Skip to main content
NCBI home page
Annals of African Medicine logoLink to Annals of African Medicine
. 2023 Jul 4;22(3):271–278. doi: 10.4103/aam.aam_22_22

Determinants and Outcomes of Low Birth Weight among Newborns at a Tertiary Hospital in Zambia: A Retrospective Cohort Study

Moses Mukosha 1,2,3,✉, Choolwe Jacobs 2, Patrick Kaonga 2,4, Patrick Musonda 2, Bellington Vwalika 3,5, Mwansa Ketty Lubeya 3,5, Chiluba Mwila 1, Steward Mudenda 1, Ellah Zingani 1, Kunda Mutesu Kapembwa 6
PMCID: PMC10445713  PMID: 37417013

Abstract

Context:

Newborns’ low birth weight (LBW) has been linked to early infant morbidity and mortality. However, our understanding of the determinants and outcomes of LBW in this population is still poor.

Aim:

This study aimed to assess determinants and outcomes of LBW among newborns at a tertiary hospital.

Settings and Design:

Retrospective cohort study at Women and Newborn Hospital in Lusaka Zambia.

Subjects and Methods:

We reviewed delivery case records and neonatal files between January 1, 2018, and September 30, 2019, for newborns admitted to the neonatal intensive care unit.

Statistical Analysis Used:

Logistic regression models were used to establish determinants of LBW and describe the outcomes.

Results:

Women living with human immunodeficiency virus infection were more likely to deliver LBW infants (adjusted odds ratio [AOR] = 1.46; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.16–1.86). Other maternal determinants of LBW were; increased parity (AOR = 1.22; 95% CI: 1.05–1.43), preeclampsia (AOR = 6.91; 95% CI: 1.48–32.36), and gestational age <37 weeks compared to 37 weeks or more (AOR = 24.83; 95% CI: 13.27–46.44). LBW neonates were at higher odds of early mortality (AOR = 2.16; 95% CI: 1.85–2.52), developing respiratory distress syndrome (AOR = 2.96; 95% CI: 2.53–3.47), and necrotizing enterocolitis (AOR = 1.66; 95% CI: 1.16–2.38) than neonates with a birth weight of 2500 g or more.

Conclusions:

These findings underscore the importance of effective maternal and neonatal interventions to reduce the risk of morbidity and mortality for neonates with LBW in Zambia and other similar settings.

Keywords: Determinants, human immunodeficiency virus infection, low birth weight, neonates

INTRODUCTION

Low birth weight (LBW) is mainly defined as weight at birth <2500 g.[1] LBW is of public health concern and is widely accepted as the most critical determinant of future chances of healthy growth, infant survival, and illnesses later in life.[2] Globally, LBW is estimated between 15% and 20% of all births translating to more than 20 million births per year, which meet LBW criteria.[1] Sub-Saharan Africa (15%) and South-central Asia (27%) regions share a disproportionate burden of LBW.[2,3] For example, in Zambia, Chibwesha et al.[4] reported that about 11% of newborns in Lusaka were LBW.

According to the WHO guidelines, pregnant women living with human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) are put on antiretroviral therapy (ART) option B plus in Zambia.[5] This has seen a rapidly increasing number of HIV-exposed uninfected infants. HIV is considered to be responsible for various placental pathologies which are linked to LBW.[6] Prominent among the theories is through the pro-inflammatory process induced by high levels of interleukin-2 (IL-2), IL-6, and tumor necrosis factor-alpha due to HIV infection.[7] Before introducing ART for the treatment of HIV, studies reported the link between HIV and LBW.[8,9] However, after the initiation of widespread ART, the effects of HIV infection on birth weight became more challenging to assess partly due to the differences in the timing of ART initiation, type of ART, and adherence challenges.

Several studies have shown that maternal determinants of LBW are multifactorial.[10,11,12,13,14,15,16] The extant literature has reported LBW determinants: HIV-seropositivity, preeclampsia, preterm birth, primiparity, high gravidity, employment, poor maternal nutrition, and young maternal age.[17,18,19] In a study done in South Africa of 2529 singleton live-born babies, the odds of LBW among HIV-infected pregnant women were 1.45-fold compared to HIV-negative pregnant women. In Nairobi, HIV-positive women were 3-fold more likely to deliver a LBW baby than HIV-negative women.[20] Similarly, birth weight was significantly lower in women with HIV infection in Rwanda and Ethiopia than in uninfected women.[21,22]

LBW is a significant risk factor for neonates’ adverse health outcomes, including necrotising enterocolitis, early mortality, respiratory distress syndrome, and retinopathy of prematurity.[23,24] The risk of adverse neonatal outcomes is higher among HIV-exposed newborns.[9,25] Rollins et al.'s study in South Africa found that LBW substantially increased early mortality among neonates. Other reported complications are neurological impairments, metabolic syndrome, and cardiovascular disease among LBW infants in later life.[26,27]

The WHO has set a target for member countries to reduce LBW rates by 30% by 2025.[1] This ambitious target will require considerable effort, particularly in low-middle-income countries with a high burden of LBW.[28] In its policy brief, the WHO mentioned that neonatal morbidity and mortality reduction would only be attained if pregnancy care is fully integrated with appropriate neonatal and postneonatal nutritional and medical care. Implementing evidence-informed interventions to tackle LBW will be more effective and have a greater impact on health equity if the implementation is fuelled by collaboration among programs and sectors. Women living with HIV have been identified to be at the highest risk for LBW delivery.[11] Therefore, there is an urgent need to understand the determinants of LBW in Zambia and other sub-Saharan African settings in the context of high HIV prevalence.

