Adolescent or Advanced Age Pregnancy: What About Quality of Life?
Objectives: The aim of this study was to evaluate the impact of age and other socio-demographic factors that may be associated with poor health status during pregnancy.
Methods: Of a total of 300 pregnant women included in the study, 100 were adolescents (≤19 years), 100 were average-aged (20 to 34 years), and 100 were of advanced age (≥35 years). After obtaining sociodemographic and obstetric information in a face-to-face interview, the women completed the Short Form 36 Health Survey (SF-36) questionnaire. The SF-36 scores were compared between groups.
Results: It was determined that the quality of life (QoL) scores in pregnancy were generally lower when compared to non-pregnant women. All of the QoL subscores were found to be significantly higher in the average-aged group (p=0.000). The physical component summary (PCS) scores were found to be lowest in the advanced-age group, and the mental component summary (MCS) scores were lowest in the adolescent group (p=0.000). Except for the PCS, which was higher in the adolescent group, no statistically significant difference in the other subscores was found between the adolescent and advanced age groups (p=0.000). According to multivariable regression analysis, age, unplanned pregnancy, lack of sharing problems with spouse/relatives, and uneasiness within the family were found to be associated with poorer PCS and MCS scores.
Conclusion: Both healthcare professionals and the individuals closest to pregnant women need to be aware of the importance of both physical and mental factors in maternal well-being, especially in adolescent and advanced-age groups.
1.The World Health Organization Quality of Life assessment (WHOQOL): position paper from the World Health Organization. Soc Sci Med 1995;41:1403–9. [CrossRef]
2. Leplège A, Hunt S. The problem of quality of life in medicine. JAMA 1997;278:47–50. [CrossRef]
3. Haas JS, Jackson RA, Fuentes-Afflick E, Stewart AL, Dean ML, Brawarsky P, et al. Changes in the health status of women during and after pregnancy. J Gen Intern Med 2005;20:45–51.
4. Otchet F, Carey MS, Adam L. General health and psychological symptom status in pregnancy and the puerperium: what is normal? Obstet Gynecol 1999;94:935–41. [CrossRef]
5. Lacasse A, Rey E, Ferreira E, Morin C, Bérard A. Nausea and vomiting of pregnancy: what about quality of life? BJOG 2008;115:1484–93. [CrossRef]
6. Dall'alba V, Callegari-Jacques SM, Krahe C, Bruch JP, Alves BC, Barros SG. Health-related quality of life of pregnant women with heartburn and regurgitation. Arq Gastroenterol 2015;52:100–4. [CrossRef]
7. Ramirez-Velez R. Pregnancy and health-related quality of life: A cross sectional study. Colomb Med. 2011;42: 476–81.
8. Taşdemir S, Balci E, Günay O. Comparison of life quality of pregnant adolescents with that of pregnant adults in Turkey. Ups J Med Sci 2010;115:275–81. [CrossRef]
9. Lau Y, Yin L. Maternal, obstetric variables, perceived stress and health-related quality of life among pregnant women in Macao, China. Midwifery 2011;27:668–73. [CrossRef]
10. Calou CGP, Pinherio AKB, Castro RCMB, de Oliveira, de Souza Aquino P, Antezana FJ. Health Related Quality of Life of Pregnant Women and Associated Factors: An Integrative Review. Health 2014;6:2375–87. [CrossRef]
11. Asadian A, Aghamolaei T, Zare F, Khodarahmi M, Zainali M, Ashough M. Quality of life in pregnant women in Bandar Abbas, South, Iran. J Biol Today’s World 2014;3:180–4. [CrossRef]
12. Otchet F, Carey MS, Adam L. General health and psychological symptom status in pregnancy and the puerperium: what is normal? Obstet Gynecol 1999;94:935–41. [CrossRef]
13. Drescher KM, Monga M, Williams P, Promecene-Cook girls. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2003;188:1231–3. [CrossRef]
14. Li J, Mao J, Du Y, Morris JL, Gong G, Xiong X. Health-related quality of life among pregnant women with and without depression in Hubei, China. Matern Child Health J 2012;16:1355–63.
15. Burke PJ, Liston WJ. Adolescent mothers' perceptions of social support and the impact of parenting on their lives. Pediatr Nurs 1994;20:593–9.
16. Hemingway H, Nicholson A, Stafford M, Roberts R, Marmot M. The impact of socioeconomic status on health functioning as assessed by the SF-36 questionnaire: the Whitehall II Study. Am J Public Health 1997;87:1484–90. [CrossRef]
17. Fatemeh A, Azam B, Nahid M. Quality of life in pregnant women results of a study from Kashan, Iran. Pak J Med Sci 2010;26:692–7.
18. Zahedi M, Deris F. The quality of life in pregnant women in Farokhshahr city, 2012. Journal of Clinical Nursing and Midwifery 2014;3:63–9.
19. Koçyiğit H, Aydemir Ö, Fişek G, Ölmez N, Memiş A. Kısa form36’nın Türkçe versiyonunun güvenilirliği ve geçerliliği. İlaç ve Tedavi Dergisi 1999;12:102–6.
20. Demiral Y, Ergor G, Unal B, Semin S, Akvardar Y, Kivircik B, et al. Normative data and discriminative properties of short form 36 (SF-36) in Turkish urban population. BMC Public Health 2006;6:247. [CrossRef]
21. Kershaw T, Murphy A, Divney A, Magriples U, Niccolai L, Gordon D. What's love got to do with it: Relationship functioning and mental and physical quality of life among pregnant adolescent couples. Am J Community Psychol 2013;52:288–301.
22. Shishehgar S, Mahmoodi A, Dolatian M, Mahmoodi Z, Bakhtiary M, Alavi Majd H. The Relationship of Social Support and Quality of Life with the Level of Stress in Pregnant Women Using the PATH Model. Iran Red Crescent Med J 2013;15:560–5.
23. Elsenbruch S, Benson S, Rücke M, Rose M, Dudenhausen J, Pincus-Knackstedt MK, et al. Social support during pregnancy: effects on maternal depressive symptoms, smoking and pregnancy outcome. Hum Reprod 2007;22:869–77. [CrossRef]