Association between maternal occupational status and utilization of antenatal care: Study based on the perinatal survey of Baden-Wuerttemberg 1998-2003

International Archives of Occupational and Environmental Health

Volumn 79, Issue 1, 2006, Pages 75-81

  Simoes, Elisabeth ^a   Kunz, Siegfried ^b   Münnich, Ralf ^c   Schmahl, Friedrich Wilhelm ^c  

^a Medizinischer Dienst der Krankenversicherung ^*  (Germany)

^b Clinic of Gynaecology and Obstetrics   (Germany)

^c UNIVERSITY OF TÜBINGEN   (Germany)

Author keywords

Antenatal care; Occupation; Perinatal database

Indexed keywords

ADULT; ARTICLE; FEMALE; GEOGRAPHIC DISTRIBUTION; GERMANY; HEALTH CARE UTILIZATION; HEALTH SURVEY; HIGH RISK POPULATION; HUMAN; HUMAN EXPERIMENT; OCCUPATIONAL HAZARD; OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH; POPULATION DISTRIBUTION; PRENATAL CARE; QUALITY CONTROL; SOCIAL STATUS; STATISTICAL ANALYSIS; STATISTICAL SIGNIFICANCE; WORK CAPACITY;

EMPLOYMENT; FEMALE; GERMANY; HEALTH CARE SURVEYS; HUMANS; PERINATAL CARE; PREGNANCY;

EID: 31144472401     PISSN: 03400131     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s00420-005-0020-4     Document Type: Article

References (27)

1. Adler NE (1993) Socioeconomic inequalities in health. No easy solution. JAMA 269:3140-3145 8505817
2. Adler NE, Newman K (2002) Socioeconomic disparities in health-pathways and policies. Health Aff 21:60-76 10.1377/hlthaff.21.2.60
3. Amini SB, Catalano PM (1996) Effect of prenatal care on obstetrical outcome. J Mat Fet Med 5:142-150 10.1002/(SICI)1520-6661(199605/ 06)5:3<142::AID-MFM9>3.0.CO;2-M
4. Beguin F (1996) Surveillance de la grossesse dans le cadre de la nouvelle LAMal. Arch Gynecol Obstet 259 (Suppl):84-87
5. Bundesgeschäftsstelle fuer Qualitätssicherung (2003) http://www.bqs-online.de
6. Catalano R, Serxner S (1992) The effect of ambient threats to employment on low birth weight. J Health Soc Behav 33:363-377 1464720
7. Chandrashekar S, Rao RS, Nair ND, Kutty PR (1998) Socio-demographic determinants of antenatal care. Trop Doct 28:206-209 9803838
8. Dunlop S, Coyte P, McIsaac W (2000) Socioeconomic status and the utilization of physicians services: Results from the Canadian National Population Health Survey. Soc Sci Med 51(1):123-133 10.1016/ S0277-9536(99)00424-4
9. Fatmi Z, Avan B (2002) Demographic, socioeconomic and environmental determinants of utilisation of antenatal care in a rural setting of Sindh, Pakistan. JPMA 52:138-142
10. Gissler M, Meriläinen J, Vuori E, Hemminki E (2002) Register based monitoring shows decreasing socioeconomic differences in Finish perinatal health. Eur J Publ Health 12 (Supp): 57 10.1093/eurpub/12.1.57
11. Greenberg RS (1983) The impact of prenatal care in different social groups. Am J Obstet Gynecol 145:797-801 6682290
12. Heinrichs O (1977) Die Relevanz psychosozialer Faktoren fuer die Schwangerschaft und die perinatale Periode bei ledigen und geschiedenen Muettern. Inauguraldissertation zur Erlangung der medizinischen Doktorwuerde an den medizinischen Fachbereichen der Freien Universität Berlin.
13. Heringa M, Huisjes HJ (1988) Prenatal screening: Current policy in EC-countries. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol 28(Suppl):7-52 3384169
14. Huntington JP, Conell FA (1994) For every dollar spent - the cost saving argument for prenatal care. N Engl J Med 331:1303-1307 10.1056/ NEJM199411103311910
15. Kohlhauser G, Fuiko R, Panagl A (2000) Outcome of very-low-birth-weight infants at 1 and 2-years of age. Clin Pediatr 39:441-449
16. Lee SK, McMillan DD, Ohlsson A (2000) Variations in practice and outcomes in the Canadian NICU network: 1996-1997. Pediatrics 5:1070-1079 10.1542/peds.106.5.1070
17. Nierhaus W (2002) Deutsche Konjunktur 2001: Prognose und Wirklichkeit. Ifo Schnelldienst 55(2):32-34
18. Moore TR, Origel W, Key TC, Resnik R (1986) The perinatal and economic impact of prenatal care in a low socio-economic population. Am J Obstet Gynecol 154:29-33 3946500
19. Ross CE, Wu C (1995) The links between education and health. Am Soc Rev 10:719-745
20. Sachs L (2002) Angewandte Statistik: Anwendung statistischer Methoden, 10th edn. Springer, Berlin Heidelberg New York
21. Selbmann HK (1984) Teilnahme an der Schwangerschaftsueberwachung in Bayern und Messung ihrer Effektivität. Geburtsh Frauenheilk 44:345-350 6564972
22. Simoes E, Kunz S, Bosing-Schwenkglenks M, Schwoerer P, Schmahl FW (2003) Inanspruchnahme der Schwangerenvorsorge-ein Spiegel gesellschaftlicher Entwicklungen und Aspekte der Effizienz. Geburtsh Frauenheilk 63:529-537 10.1055/s-2003-40472
23. Simoes E, Kunz S, Bosing-Schwenkglenks M, Schmahl FW (2004) Association between method of delivery, puerperal complication rate and postpartum hysterectomy. Arch Gynecol Obstet, Online first, DOI: 10.1007/ s00404-004-0692-0 (23.12.2004)
24. Trujillo-Hernández B, Rios-Silva M, Huerta M, Trujillo X, Väsquez C, Millán-Guerrero R (2002) Frequency of, indications for and clinical epidemiological characteristics of first time caesarean section, compared with repeated caesarean section. Arch Gynecol Obstet 267:27-32 10.1007/s00404-001-0255-6
25. Yunis KA, Beydoun H, Aaraj A (2001) Low socio-economic status (SES) and neonatal outcome in an urban developing population. Pediatr Res 49:346A
26. Villar J, Baäqeel H, Piaggio G et al, WHO Antenatal Care Trial Research Group (2001) WHO antenatal care randomised trial for the evaluation of a new model of routine antenatal care. Lancet 357:1551-1564
27. Wulf KH (1992) Schwangerenvorsorge-Inanspruchnahme und Effektivität. Dt. Ärzteblatt 89:3215