4.7 Article

Determinants of folic acid use in early pregnancy in a multi-ethnic urban population in The Netherlands: The Generation R study

Journal

PREVENTIVE MEDICINE
Volume 47, Issue 4, Pages 427-432

Publisher

ACADEMIC PRESS INC ELSEVIER SCIENCE
DOI: 10.1016/j.ypmed.2008.06.014

Keywords

Preconception care; Folic acid; Risk factors; Pregnancy; Ethnicity

Funding

  1. Erasmus Medical Center Rotterdam
  2. Erasmus University Rotterdam
  3. Netherlands Organization for Health Research and Development (ZonMw)

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Objective. Recommendations on folic acid use to prevent neural tube defects have been launched in several countries. Adequate folic acid use seems to be low. This study assesses the prevalence of folic acid use and identifies its determinants. Methods. The study was embedded in the Generation R Study Rotterdam, the Netherlands, a population-based prospective cohort study between 2002 and 2006. Complete information of 6940 women was available. Information on folic acid use and potential determinants was obtained by questionnaires and physical examination. Results. Of all women 37% adequately used folic acid during the preconception period. Most important risk factors for inadequate use were unplanned pregnancy (OR 9.5, CI 7.2-12.4. p<0.001), low educational level (OR 2.5, CI 1.8-3.6, p<0.001) and non-western ethnicity, (OR 3.5, CI 2.9-4.3, p<0.001). After stratification for ethnicity, unplanned pregnancy remained the most important risk factor for inadequate use. Other risk factors for inadequate use were younger age, single marital status, smoking, multiparity (all p<0.001) and alcohol use (p<0.05). In contrast, previous spontaneous abortion decreased the risk of inadequate folic acid use (p<0.001). Conclusion. Adequate preconception folic acid supplementation is still too low. Implementation of preconception programs and other public health strategies are strongly needed. (C) 2008 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available