The present study had two objectives. The first was to assess maternal socio-demographic, clinical, and obstetric factors associated with LBW among newborns admitted to the neonatal intensive care unit (NICU). The second was to estimate the odds of adverse neonatal outcomes within 28 days of admission to NICU among LBW neonates compared to neonates weighing more than 2500 g.

Understanding the determinants of LBW and neonatal outcomes is essential to provide information to health workers on the risk level stratification and target and evaluate interventions. Furthermore, this study's findings will assist in assessing national targets to achieve the global goals and tracking the progress toward them as we fast approach 2025.

SUBJECTS AND METHODS

Study design and setting

This was a retrospective cohort study at the Women and Newborn Hospital. This is the largest referral hospital for obstetric, gynecological and critically ill neonates requiring specialist care.[29] On average, about 28,800 admissions of pregnant women and 9000 births per year are recorded at this hospital. The average neonatal admissions per year are above 4000.[30] The hospital receives referrals from over 20 health centers and five first-level hospitals from within Lusaka and other parts of the country.[31] In addition, the hospital is a training site for future specialist gynaecologists, obstetricians, and undergraduate medical and nursing students of the University of Zambia School of Medicine. The Department of Obstetrics conducts outpatient antenatal clinics where HIV-infected women are identified, investigated, and commenced on ART according to the WHO option B plus.

Study population and sampling technique

The study population comprised newborns (HIV exposed and nonexposed) admitted to NICU at Women and Newborn Hospital between January 1, 2018, and September 30, 2019. We classified HIV exposed as neonates born from HIV-infected women (in the study setting, confirmatory polymerase chain reaction test results are routinely done at 18 months from birth). The neonatal files were reviewed with a follow-up period of 28 days from admission to determine any adverse outcomes within 28 days. We conducted a complete enumeration of eligible delivery case records and neonatal files. Details of the data extraction procedure have been previously described.[31] Briefly, files for each month under the study period were collected from the registry office and screened for the primary outcome of interest (record of birth weight at delivery). Eligible files were further screened for a record of adverse neonatal outcomes at day 28 of admission. After screening the files, the de facto eligible sample came to 3213 records [Figure 1].

Figure 1.

Figure 1

Open in a new tab

The sampling frame for the records. BW, NICU. BW = Birth weight, NICU = Neonatal intensive care unit

Data extraction

The study extracted data from the delivery case records and neonatal files. We used a predesigned excel-based sheet for data entry and audited all the information every day to ensure its completeness and accuracy. All the relevant demographic, obstetric, clinical, and neonatal data were extracted from delivery case records and neonatal files. The variables comprised antenatal care (ANC) attendance, maternal age, maternal HIV status, gravidity, parity, gestational age at delivery, history of preterm birth, sex of baby, preeclampsia, substance use, respiratory distress syndrome, necrotizing enterocolitis, mortality within 28 days and admission to Kangaroo Mother Care (KMC). First, we entered the data into the Microsoft excel operating system version 16 (2016 Jones, Chicago, USA). Then, we carried out data cleaning, coding, and validation until the database corresponded with the forms’ data collected. After that, data was exported to Stata/IC version 16.1 (Stata Corporation, College Station, Texas, USA) for analysis.

Study measures

We assessed the outcome measures for the study at two-time points (admission and on day 28). For objective 1, the outcome was LBW (categorized as 1, if weight <2500 g and 0 = if weight ≥2500 g) recorded at admission to NICU. On the other hand, in objective 2, we quantified the odds of adverse perinatal outcomes in LBW neonates compared with neonates weighing more than 2500 g for three adverse neonatal outcomes: respiratory distress syndrome (yes = 1, no = 0), necrotizing enterocolitis (yes = 1, no = 0), and early neonatal mortality (yes = 1, no = 0) within the 1st 28 days of life. The diagnosis of necrotising enterocolitis in this setting is mainly clinical and/or suspected, and if not taken to the theater, the neonatologists do not confirm the diagnosis as there is no portable X-ray available in the department. Conversely, respiratory distress syndrome is a clinical diagnosis. It is diagnosed based on signs of respiratory distress in a newborn with risk factors.

