79
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      An Updated Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of the Obstetric Consequences of Female Genital Mutilation/Cutting

      research-article

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          In our recent systematic review in Obstetrics and Gynecology International of the association between FGM/C and obstetric harm we concluded that FGM/C significantly increases the risk of delivery complications. The findings were based on unadjusted effect estimates from both prospective and retrospective studies. To accommodate requests by critics, we aimed to validate these results through additional analyses based on adjusted estimates from prospective studies. We judged that 7 of the 28 studies included in our original systematic review were prospective. Statistical adjustments for measured confounding factors were made in eight studies, including three prospective studies. The adjusted confounders differed across studies in number and type. Results from meta-analyses based on adjusted estimates, with or without data from retrospective studies, consistently pointed in the same direction as our earlier findings. There were only small differences in the sizes or the level of statistical significance. Using GRADE, we assessed that our confidence in the effect estimates was very low or low for all outcomes. The adjusted estimates generally show similar obstetric harms from FGM/C as unadjusted estimates do. Thus, the current analyses confirm the findings from our previous systematic review. There are sufficient grounds to conclude that FGM/C, with respect to obstetric circumstances, involves harm.

          Related collections

          Most cited references51

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Female genital mutilation and obstetric outcome: WHO collaborative prospective study in six African countries.

          Reliable evidence about the effect of female genital mutilation (FGM) on obstetric outcome is scarce. This study examines the effect of different types of FGM on obstetric outcome. 28 393 women attending for singleton delivery between November, 2001, and March, 2003, at 28 obstetric centres in Burkina Faso, Ghana, Kenya, Nigeria, Senegal, and Sudan were examined before delivery to ascertain whether or not they had undergone FGM, and were classified according to the WHO system: FGM I, removal of the prepuce or clitoris, or both; FGM II, removal of clitoris and labia minora; and FGM III, removal of part or all of the external genitalia with stitching or narrowing of the vaginal opening. Prospective information on demographic, health, and reproductive factors was gathered. Participants and their infants were followed up until maternal discharge from hospital. Compared with women without FGM, the adjusted relative risks of certain obstetric complications were, in women with FGM I, II, and III, respectively: caesarean section 1.03 (95% CI 0.88-1.21), 1.29 (1.09-1.52), 1.31 (1.01-1.70); postpartum haemorrhage 1.03 (0.87-1.21), 1.21 (1.01-1.43), 1.69 (1.34-2.12); extended maternal hospital stay 1.15 (0.97-1.35), 1.51 (1.29-1.76), 1.98 (1.54-2.54); infant resuscitation 1.11 (0.95-1.28), 1.28 (1.10-1.49), 1.66 (1.31-2.10), stillbirth or early neonatal death 1.15 (0.94-1.41), 1.32 (1.08-1.62), 1.55 (1.12-2.16), and low birthweight 0.94 (0.82-1.07), 1.03 (0.89-1.18), 0.91 (0.74-1.11). Parity did not significantly affect these relative risks. FGM is estimated to lead to an extra one to two perinatal deaths per 100 deliveries. Women with FGM are significantly more likely than those without FGM to have adverse obstetric outcomes. Risks seem to be greater with more extensive FGM.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: found
            Is Open Access

            Somali women and their pregnancy outcomes postmigration: data from six receiving countries

            Objective This study aimed to investigate pregnancy outcomes in Somali-born women compared with those women born in each of the six receiving countries: Australia, Belgium, Canada, Finland, Norway and Sweden. Design Meta-analyses of routinely collected data on confinements and births. Setting National or regional perinatal datasets spanning 3–6 years between 1997 and 2004 from six countries. Sample A total of 10 431 Somali-born women and 2 168 891 receiving country-born women. Methods Meta-analyses to compare outcomes for Somali-born and receiving country-born women across the six countries. Main outcome measures Events of labour (induction, epidural use and proportion of women using no analgesia), mode of birth (spontaneous vaginal birth, operative vaginal birth and caesarean section) and infant outcomes (preterm birth, birthweight, Apgar at 5 minutes, stillbirths and neonatal deaths). Results Compared with receiving country-born women, Somali-born women were less likely to give birth preterm (pooled OR 0.72, 95% CI 0.64–0.81) or to have infants of low birthweight (pooled OR 0.89, 95% CI 0.82–0.98), but there was an excess of caesarean sections, particularly in first births (pooled OR 1.41, 95% CI 1.25–1.59) and an excess of stillbirths (pooled OR 1.86, 95% CI 1.38–2.51). Conclusions This analysis has identified a number of disparities in outcomes between Somali-born women and their receiving country counterparts. The disparities are not readily explained and they raise concerns about the provision of maternity care for Somali women postmigration. Review of maternity care practices followed by implementation and careful evaluation of strategies to improve both care and outcomes for Somali women is needed.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: not found
              • Article: not found

              Categorical data analysis.

                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                Obstet Gynecol Int
                Obstet Gynecol Int
                OGI
                Obstetrics and Gynecology International
                Hindawi Publishing Corporation
                1687-9589
                1687-9597
                2014
                23 November 2014
                : 2014
                : 542859
                Affiliations
                The Norwegian Knowledge Centre for the Health Services, P.O. Box 7004, St.Olavs Plass, 0130 Oslo, Norway
                Author notes

                Academic Editor: John R. Van Nagell

                Article
                10.1155/2014/542859
                4258320
                25505915
                7b69a14c-d71a-4dfa-8bd0-fec5f925db39
                Copyright © 2014 R. C. Berg et al.

                This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

                History
                : 18 March 2014
                : 29 October 2014
                Categories
                Research Article

                Obstetrics & Gynecology
                Obstetrics & Gynecology

                Comments

                Comment on this article