The “Hispanic paradox”: An investigation of racial disparity in pregnancy outcomes at a teriary care medical center

Duke University, Durham, North Carolina, United States
American journal of obstetrics and gynecology (Impact Factor: 4.7). 08/2007; 197(2):197.e1-7; discussion 197.e7-9. DOI: 10.1016/j.ajog.2007.04.036
Source: PubMed


The purpose of this study was to examine racial disparities and the "Hispanic paradox" in pregnancy outcomes at a tertiary-care medical center.
A cross-sectional study of pregnancy events was performed with information from the Duke University birth database. The latter includes data on birth outcomes, cost, and health services factors. The final sample included 10,755 women with Medicaid insurance, who gave birth during calendar years 1994-2004. Pregnancy comorbidities and outcome measures were identified by International Classification of Diseases, 9th revision, and Current Procedural Terminology (CPT) codes. Univariate and multivariate analyses were performed to compare racial/ethnic groups.
African-American women were younger and more likely to be employed, to have a medical comorbidity, to remain in the hospital for >4 days, and to have hospital charges of >$7500. African-American women had higher rates of preterm birth, small-for-gestational-age infants, preeclampsia, and stillbirths. There were no differences by race for gestational diabetes mellitus. With the use of white women as the reference group, Hispanic women had lower odds for preterm birth (odds ratio, 0.66; 95% CI, 0.54-0.80), and African-American women had greater odds for preeclampsia (odds ratio, 1.30; 95% CI, 1.07-1.58) and small-for-gestational-age infants (odds ratio, 1.74; 95% CI, 1.29-2.36). With the use of African-American women as the reference, Hispanic women were less likely than African-American women to experience any adverse pregnancy event, with the exception of gestational diabetes mellitus.
Poverty and insurance status does not explain differences in adverse pregnancy outcomes between African-American women and Hispanic women with Medicaid insurance.

Download full-text


Available from: Daniel L Howard,
  • Source
    • "Hispanic women have lower odds for preterm birth compared to White/Non-Hispanic women. When compared to African-American women, Hispanic women are less likely than African-American women to experience any adverse pregnancy event [12]. Latina mothers in the United States have been shown to have favorable birth outcomes despite their social disadvantages. "
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Background Maternal race/ethnicity, age, and socioeconomic status (SES) are important factors determining birth outcome. Previous studies have demonstrated that, teenagers, and mothers with advanced maternal age (AMA), and Black/Non-Hispanic race/ethnicity can independently increase the risk for a poor pregnancy outcome. Similarly, public insurance has been associated with suboptimal health outcomes. The interaction and impact on the risk of a pregnancy resulting in a NICU admission has not been studied. Our aim was, to analyze the simultaneous interactions of teen/advanced maternal age (AMA), race/ethnicity and socioeconomic status on the odds of NICU admission. Methods The Consortium of Safe Labor Database (subset of n = 167,160 live births) was used to determine NICU admission and maternal factors: age, race/ethnicity, insurance, previous c-section, and gestational age. Results AMA mothers were more likely than teenaged mothers to have a pregnancy result in a NICU admission. Black/Non-Hispanic mothers with private insurance had increased odds for NICU admission. This is in contrast to the lower odds of NICU admission seen with Hispanic and White/Non-Hispanic pregnancies with private insurance. Conclusions Private insurance is protective against a pregnancy resulting in a NICU admission for Hispanic and White/Non-Hispanic mothers, but not for Black/Non-Hispanic mothers. The health disparity seen between Black and White/Non-Hispanics for the risk of NICU admission is most evident among pregnancies covered by private insurance. These study findings demonstrate that adverse pregnancy outcomes are mitigated differently across race, maternal age, and insurance status.
    BMC Pregnancy and Childbirth 09/2012; 12(1):97. DOI:10.1186/1471-2393-12-97 · 2.19 Impact Factor
  • Source
    • "The US economic burden for this major public health issue was estimated to be a minimum of $26.2 billion yearly in 2005 (Behrman and Butler 2007). A growing body of evidence has supported the existence of a " Hispanic paradox " : that healthy pregnancy outcomes have diminished as Hispanic immigrants modify their own culture to adapt to the US culture (Page 2004; McGlade et al. 2004; Brown et al. 2007). "
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: We examined the effects of acculturation, depressive symptoms, progesterone, and estriol (E3) as predictors of preterm birth (PTB) in pregnant Hispanic women. This cross-sectional study recruited a sample of 470 Hispanic women between 22- and 24-week gestation from physician practices and community clinics. We used the CES-D to measure maternal depressive symptoms. We measured acculturation by English proficiency on the Bidimensional Acculturation Scale, residence index by years in the USA minus age, nativity, and generational status. Serum progesterone and E3 were analyzed by EIA. Ultrasound and medical records determined gestational age after delivery. In χ (2) analysis, there were a significantly greater percentage of women with higher depressive scores if they were born in the USA. In a structural equation model (SEM), acculturation (English proficiency, residence index, and generational status) predicted the estriol/progesterone ratio (E/P), and the interaction of depressive symptoms with the E/P ratio predicted PTB. Undiagnosed depressive symptoms during pregnancy may have biological consequences increasing the risk for PTB.
    Archives of Women s Mental Health 02/2012; 15(1):57-67. DOI:10.1007/s00737-012-0258-2 · 2.16 Impact Factor
  • Source
    • "Relatively few studies have been conducted among Hispanics, with some reporting higher rates of PIH among Hispanics [13] [14] [15] [16] and others reporting lower rates compared to non- Hispanic Whites [13] [14] [17] [18] [19] [20]. Even fewer genetic studies have been conducted in Hispanics [21-24]. "
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: The aim of the study was to determine whether polymorphism in the GCM1 gene is associated with pregnancy induced hypertension (PIH) in a case-control study of mother-baby dyads. Predominantly Hispanic women, ages 15-45, with (n=136) and without (n=169) PIH were recruited. We genotyped four polymorphisms in the GCM1 gene and examined the association with PIH using both logistic regression and likelihood expectation maximization (LEM) to adjust for intra-familial correlation between genotypes. Maternal genotype was not associated with PIH for any polymorphisms examined. Fetal genotype, however, was associated with maternal risk of PIH. Mothers carrying a fetus with ≥1 copy of the minor (C) allele for rs9349655 were less likely to develop PIH than women carrying a fetus with the GG genotype (parity-adjusted OR=0.44, 95% Cl: 0.21, 0.94). The trend of decreasing risk with increasing C alleles was also statistically significant (OR(trend)=0.41 95% Cl: 0.20, 0.85). The minor alleles for the other three SNPs also appear to be associated with protection. Multilocus analyses of fetal genotypes showed that the protective effect of carrying minor alleles at rs9349655 and rs13200319 (non-significant) remained unchanged when adjusting for genotypes at the other loci. However, the apparent (non-significant) effect of rs2816345 and rs2518573 disappeared when adjusting for rs9349655. In conclusion, we found that a fetal GCM1 polymorphism is significantly associated with PIH in a predominantly Hispanic population. These results suggest that GCM1 may represent a fetal-effect gene, where risk to the mother is conferred only through carriage by the fetus.
    International Journal of Molecular Epidemiology and Genetics 08/2011; 2(3):196-206. · 1.30 Impact Factor
Show more