Statistical analysis

We conducted a descriptive analysis of socio-demographic, obstetric, clinical, and neonatal characteristics. For the descriptive analysis, age, parity, and gravidity were categorized. We expressed all categorical variables as frequencies and percentages. We used the Pearson Chi-square test (expected cell frequency more than five) as appropriate to assess for associations between variables.

For the primary outcome, we first conducted a univariable logistic regression with socio-demographic, obstetric, and clinical characteristics to obtain crude estimates (outcome LBW: yes = 1 and no = 0). We then fitted a multivariable logistic regression model including only variables with a P < 0.20 from the univariable analysis to adjust for confounders in three parts. First, we explored the effect of only HIV-serostatus on LBW to obtain unadjusted estimates. We took the analysis with only HIV as unadjusted because HIV status variable was a priori variable. Second, we analyzed the data by adding employment status, gestational age, parity, and preeclampsia to obtain adjusted estimates. Third, stratified data with HIV-negative and HIV-positive separately. Finally, we compared LBW infants to those weighing 2500 g or more for our secondary analyses. We estimated crude and adjusted odds ratios for the neonatal outcomes; (viz., respiratory distress syndrome, necrotizing enterocolitis, and mortality within 28 days). Three separate analyses were fitted for secondary outcomes similar to the primary analysis. The analysis fitted used stepwise regression after biologically and clinically considering the appropriate explanatory variables to be investigated in the stepwise regression with a liberal P value for exclusion (P < 0.1). Only the HIV-serostatus was fixed in the adjusted models as it was set as priori. Then, a stratified logistic regression model by HIV-serostatus was fitted, similar to the overall model (secondary outcomes).

We considered age, parity, and gravidity as continuous variables for the regression models (primary and secondary outcomes). Interactions among variables were investigated, and none were found to approach any statistical significance. We used Hosmer–Lemeshow goodness-of-fit test to assess the fit of the model. A P < 0.05 was considered statistically significant for this analysis. Stata/IC version 16.1 (Stata Corp., College Station, Texas, USA) was used for statistical analysis.

Ethical considerations

Ethics approval was obtained from the University of Zambia. In addition, we obtained additional permission from Women and Newborn Hospital management. However, medical records from maternal delivery notes and neonatal files were de-identified, and no direct contact with participants was made to protect the participant's confidentiality; therefore, no informed consent was obtained.

RESULTS

Study characteristics

Table 1 shows the maternal and newborn study characteristics. Of the 3213 pregnant women, 638 (19.8%) were HIV seropositive. The majority were; aged between 20 and 29 years 1484 (49.4%), low multiparity 2132 (72.0%), pregnant more than twice before 1311 (43.6%), unemployed 2392 (93.3%), attended ANC 3152 (98.0%), and gave birth to preterm infants 2250 (70.0%). Among the newborn infants from the 3213 pregnant women, 162 (5.0%) developed necrotising enterocolitis, 1482 (46.1%) developed respiratory distress syndrome, 1111 (34.6%) were admitted to KMC, 1775 (55.3%) were male, and 1947 (60.6%) died within 28 days from birth.

Table 1.

Maternal and newborn characteristics by birthweight status

Factor Level Total population (n=3213), n (%) Birthweight ≥2500 g (n=1278; 39.8), n (%) Birthweight <2500 g (n=1935; 60.2), n (%) P*
HIV serostatus Negative 2577 (80.2) 1058 (82.8) 1517 (78.4) 0.002
Positive 638 (19.8) 220 (17.2) 418 (21.6)
Age (years) 12-19 434 (14.5) 157 (13.3) 277 (15.2) 0.162
20-29 1484 (49.4) 574 (48.5) 909 (50.0)
30-39 939 (31.3) 388 (32.8) 550 (30.3)
4-49 147 (4.9) 65 (5.5) 82 (4.51)
Parity 0 (nulliparity) 83 (2.8) 35 (2.9) 48 (2.7) 0.783
1-3 (low multiparity) 2132 (72.0) 844 (71.3) 1286 (72.5)
≥4 (grand multipara) 745 (25.2) 304 (25.7) 441 (24.9)
Gravidity Once 1035 (34.5) 429 (35.8) 605 (33.6) 0.439
Twice 658 (21.9) 254 (21.2) 404 (22.4)
More than twice 1311 (43.6) 517 (43.1) 793 (44.0)
Employment Unemployed 2392 (93.3) 931 (92.1) 1459 (94.0) 0.058
Employed 173 (6.7) 80 (7.9) 93 (6.0)
ANC attendance No 63 (1.9) 17 (1.3) 45 (2.3) 0.045
Yes 3152 (98.0) 1261 (98.7) 1890 (97.7)
GA (weeks) ≥37 965 (30.0) 789 (61.7) 175 (9.0) <0.001
<37 2250 (69.9) 489 (38.3) 1760 (91.0)
PE No 2968 (92.3) 1216 (95.2) 1750 (90.4) <0.001
Yes 247 (7.7) 62 (4.9) 185 (9.6)
Necrotising enterocolitis No 3050 (94.9) 1226 (95.9) 1822 (94.3) 0.040
Yes 162 (5.0) 52 (4.1) 110 (5.7)
KMC No 2103 (65.4) 907 (70.9) 1194 (61.7) <0.001
Yes 1111 (34.6) 371 (29.0) 740 (38.3)
RDS No 1730 (53.9) 854 (66.9) 874 (45.2) <0.001
Yes 1482 (46.1) 421 (33.0) 1061 (54.8)
Sex of newborn Female 1439 (44.8) 465 (36.4) 973 (50.3) <0.001
Male 1775 (55.2) 813 (63.6) 961 (49.7)
Mortality with 28 days No 1268 (39.4) 507 (33.4) 136 (32.5) 0.734
Yes 1947 (60.6) 1010 (66.6) 282 (67.5)
Overall percentage (95% CI) 39.78 (38.08-41.49) 60.22 (58.51-61.92)
Open in a new tab

