Skip to main content
Key Specialties
Cardiology Diabetology Endocrinology Gastroenterology Geriatrics and Gerontology Gynecology and Obstetrics Hematology Infectious Disease Internal Medicine Nephrology Neurology Oncology Pediatrics Respiratory Medicine Rheumatology Surgery
Congress Coverage
2024 ACC Congress 2023 ESMO Congress 2023 EASD Congress 2023 ERS Congress 2023 ESC Congress
Clinical Collections
Advances in Alzheimer’s

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on medication adherence

LIVE: Thursday 27th June 2024, 18:00-19:30 (CEST)
Join our expert panel to discover why you need to understand the drivers of non-adherence in your patients, and how you can optimize medication adherence in your clinics to drastically improve patient outcomes.
ADVANCED SEARCH
Log in
Top
BMC Pregnancy and Childbirth
Published in: BMC Pregnancy and Childbirth 1/2024

Open Access 01-12-2024 | Premature Birth | Research

Interpregnancy interval and adverse birth outcomes: a population-based cohort study of twins

Authors: Gursimran Dhamrait, Melissa O’Donnell, Hayley Christian, Catherine L. Taylor, Gavin Pereira

Published in: BMC Pregnancy and Childbirth | Issue 1/2024

Login to get access

Abstract

Background

To investigate associations between interpregnancy intervals (IPIs) and adverse birth outcomes in twin pregnancies.

Methods

This retrospective cohort study of 9,867 twin pregnancies in Western Australia from 1980–2015. Relative Risks (RRs) were estimated for the interval prior to the pregnancy (IPI) as the exposure and after the pregnancy as a negative control exposure for preterm birth (< 37 weeks), early preterm birth (< 34 weeks), small for gestational age (SGA: < 10th percentile of birth weight by sex and gestational age) and low birth weight (LBW: birthweight < 2,500 g).

Results

Relative to IPIs of 18–23 months, IPIs of < 6 months were associated with a higher risk of early preterm birth (aRR 1.41, 95% CI 1.08–1.83) and LBW for at least one twin (aRR 1.16, 95% CI 1.06–1.28). IPIs of 6–11 months were associated with a higher risk of SGA (aRR 1.24, 95% CI 1.01–1.54) and LBW for at least one twin (aRR 1.09, 95% CI 1.01–1.19). IPIs of 60–119 months and ≥ 120 months were associated with an increased risk of preterm birth (RR 1.12, 95% CI 1.03–1.22; and (aRR 1.25, 95% CI 1.10–1.41, respectively), and LBW for at least one twin (aRR 1.17, 95% CI 1.08–1.28; and aRR 1.20, 95% CI 1.05–1.36, respectively). IPIs of ≥ 120 months were also associated with an increased risk of early preterm birth (aRR 1.42, 95% CI 1.01–2.00). After negative control analysis, IPIs ≥ 120 months remained associated with early preterm birth and LBW.

