskaya ТА, Stupak VS, Chizhova GV. Current problems of incidence of pregnant women in the Far East Federal District: Basic background and directions for forming prevention programs. Modern Problems of Public Health and Medical Statistics. 2021; (3):475-91. DOI:10. 24412/2312-2935-2021-3-475-491
3. Erickson AC, Arbour L. The shared pathoetiological effects of particulate air pollution and the social environment on fetal-placental development. J Environ Public Health. 2014;2014:901017. DOI:10.1155/2014/901017
4. Poulsen G, Andersen AN, Jaddoe WW, at al. Does smoking during pregnancy mediate educational disparities in pre-term delivery? Findings from three large birth cohorts. Paediatr Perinat Epidemiol. 2019;33 (2): 164-71. DOI:10.1111/ppe.12544
5. Meng G, Thompson ME, Hall GB. Pathways of neighbourhood-level socio-economic determinants of adverse birth outcomes. Int J Health Geogr. 2013;12:32. DOI:10.1186/1476-072X-12-32
6. Brunner EJ. Stress and the biology of inequality. BMJ. 1997;314 (7092):1472-6. DOI:10.1136/bmj.314.7092.1472
7. Wadhwa PD, Culhane JF, Rauh V, et al. Stress, infection and preterm birth: A biobehavioural perspective. Paediatr Perinat Epidemiol. 2001;15 (Suppl. 2):17-29. DOI:10.1046/j. 1365-3016.2001.00005.x
8. Vygotsky LS. Psychology. Moscow: April press, EXMO-press, 2000; 1007 p.
9. Nemirovskaya YuV. Social factors of pregnancy. PhD diss. Volgograd, 2007; 147 p.
10. Radzinsky VE, Knyazev SA, Kostin IN. Obstetric Risk. Maximum information — minimum danger for mother and baby. Moscow, 2009; 288 p.
11. Cherkasov SN, Bezmelnitsyna LYu, Meshkov DO, et al. Evaluation of the influence of the risk factors on the current and outputs of pregnancy. Bulletin of the N.A. Semashko National Research Institute of Public Health. 2019; (3-4):105-12. DOI:10.25742/NRIPH. 2019.03.012
12. Yepifanava АК, Surmach MYu. Medical and social portrait of pregnant women and dynamics of behavioral factors of their health for the period from 2007 to 2017 years. Modern Problems of Hygiene, Radiation and Environmental Medicine. 2019; (9):143-53.
13. Vakhrusheva YuN. Scientific substantiation of optimization of medical care for women with early spontaneous pregnancy loss. PhD diss. Moscow, 2022; 209 p.
14. Morenoff JDD. Neighborhood mechanisms and the spatial dynamics of birth weight. Am J Sociol. 2003;108 (5):976-1017. DOI:10.1086/374405
15. Barfield WD. Social disadvantage and its effect on maternal and newborn health. Semin Perinatol. 2021 ;45 (4):151407. DOI:10.1016/j.semperi. 2021.151407
16. Agarkova LA, Bukharina lYu, Belova NG, etal. Risk factors and mathematical model of complicated course of pregnancy based on integrative analysis. Bulletin of Siberian Medicine. 2019;18 (2):6-15. DOI:10.20538/1682-0363-2019-2-6-15
| Attachment | Size |
|---|---|
| 2025_01_086-089.pdf | 282.7 KB |
Русский
English