*Univariable analysis P-values from Pearson-Chi-square test. ANC=Antenatal care, KMC=Kangaroo mother care, RDS=Respiratory distress syndrome, GA=Gestational age, HIV=Human-immunodeficiency virus, CI=Confidence interval, PE=Preeclampsia

There was an association between birthweight and the following: HIV-serostatus (P = 0.002), necrotizing enterocolitis (P = 0.040), gestational age (P < 0.001), preeclampsia (P < 0.001), admission to KMC (P < 0.001), respiratory distress syndrome (P < 0.001), and sex of newborn (P < 0.001). Overall, the magnitude of LBW among infants admitted to NICU was 1935/3213 (60.2% 95% confidence interval: 58.51–61.92, using Binomial exact methods).

The results from a multivariable analysis on maternal factors associated with low birthweight are shown in Table 2. In the unadjusted Model 1, HIV infection was associated with 33% increased odds of a LBW infant. After adjusting for employment status, gestational age, preeclampsia and parity, the effect of HIV infection increased to 46% in the overall adjusted Model 2. In stratified analysis, factors associated with LBW among HIV infected women were gestational age, parity, and preeclampsia. Compared to infants born at or after 37 weeks of gestation, infants born <37 completed weeks of gestation had 24-fold increased odds of LBW. The odds of LBW were 6.91 times higher among infants born from mothers who developed preeclampsia during pregnancy than those who did not. A unit increase in parity was associated with a 22% increase in odds of LBW. Similar trends were observed among the HIV negative women for gestational age and preeclampsia. Being in employment compared to unemployment among HIV-negative women was associated with reduced odds of LBW by 35%.

Table 2.

Multivariable logistic regression model of maternal factors associated with low birthweightc

Factor Level Model 1 cOR (95% CI) Model 2 Overall, aOR (95% CI) Model 3 HIV-negative, aOR (95% CI) Model 4 HIV-positive, aOR (95% CI)
HIV Negative Reference Reference
Positive 1.33 (1.11-1.59)a 1.46 (1.16-1.86)a
Employmen Unemployed Reference Reference
t Employed 0.68 (0.47-1.00)a 0.65 (0.43-0.99)a
GA (weeks) ≥37 Reference Reference Reference
<37 16.16 (12.84-20.36)b 15.37 (11.97-19.74)b 24.83 (13.27-46.44)b
PE No Reference Reference Reference
Yes 2.39 (1.57-3.63)b 2.19 (1.42-3.39)b 6.91 (1.48-32.36)a
Parity A unit increase 1.22 (1.05-1.43)a
Open in a new tab

aP<0.05, bP<0.001, cModel 1 was fitted with only HIV-serostatus to obtain unadjusted estimates, Model 2 was fitted by adding employment status, GA, parity and PE to model 1 to obtain adjusted estimates and stratified adjusted model 3 and 4 were fitted for HIV-negative and HIV-positive separately. Parity was only included in model 4 as it only reached statistical significance in that model at P<0.15. HIV was retained in model 2 as a priori variable. cOR=Crude odds ratio, aOR=Adjusted odds ratio, 95% CI=95% confidence interval, HIV=Human immunodeficiency virus, GA=Gestational age, PE=Preeclampsia

Results of the adverse neonatal outcomes are shown in Table 3. After adjusting for the risk factors (preeclampsia, employment status, parity, and gestational age) of LBW identified in Table 2, there was an increased odds of necrotising enterocolitis, respiratory distress syndrome, and mortality within 28 days among LBW neonates compared to those weighing ≥2500 g (Model 1). The effect of LBW on mortality and respiratory distress syndrome was consistent when stratified by HIV serostatus except for necrotising enterocolitis, which showed a negative association for the HIV exposed neonates (Model 3).

Table 3.