Conclusion

Evidence for adverse associations with twin birth outcomes was strongest for long IPIs.
Appendix
Available only for authorised users
Literature
1.
Twins Research Australia (TRA). Multiple perspectives: what support do multiple birth families need to live happy and healthy lives. TRA, The University of Melbourne. 2019.
2.
Geisler ME, O’Mahony A, Meaney S, Waterstone JJ, O’Donoghue K. Obstetric and perinatal outcomes of twin pregnancies conceived following IVF/ICSI treatment compared with spontaneously conceived twin pregnancies. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol. 2014;181:78–83.CrossRefPubMed
3.
Alexander GR, Slay Wingate M, Salihu H, Kirby RS. Fetal and neonatal mortality risks of multiple births. Obstet Gynecol Clin North Am. 2005;32(1):1–16, vii.CrossRefPubMed
4.
Sherer DM. Adverse perinatal outcome of twin pregnancies according to chorionicity: review of the literature. Am J Perinatol. 2001;18(1):23–37.CrossRefPubMed
5.
Blondel B, Kogan MD, Alexander GR, Dattani N, Kramer MS, Macfarlane A, et al. The impact of the increasing number of multiple births on the rates of preterm birth and low birthweight: an international study. Am J Public Health. 2002;92(8):1323–30.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
6.
Fuchs F, Senat MV. Multiple gestations and preterm birth. Semin Fetal Neonatal Med. 2016;21(2):113–20.CrossRefPubMed
7.
Riese M. Risk and early development: Findings from the Louisville Twin Study. In: Blickstein I, Keith LG, editors. Multiple Pregnancy: Epidemiology, Gestation, and Perinatal Outcome. 2nd ed. CRC Press. 2005.
8.
Ball S, Pereira G, Jacoby P, de Klerk N, Stanley F. Re-evaluation of link between interpregnancy interval and adverse birth outcomes: retrospective cohort study matching two intervals per mother. BMJ. 2014;349:g4333.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
9.
World Health Organization. Report of a technical consultation on birth spacing. Geneva: Switzerland; 2005.
10.
Ahrens KA, Nelson H, Stidd RL, Moskosky S, Hutcheon JA. Short interpregnancy intervals and adverse perinatal outcomes in high-resource settings: an updated systematic review. Paediatr Perinat Epidemiol. 2019;33(1):O25–47.CrossRefPubMed
11.
Yee LM, Caughey AB, Grobman WA, Cheng YW. 148: Relationship between interpregnancy interval and perinatal outcome among U.S. women with twin gestations. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2018;218(1, Supplement):S103.CrossRef
12.
Bryant A, Madden E. 694: Short interpregnancy intervals: what is the effect of multiple gestations? Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2013;208(1):S292.CrossRef
13.
Jelliffe D, Maddocks I. Notes on Ecologic Malnutrition in the New Guinea Highlands. Clin Pediatr (Phila). 1964;3:432–8.CrossRefPubMed
14.
Conde-Agudelo A, Rosas-Bermudez A, Castano F, Norton M. Effects of birth spacing on maternal, perinatal, infant, and child health: a systematic review of causal mechanisms. Stud Fam Plann. 2012;43(2):93–114.CrossRefPubMed
15.
Habimana-Kabano I, Broekhuis A, Hooimeijer P. The effects of interpregnancy intervals and previous pregnancy outcome on fetal loss in Rwanda. Int J Reprod Med. 2015;2015:10.CrossRef
16.
Gebremedhin AT, Tessema GA, Regan AK, Pereira G. Association between interpregnancy interval and hypertensive disorders of pregnancy: effect modification by maternal age. Paediatr Perinat Epidemiol. 2021;35(4):415–24.CrossRefPubMed
17.
Miller J. Birth intervals and perinatal health: an investigation of three hypotheses. Fam Plann Perspect. 1991;23(2):62–70.CrossRefPubMed
18.
Kangatharan C, Labram S, Bhattacharya S. Interpregnancy interval following miscarriage and adverse pregnancy outcomes: systematic review and meta-analysis. Hum Reprod Update. 2017;23(2):221–31.PubMed
19.
Class QA, Rickert ME, Oberg AS, Sujan AC, Almqvist C, Larsson H, et al. Within-family analysis of interpregnancy interval and adverse birth outcomes. Obstet Gynecol. 2017;130(6):1304–11.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
20.
Holman CDAJ, Bass JA, Rosman DL, Smith MB, Semmens JB, Glasson EJ, et al. A decade of data linkage in Western Australia: strategic design, applications and benefits of the WA data linkage system. Aust Health Rev. 2008;32(4):766–77.CrossRefPubMed
21.
Zhu B. Effect of interpregnancy interval on birth outcomes: findings from three recent US studies. Int J Gynaecol Obstet. 2005;89(Suppl 1):S25-33.PubMed
22.
Grisaru-Granovsky S, Gordon E, Haklai Z, Samueloff A, Schimmel M. Effect of interpregnancy interval on adverse perinatal outcomes-a national study. Contraception. 2009;80(6):512–8.CrossRefPubMed
23.
