3.9 Article

Risk factors for eclampsia: a case-control study

期刊

出版社

EDITIONS SCIENTIFIQUES MEDICALES ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.annfar.2003.08.006

关键词

preeclampsia; eclampsia; risk factors; case-control studies

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Objective. - Our purpose was to characterize the risk factors of eclampsia in women with preeclampsia. Patients and methods. - A case-control study was conducted at Monastir hospital to investigate risk factors for eclampsia between 1st January 1995 and 30th June 2000. Cases were matched to preeclamptic controls on a 2:1 ratio. Univariate analysis was used to determine which of the independent variables were significantly different between the groups. Those with significant differences were then entered into multiple logistic regression analysis to determine the characteristics that were independently related to eclampsia. Result. - A total of 41 cases of eclampsia were ascertained from deliveries. The ratio of eclampsia cases to number of deliveries over the study period was 1.87 per 1000. The first seizures occurred at home in 59% of the cases. Univariate analysis revealed statistical significance for the following variables associated with eclampsia: systolic hypertension greater than or equal to160 mmHg and diastolic greater than or equal to110 mmHg, headache, visual symptoms, vivid deep tendon reflexes, proteinuria >3+ or >3 g d(-1), uric acid concentration greater than or equal to350 mumol l(-1), serum creatinine concentration >100 mumol l(-1) and aminotransferase aspartate >30 IU l(-1). A history of abortion appears to be the protective factor against eclampsia. However, with subsequent multivariate analysis, only vivid deep tendon reflexes and elevated uric acid concentration remained significant. Conclusion. - These data indicate a need for improved prenatal care and medical attention focused on prodroms of eclampsia as well as the detection of preeclampsia to reduce the incidence of eclampsia. (C) 2003 Editions scientifiques et medicales Elsevier SAS. Tous droits reserves.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

3.9
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据