Newborn outcomes associated with low birth weightc

Outcomes Level Model 1 Overall, aOR (95% CI) Model 2 HIV-not exposed, aOR (95% CI) Model 3 HIV-exposed, aOR (95% CI)
Necrotising No Reference Reference
enterocolitis Yes 1.66 (1.16-2.38)a 2.56 (1.63-3.99)b 0.74 (0.41-1.35)
RDS No Reference Reference Reference
Yes 2.96 (2.53-3.47)b 3.43 (2.87-4.10)b 1.61 (1.14-2.27)a
Mortality within 28 days No Reference Reference Reference
Yes 2.16 (1.85-2.52)b 2.04 (1.71-2.43)b 2.57 (1.83-3.62)b
Open in a new tab

aP<0.01, bP<0.001, cAll the models were calculated from multivariable logistic regression of the effect of LBW on each of the outcomes (necrotising enterocolitis, RDS and mortality within 28 days), adjusting for all risk factors identified in Table 2 model 2 (GA, PE, parity and employment status). 95% CI=95% confidence interval, RDS=Respiratory distress syndrome, aOR=Adjusted odds ratio

DISCUSSION

This study assessed the determinants of LBW and adverse neonatal outcomes among HIV-exposed and nonexposed newborn infants admitted to NICU. We found that six in every ten neonates admitted to NICU had a LBW compared to four in every ten neonates weighing 2500 g or more. Maternal determinants of LBW among the newborns were: HIV seropositive, increased parity, preeclampsia, and gestational age <37 weeks. In addition, neonates with LBW were at higher odds of early mortality, developing respiratory distress syndrome, and necrotizing enterocolitis when compared to neonates with a birth weight of 2500 g or more.

In the present analysis, clinical and obstetric determinants of LBW, including HIV-seropositivity, preeclampsia, employment, preterm birth, and increased parity, are consistent with the extant literature.[4,8,32] A study done in Tanzania showed that, HIV-positive women were twice as likely to deliver LBW infants than HIV-negative women.[8] This was supported by the findings in Ethiopia,[33] Malawi,[25] Botswana,[34] and South Africa.[9] A plausible reason for the observed association could be that HIV infection creates increased nutritional requirements.[35,36] Nutritional status, including micronutrients, has prognostic implications in people with HIV/AIDS.[37,38] Zambia, a LMIC, is likely to have women unable to meet the nutritional demands of pregnancy due to HIV infection and chronically poor diet.[39] Speculations that this could be linked to the high magnitude of LBW might potentially be exacerbated by the burden of HIV infection and ART use.

Another reason could be that HIV-infection may alter the cytokine profile in the placenta.[40,41] This may affect the function of the placenta during pregnancy, thereby restricting the development of the fetus, which might be another incentive of LBW. Moreover, HIV infection and ART has been linked to overexpression of the Type 1 T helper, which are thought to be accountable for adverse pregnancy outcomes.[42] All pregnant women who are HIV positive in our study setting receive ART as a routine standard of care. However, the present study was not able to assess time on ART and the type of regimen as these were not documented in delivery case records. Furthermore, adherence data were not recorded, although a pilot study in a similar setting showed 96% adherence levels among pregnant women.[43]

Consistent with the extant literature,[4,33] preeclampsia and gestational age <37 have previously been linked to LBW among HIV-positive pregnant women. For example, a study in Ethiopia reported higher odds of LBW infants among women who developed preeclampsia and delivered preterm.[33] The link is thought to be through endothelial dysfunction, leading to disorders of placental development and systemic vasospasm and subsequent fetal growth restriction.[44] Recently, Ross et al.[45] studied women who delivered preterm and LBW infants and found that those who developed preeclampsia had different metabolic markers. The findings are suggestive of biological plausibility for preeclampsia to be a precursor to LBW and preterm birth.

Moreover, our study revealed a positive association between gestational age <37 weeks and LBW, with the likelihood of being a LBW infant increasing among newborns with gestational age <37 weeks. These findings were corroborated by other studies conducted in Zambia,[4] Tanzania,[46] Ethiopia,[47] Kenya,[29] and India.[45] This is plausible because gestational age below 37 weeks happens before the completion of intrauterine growth, and this is when the preferred birth weight has not been reached, leading to LBW.[45]

In the present study, LBW was associated with increased odds of developing respiratory distress syndrome, necrotising enterocolitis, and early mortality (within 28 days from birth), and this was consistent with published literature.[4,48] LBW's effect on the development of respiratory distress syndrome can be explained by the possibility that a more considerable proportion of such infants are small for gestational age.[48] When an infant is small for gestational age, the lungs are structurally immature and prone to surfactant deficiency, which is needed to lower surface tension and prevent alveolar collapse.[49]

LBW of neonates has been linked to early infant mortality previously.[28] Therefore, it was not surprising to find that most LBW infants were more likely to be admitted to KMC. The WHO recently recommended KMC to be the standard of care for LBW infants after evidence showed that it reduced mortality rates among LBW neonates and is now the standard of care in Zambia.[50] KMC has been reported to be an effective way to reduce neonatal mortality due to continuous skin-to-skin contact between mother and baby, which improves baby's temperature, supports exclusive breastfeeding, and helps early recognition/response illness.[45]

Strengths of the study

Our study has some strengths, including using a large data set for analysis compared to similar studies. Moreover, we conducted this study in the context of high HIV prevalence. Furthermore, LBW is of public health concern and is widely accepted as the most critical determinant of future chances of healthy growth and infant survival, particularly in a lower-middle income country like Zambia.