Conde-Agudelo A, Rosas-Bermudez A, Norton M. Birth spacing and risk of autism and other neurodevelopmental disabilities: a systematic review. Pediatrics. 2016;137(5):e20153482.CrossRefPubMed
24.
Shachar B, Lyell D. Interpregnancy interval and obstetrical complications. Obstet Gynecol Surv. 2012;67(9):584–96.CrossRefPubMed
25.
Chen X, Wen S, Fleming N, Demissie K, Rhoads G, Walker M. Teenage pregnancy and adverse birth outcomes: a large population based retrospective cohort study. Int J Epidemiol. 2007;36(2):368–73.CrossRefPubMed
26.
Australian Bureau of Statistics and and Statistics New Zealand. ANZSCO - Australian and New Zealand Standard Classification of Occupations, First Edition, Revision 1. Canberra: Australian Bureau of Statistics; 2009.
27.
McMillan J, Beavis A, Jones F. The AUSEI06: a new socioeconomic index for Australia. J Sociol. 2009;45(2):123–49.CrossRef
28.
29.
Royston P, White IR. Multiple imputation by chained equations (MICE): implementation in Stata. J Stat Softw. 2011;45(4):1–20.CrossRef
30.
Chen W, Qian L, Shi J, Franklin M. Comparing performance between log-binomial and robust Poisson regression models for estimating risk ratios under model misspecification. BMC Med Res Methodol. 2018;18(1):63.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
31.
Zou G. A modified poisson regression approach to prospective studies with binary data. Am J Epidemiol. 2004;159(7):702–6.CrossRefPubMed
32.
SAS Institute. SAS Cary, NC: SAS Institute. Inc; 2013.
33.
Macaldowie A, W YA, Chambers GM, Sullivan EA. Assisted reproductive technology in Australia and New Zealand 2010. Sydney: National Perinatal Epidemiology and Statistics Unit, The University of New South Wales; 2012.
34.
Copen CE, Thoma ME, Kirmeyer S. Interpregnancy intervals in the United States: data from the birth certificate and the national survey of family growth. Natl Vital Stat Rep. 2015;64(4):1–11.PubMed
35.
Ngo AD, Roberts CL, Figtree G. Association between interpregnancy interval and future risk of maternal cardiovascular disease—a population-based record linkage study. BJOG. 2016;123(8):1311–8.CrossRefPubMed
36.
Tessema GA, Marinovich ML, Håberg SE, Gissler M, Mayo JA, Nassar N, et al. Interpregnancy intervals and adverse birth outcomes in high-income countries: an international cohort study. PLoS ONE. 2021;16(7):e0255000.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
37.
Kozuki N, Walker N. Exploring the association between short/long preceding birth intervals and child mortality: using reference birth interval children of the same mother as comparison. BMC Public Health. 2013;13(3):S6.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
38.
Bower C, Hansen M. Assisted reproductive technologies and birth outcomes: overview of recent systematic reviews. Reprod Fertil Dev. 2005;17(3):329–33.CrossRefPubMed
39.
Ahrens KA, Hutcheon JA, Ananth CV, Basso O, Briss PA, Ferré CD, et al. Report of the Office of Population Affairs’ expert work group meeting on short birth spacing and adverse pregnancy outcomes: Methodological quality of existing studies and future directions for research. Paediatr Perinat Epidemiol. 2019;33(1):O5–14.CrossRefPubMed
40.
The National Health and Medical Research Council., The Australian Research Council & Universities Australia. National Statement on Ethical Conduct in Human Research 2007 (Updated 2018). 2018.
Metadata
Title
Interpregnancy interval and adverse birth outcomes: a population-based cohort study of twins
Authors
Gursimran Dhamrait
Melissa O’Donnell
Hayley Christian
Catherine L. Taylor
Gavin Pereira
Publication date
01-12-2024
Publisher
BioMed Central
Keyword
Premature Birth
Published in
BMC Pregnancy and Childbirth / Issue 1/2024
Electronic ISSN: 1471-2393
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1186/s12884-023-06119-x

Other articles of this Issue 1/2024

BMC Pregnancy and Childbirth 1/2024 Go to the issue

Research

Effect of implementation of the WHO intrapartum care model on maternal and neonatal outcomes: a randomized control trial

Research

Trade-off between double cleavage-stage embryos transfer and single blastocyst-stage embryo transfer in patients with few good quality embryos in antagonist cycles: a retrospective study using a propensity score matching analysis

Research

Association of maternal serum uric acid levels with LBW/SGA: a large retrospective cohort study

Research

Urogenital cultures and preterm birth in women with cervical cerclage: a single center retrospective cohort study

Research

Pregnant and postpartum women’s experiences of the indirect impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic in high-income countries: a qualitative evidence synthesis

Research

Risk factors for relaparotomy after a cesarean delivery: a case-control study