Intencionalidad del embarazo y cuidados prenatales en Uruguay

Nicolás Brunet; Wanda Cabella; Alejandra Marroig; Mathías Nathan; Ignacio Pardo; Guillermo Zoppolo

doi:10.29193/RMU.36.4.4

Authors

Nicolás Brunet Universidad de la República, Facultad de Psicología, Instituto de Psicología de la Salud, Profesor Adjunto.
Wanda Cabella Universidad de la República, Facultad de Ciencias Sociales, Programa de Población, Profesora Agregada
Alejandra Marroig Universidad de la República, Facultad de Ciencias Económicas y de Administración, Instituto de Economía-Instituto de Estadística, Profesora Adjunta
Mathías Nathan Universidad de la República, Facultad de Ciencias Sociales, Programa de Población, Asistente de investigación
Ignacio Pardo Universidad de la República, Facultad de Ciencias Sociales, Programa de Población, Profesor Adjunto
Guillermo Zoppolo Universidad de la República, Facultad de Ciencias Económicas y de Administración, Instituto de Estadística, Profesor Adjunto

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.29193/RMU.36.4.4

Keywords:

UNWANTED PREGNANCY, PRENATAL CARE, PROPENSITY SCORE MATCHING

Abstract

Introduction: in Uruguay, the number of unintended pregnancies has been around 40% for several years. This is rather a high percentage if compared to other countries who also have low fertility rates and evidences difficulties in access to modern contraceptive methods or using them effectively. Likewise, several studies evidence unintended pregnancies are related to insufficient antenatal care services and worse outcome in the new-borns when compared to births resulting from intentional pregnancies.
Objective: to study the relationship between pregnancy intentionality and antenatal care services in Uruguay, based on an analysis of its impact on the early engagement of pregnancies and non-healthy practices during pregnancy (smoking and alcohol consumption).
Method: unintended and untimely births (not sought at that time) were included in the study as two treatment groups, and they are compared to the group of intentional births.
The net effect of pregnancy intention on health practices during pregnancy was examined using the de Propensity Score Matching (PSM) techniques. We used data delivered by the Nutrition, Child Development and Health Survey, a panel study that has been collecting information from mothers of children between 0 and 3 years old who live in urban localities of Uruguay (with over 5,000 inhabitants) since 2013.
Results: Prior to the PSM matching, the differences in early engagement and smoking were significant between pregnancy intention groups, whereas alcohol consumption was not associated to significant differences between pregnancy intention groups.

References

(1) Cabella W, Nathan M, Pardo I. La caída de la fecundidad en Uruguay entre 2015 y 2018. En: Fondo de Población de las Naciones Unidas; Ministerio de Salud Pública; Universidad de la República. Descenso acelerado de la fecundidad en Uruguay entre 2015 y 2018. Tres estudios para su análisis. Montevideo: UNFPA, MSP, UdelaR, 2019:33-69.
(2) Kost K, Lindberg L. Pregnancy intentions, maternal behaviors, and infant health: investigating relationships with new measures and propensity score analysis. Demography 2015; 52(1):83-111.
(3) Dibaba Y, Fantahun M, Hindin M. The effects of pregnancy intention on the use of antenatal care services: systematic review and meta-analysis. Reprod Health 2013; 10:50.
(4) Gipson JD, Koenig MA, Hindin MJ. The effects of unintended pregnancy on infant, child, and parental health: a review of the literature. Stud Fam Plann 2008; 39(1):18-38.
(5) Mohllajee AP, Curtis KM, Morrow B, Marchbanks PA. Pregnancy intention and its relationship to birth and maternal outcomes. Obstet Gynecol 2007; 109(3):678-86.
(6) Kost K, Landry DJ, Darroch JE. Predicting maternal behaviors during pregnancy: does intention status matter? Fam Plann Perspect 1998; 30(2):79-88.
(7) Harkavy O, Jaffe FS, Wishik SM. Family planning and public policy: who is misleading whom? Science 1969; 165(3891):367-73.
(8) Blake J. Population policy for Americans: is the government being misled? Science 1969; 164:522-9.
(9) Koenig MA, Acharya R, Singh S, Roy TK. Do current measurement approaches underestimate levels of unwanted childbearing? Evidence from rural India. Popul Studies (Camb) 2006; 60(3):243-56.
(10) Santelli JS, Lindberg LD, Orr MG, Finer LB, Speizer I. Toward a multidimensional measure of pregnancy intentions: evidence from the United States. Stud Fam Plann 2009; 40(2):87-100.
(11) Bongaarts J. The measurement of wanted fertility. Popul Develop Rev 1990; 16(3):487-506.
(12) Casterline JB, El-Zeini LO. The estimation of unwanted fertility. Demography 2007; 44(4):729-45.
(13) Pearson E, Biswas K, Chowdhury R, Sultana S, Shahidullah M, Moreau C. Multidimensional measures of fertility intentions regarding terminated pregnancy and association with subsequent reproductive health outcomes in Bangladesh. En: Population Association of America. Annual Meeting, San Diego-EEUU, 2015.
(14) de la Rochebrochard E, Joshi H. Children born after unplanned pregnancies and cognitive development at 3 years: social differentials in the United Kingdom millennium cohort. Am J Epidemiol 2013; 178(6):910-20.
(15) Joyce TJ, Kaestner R, Korenman S. The effect of pregnancy intention on child development. Demography 2000; 37(1):83-94.
(16) Uruguay. Instituto Nacional de Estadística. Definiciones indicadores demográficos. Disponible en: http://www.ine. gub. uy/indicadores-demograficos1 [Consulta: 16 febrero 2020].
(17) Cabella W, De Rosa M, Failache P, Fitermann P, Katzkowicz N, Medina M, et al. Salud, nutrición y desarrollo en la primera infancia en Uruguay. Primeros resultados de la ENDIS. Montevideo: UCC, Mides, 2015.
(18) Stuart EA. Matching methods for causal inference: a review and a look forward. Stat Sci 2010; 25(1):1-21.
(19) Ho D, Imai K, King G, Stuart E. MatchIt: nonparametric preprocessing for parametric causal inference. J Stat Softw 2011; 42(8):1-28.
(20) Rosenbaum PR, Rubin DB. The central role of the propensity score in observational studies for causal effects. Biometrika 1983; 70:41-55.
(21) Harris J, Balsa A, Triunfo P. Tobacco control campaign in Uruguay: impact on smoking cessation during pregnancy and birth weight. J Health Econ 2015; 42:186-96.
(22) Hansen BB. Full matching in an observational study of coaching for the SAT. J Am Stat Assoc 2004; 99(467):609-18.
(23) Imbens GW. The role of the propensity score in estimating dose-response functions. Biometrika 2000; 87(3):706-10.
(24) Amarante V, Cabella W. La brecha entre la fecundidad deseada y la observada en Montevideo y su Área Metropolitana. Notas poblac 2015; (100):11-34.
(25) Peri A, Pardo I. Nueva evidencia sobre la hipótesis de la doble insatisfacción en Uruguay: ¿cuán lejos estamos de que toda la fecundidad sea deseada? (Serie Divulgación). Montevideo: UNFPA, 2008.