Study limitations

Our study had some limitations. First, we were unable to assess time on ART since all HIV infected pregnant women were on ART. Second, we were not able to adjust for some maternal variables: diabetes, maternal nutritional status, CD4 count, viral load, intracranial haemorrhage, patent ductus arteriosus, place of delivery, type of pregnancy (multiple or singleton gestation), maternal nutritional status, body mass index, and maternal smoking status as these were not recorded in case record files which could influence our outcomes. Third, gestational age may not have been collected with sufficient precision since mothers are only asked at ANC visit during registration, leading to bias in classification. In addition, antenatal dating scans are not commonly done at the study setting as this would help in accurate gestational age measurement if done around 18–22 weeks. Furthermore, necrotizing enterocolitis could not be confirmed by X-ray and therefore, the results on this variable should be interpreted with caution.

CONCLUSIONS

Overall, 60.2% of the newborns admitted to NICU at Women, and Newborn Hospital met the criteria for LBW, and these newborns were at markedly increased risk for adverse outcomes, including early neonatal death, necrotizing enterocolitis and respiratory distress syndrome. Preeclampsia, HIV-seropositive, increased parity, and gestational age <37 increased the risk of LBW substantially. These results underline a need for comprehensive, early, and high-quality prenatal and ANC. In addition, they highlight the importance of effective maternal and neonatal interventions to reduce the risk of morbidity and mortality for neonates with LBW in Zambia and other similar settings.

Financial support and sponsorship

Nil.

Conflicts of interest

There are no conflicts of interest.

Acknowledgments

We would like to thank the staff members at Women and Newborn Hospital for their assistance in retrieving files from the records office. Special thanks also go to the management of Women and Newborn Hospital for permitting us to use their data. Moses Mukosha and Mwansa Ketty Lubeya would like to acknowledge that some of their time is supported by the UNC-UNZA-Wits Partnership for HIV and Women's Reproductive Health (grant number: D43 TW010558).

