IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/aph/ajpbhl/1999892209-212_3.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Prevalent urinary incontinence as a correlate of pregnancy, vaginal childbirth, and obstetric techniques

Author

Listed:
  • Foldspang, A.
  • Mommsen, S.
  • Djurhuus, J.C.

Abstract

Objectives. This study examined the association between pregnancy, vaginal childbirth and obstetric techniques, and the prevalence of urinary incontinence among adult women aged 20 to 59 years. Methods. A cross- sectional survey enrolled a random sample of 6240 women aged 20 to 59 years who were mailed a self-administered questionnaire focusing on urinary incontinence and other health variables. More than 75% of the women responded. The present analysis includes 4345 women who were not pregnant and did not experience a vaginal childbirth during 1994. Results. Multivariate prevalence odds ratios showed increases in relation to urinary incontinence during pregnancy, urinary incontinence immediately after a vaginal childbirth, and age of 30 years or more at the second vaginal childbirth. No multivariate associations were found for forceps delivery or vacuum extraction delivery, episiotomy, or perineal suturing. Conclusions. Not only the process of childbirth itself but also processes during pregnancy seem to be strongly associated with prevalent urinary incontinence. Perincal suturing may be associated with prevalent urinary incontinence, whereas other obstetric techniques inspected do not seem to be so.

Suggested Citation

  • Foldspang, A. & Mommsen, S. & Djurhuus, J.C., 1999. "Prevalent urinary incontinence as a correlate of pregnancy, vaginal childbirth, and obstetric techniques," American Journal of Public Health, American Public Health Association, vol. 89(2), pages 209-212.
    • Handle: RePEc:aph:ajpbhl:1999:89:2:209-212_3
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    To our knowledge, this item is not available for download. To find whether it is available, there are three options:
    1. Check below whether another version of this item is available online.
    2. Check on the provider's web page whether it is in fact available.
    3. Perform a search for a similarly titled item that would be available.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:aph:ajpbhl:1999:89:2:209-212_3. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Christopher F Baum (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.apha.org .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.