Rate Of SGA Research Articles

PUERTO RICAN AND MEXICAN-AMERICAN SMALL-FOR-GESTATIONAL-AGE(SGA) RATES REMAIN DISPARATE AMONG LOW-RISK URBAN MOTHERS: A POPULATION-BASED STUDY.† 1619

There are limited available data on the prevalence of SGA infants among urban Hispanics. We used 1982-83 Illinois vital records and 1980 U.S. census income data to determine the association of maternal ethnicity and SGA(weight-for-gestational-age < 10th percentile) rates among Hispanics in Chicago. This older cohort was chosen to avoid the confounding effect of cocaine associated with its increased local availability after 1985. The SGA rate was 3.3% for infants with Puerto Rican (PR) mothers (N=3,483) and 2.1% for infants with U.S.-born Mexican-American mothers (N=2,253) compared to 1.4% for infants with foreign-born Mexican-American mothers (N=8,746); OR=2.4(1.8-3.1) and 1.5(1.1-3.1), respectively. Most striking, the PR but not U.S.-born Mexican-American disadvantage persisted as maternal risk status improved (Table). In a multiple logistic regression model that included maternal age, education, marital status, parity, prenatal care, and community income, the adjusted OR of SGA for PR was 2.9(1.4-4.5). We conclude that 1) the relationship of Puerto Rican ethnicity to the risk of intrauterine growth retardation is independent of commonly cited risk factors and 2) the “epidemiologic paradox” is confined to foreign-born Mexican-Americans.

THE PREVALENCE OF SMALL-FOR-GESTATIONAL-AGE (SGA) INFANTS AMONG COLLEGE-EDUCATED AFRICAN-AMERICAN AND WHITE WOMEN IN CHICAGO. † 1547

For unclear reasons, the incidence of SGA infants is greater for African-American compared to white women. We used Illinois vital records and U.S. census income data to determine the extent to which socioeconomic status(SES) explains the racial disparity in SGA (weight-for-gestational age < 10th percentile) infants in Chicago, We restricted the study population to mothers with 16 or more yrs of formal education to ensure an unbiased reporting of last menstrual period and control for level of education attainment. The SGA rate for African-Americans (N=2,334) was 2.8% compared to 1.2% for whites (N=6,476); OR=2.5 (1.4-3.8). Although the study was limited to college-educated women, measures of SES and prenatal care differed significantly by race (Table). However, control of these variables in a logistic regression model did not reduce the estimated risk for African-Americans; adjusted OR=2.9 (1.4-4.5). Among African-Americans, the IMR of SGA infants was 149/1000 vs. 18/1000 for non-SGA infants; OR=9.5(4.9-19.9). Among whites, the IMR of SGA infants was 65/1000 vs. 5/1000 for non-SGA infants; OR=12.9(4.9-34.0). As such, the race-specific population attributable risks of infant death for SGA infants were 19% and 13%, respectively. We conclude that 1) factors more closely related to race than SES underlie the African-American pregnancy disadvantage as measured by SGA rate ratios, and 2) the racial disparity in the proportion of SGA infants has public health implications.