REFERENCES

  • 1.World Health Organization. Global nutrition targets 2025: Low birth weight policy brief. Geneva: World Health Organization; 2014. [Google Scholar]
  • 2.Lira PI, Ashworth A, Morris SS. Low birth weight and morbidity from diarrhea and respiratory infection in northeast Brazil. J Pediatr. 1996;128:497–504. doi: 10.1016/s0022-3476(96)70360-8. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 3.Blencowe H, Krasevec J, de Onis M, Black RE, An X, Stevens GA, et al. National, regional, and worldwide estimates of low birthweight in 2015, with trends from 2000: A systematic analysis. Lancet Glob Health. 2019;7:e849–60. doi: 10.1016/S2214-109X(18)30565-5. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 4.Chibwesha CJ, Zanolini A, Smid M, Vwalika B, Phiri Kasaro M, Mwanahamuntu M, et al. Predictors and outcomes of low birth weight in Lusaka, Zambia. Int J Gynaecol Obstet. 2016;134:309–14. doi: 10.1016/j.ijgo.2016.03.021. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 5.Mukosha M, Chiyesu G, Vwalika B. Adherence to antiretroviral therapy among HIV infected pregnant women in public health sectors: A pilot of Chilenje level one Hospital Lusaka, Zambia. Pan Afr Med J. 2020;35:49. doi: 10.11604/pamj.2020.35.49.20078. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 6.Bruce-Brand C, Wright CA, Schubert PT. HIV, placental pathology, and birth outcomes-a brief overview. J Infect Dis. 2021;224:S683–90. doi: 10.1093/infdis/jiab240. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 7.Moncunill G, Dobaño C, González R, Smolen KK, Manaca MN, Balcells R, et al. Association of maternal factors and HIV infection with innate cytokine responses of delivering mothers and newborns in mozambique. Front Microbiol. 2020;11:1452. doi: 10.3389/fmicb.2020.01452. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 8.Siza JE. Risk factors associated with low birth weight of neonates among pregnant women attending a referral hospital in northern Tanzania. Tanzan J Health Res. 2008;10:1–8. doi: 10.4314/thrb.v10i1.14334. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 9.Rollins NC, Coovadia HM, Bland RM, Coutsoudis A, Bennish ML, Patel D, et al. Pregnancy outcomes in HIV-infected and uninfected women in rural and urban South Africa. J Acquir Immune Defic Syndr. 2007;44:321–8. doi: 10.1097/QAI.0b013e31802ea4b0. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 10.Deshpande Jayant D, Phalke D, Bangal V, Peeyuusha D, Sushen B. Maternal risk factors for low birth weight neonates: A hospital based casecontrol study in rural area of western Maharashtra, India. Natl J Community Med. 2011;2:394–8. [Google Scholar]
  • 11.Anggrahini SM, Notobroto HB, Suryawan A. Structural model of maternal behavior in community setting to prevent low birth weight in East Nusa Tenggara, Indonesia. Folia Med Indones. 2020;56:60–6. [Google Scholar]
  • 12.Kouser W, Bala K, Sahni B, Akhtar N. Epidemiological determinants of low birth weight: A prospective study. J Family Med Prim Care. 2020;9:3438–43. doi: 10.4103/jfmpc.jfmpc_414_20. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 13.Zaveri A, Paul P, Saha J, Barman B, Chouhan P. Maternal determinants of low birth weight among Indian children: Evidence from the National Family Health Survey-4, 2015-16. PLoS One. 2020;15:e0244562. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0244562. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 14.Abubakari A, Kynast-Wolf G, Jahn A. Maternal determinants of birth weight in northern Ghana. PLoS One. 2015;10:e0135641. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0135641. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 15.Ganesh Kumar S, Harsha Kumar HN, Jayaram S, Kotian MS. Determinants of low birth weight: A case control study in a district hospital in Karnataka. Indian J Pediatr. 2010;77:87–9. doi: 10.1007/s12098-009-0269-9. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 16.Patel S, Verma NR, Padhi P, Naik T, Nanda R, Naik G, et al. Retrospective analysis to identify the association of various determinants on birth weight. J Family Med Prim Care. 2021;10:496–501. doi: 10.4103/jfmpc.jfmpc_1493_20. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 17.Henry M, Florey L, Youll S, Gutman JR. An analysis of country adoption and implementation of the 2012 WHO recommendations for intermittent preventive treatment for pregnant women in sub-Saharan Africa. Malar J. 2018;17:364. doi: 10.1186/s12936-018-2512-1. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 18.Onubogu CU, Egbuonu I, Ugochukwu EF, Nwabueze AS, Ugochukwu O. The influence of maternal anthropometric characteristics on the birth size of term singleton South-East Nigerian newborn infants. Niger J Clin Pract. 2017;20:852–9. doi: 10.4103/njcp.njcp_308_16. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 19.Elshibly EM, Schmalisch G. The effect of maternal anthropometric characteristics and social factors on gestational age and birth weight in Sudanese newborn infants. BMC Public Health. 2008;8:244. doi: 10.1186/1471-2458-8-244. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 20.Bulterys M, Chao A, Munyemana S, Kurawige JB, Nawrocki P, Habimana P, et al. Maternal human immunodeficiency virus 1 infection and intrauterine growth: A prospective cohort study in Butare, Rwanda. Pediatr Infect Dis J. 1994;13:94–100. doi: 10.1097/00006454-199402000-00003. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 21.Zenebe A, Eshetu B, Gebremedhin S. Association between maternal HIV infection and birthweight in a tertiary hospital in southern Ethiopia: Retrospective cohort study. Ital J Pediatr. 2020;46:70. doi: 10.1186/s13052-020-00834-3. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 22.Braddick MR, Kreiss JK, Embree JB, Datta P, Ndinya-Achola JO, Pamba H, et al. Impact of maternal HIV infection on obstetrical and early neonatal outcome. AIDS. 1990;4:1001–5. doi: 10.1097/00002030-199010000-00009. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 23.Guyatt HL, Snow RW. Impact of malaria during pregnancy on low birth weight in sub-Saharan Africa. Clin Microbiol Rev. 2004;17:760–9. doi: 10.1128/CMR.17.4.760-769.2004. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 24.Mukosha M, Kaonga P, Kapembwa KM, Musonda P, Vwalika B, Lubeya MK, et al. Modelling mortality within 28 days among preterm infants at a tertiary hospital in Lusaka, Zambia: A retrospective review of hospital-based records. Pan Afr Med J. 2021;39:69. doi: 10.11604/pamj.2021.39.69.27138. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 25.Twabi HS, Manda SO, Small DS. Assessing the effects of maternal HIV infection on pregnancy outcomes using cross-sectional data in Malawi. BMC Public Health. 2020;20:974. doi: 10.1186/s12889-020-09046-0. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 26.Gluckman PD, Hanson MA, Cooper C, Thornburg KL. Effect of in utero and early-life conditions on adult health and disease. N Engl J Med. 2008;359:61–73. doi: 10.1056/NEJMra0708473. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 27.Gluckman PD, Hanson MA, Low FM. Evolutionary and developmental mismatches are consequences of adaptive developmental plasticity in humans and have implications for later disease risk. Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci. 2019;374:20180109. doi: 10.1098/rstb.2018.0109. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 28.Pusdekar YV, Patel AB, Kurhe KG, Bhargav SR, Thorsten V, Garces A, et al. Rates and risk factors for preterm birth and low birthweight in the global network sites in six low- and low middle-income countries. Reprod Health. 2020;17:187. doi: 10.1186/s12978-020-01029-z. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 29.Abalos E, Cuesta C, Grosso AL, Chou D, Say L. Global and regional estimates of preeclampsia and eclampsia: A systematic review. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol. 2013;170:1–7. doi: 10.1016/j.ejogrb.2013.05.005. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 30.Angelescu K, Nussbaumer-Streit B, Sieben W, Scheibler F, Gartlehner G. Benefits and harms of screening for and treatment of asymptomatic bacteriuria in pregnancy: A systematic review. BMC Pregnancy Childbirth. 2016;16:336. doi: 10.1186/s12884-016-1128-0. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 31.Mukosha M, Jacobs C, Musonda P, Zulu JM, Masaku S, Nkwemu C, et al. Determinants of preterm births at a national hospital in Zambia: Application of partial proportional odds model. Obstet Gynecol Res. 2021;4:117–30. [Google Scholar]
  • 32.Pal A, Manna S, Das B, Dhara PC. The risk of low birth weight and associated factors in West Bengal, India: A community based cross-sectional study. Egypt Pediatr Assoc Gaz. 2020;68:1–11. [Google Scholar]
  • 33.Ekubagewargies DT, Kassie DG, Takele WW. Maternal HIV infection and preeclampsia increased risk of low birth weight among newborns delivered at University of Gondar specialized referral hospital, Northwest Ethiopia, 2017. Ital J Pediatr. 2019;45:7. doi: 10.1186/s13052-019-0608-z. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 34.Shava E, Moyo S, Zash R, Diseko M, Dintwa EN, Mupfumi L, et al. Brief report: High rates of adverse birth outcomes in HIV and syphilis coinfected women in Botswana. J Acquir Immune Defic Syndr. 2019;81:e135–40. doi: 10.1097/QAI.0000000000002082. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 35.Elongi Moyene JP, Scheers H, Tandu-Umba B, Haufroid V, Buassa-Bu-Tsumbu B, Verdonck F, et al. Preeclampsia and toxic metals: A case-control study in Kinshasa, DR Congo. Environ Health. 2016;15:48. doi: 10.1186/s12940-016-0132-1. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 36.Biswas S, Roy A, Biswas S. Comparative study of copper, zinc, iron, ferritin, calcium and magnesium levels in pregnancy induced hypertension and normotensive primigravida mothers. Int J Res Med Sci. 2017;4:1879–83. [Google Scholar]
  • 37.Kelly P, Zulu I, Amadi B, Munkanta M, Banda J, Rodrigues LC, et al. Morbidity and nutritional impairment in relation to CD4 count in a Zambian population with high HIV prevalence. Acta Trop. 2002;83:151–8. doi: 10.1016/s0001-706x(02)00095-5. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 38.Woodd SL, Kelly P, Koethe JR, Praygod G, Rehman AM, Chisenga M, et al. Risk factors for mortality among malnourished HIV-infected adults eligible for antiretroviral therapy. BMC Infect Dis. 2016;16:562. doi: 10.1186/s12879-016-1894-3. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 39.Gernand AD, Schulze KJ, Stewart CP, West KP, Jr, Christian P. Micronutrient deficiencies in pregnancy worldwide: Health effects and prevention. Nat Rev Endocrinol. 2016;12:274–89. doi: 10.1038/nrendo.2016.37. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 40.Moussa M, Roques P, Fievet N, Menu E, Maldonado-Estrada JG, Brunerie J, et al. Placental cytokine and chemokine production in HIV-1-infected women: Trophoblast cells show a different pattern compared to cells from HIV-negative women. Clin Exp Immunol. 2001;125:455–64. doi: 10.1046/j.1365-2249.2001.01629.x. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 41.Chisulo A, Lambwe N, Sijumbila G, Mukosha M. Serum selenium levels in essential hypertension among adults at the university teaching hospital, Lusaka, Zambia. Med J Zambia. 2017;44:218–24. [Google Scholar]
  • 42.Barlow RE, Marshall AW, Proschan F. Properties of probability distributions with monotone hazard rate. Ann Math Stat. 1963;34:375–89. [Google Scholar]
  • 43.Barradas D, Gupta S, Moyo C, Sachathep K, Dzekedzeke K, Nkumbula T, et al. Findings from the 2016 Zambia population-based HIV impact assessment (ZAMPHIA): HIV prevalence, incidence and progress towards the 90-90-90 goals. J Int AIDS Soc 2017. 2017:35–6. [Google Scholar]
  • 44.Umesawa M, Kobashi G. Epidemiology of hypertensive disorders in pregnancy: Prevalence, risk factors, predictors and prognosis. Hypertens Res. 2017;40:213–20. doi: 10.1038/hr.2016.126. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 45.Ross, Kharah M, Rebecca J. Baer, Kelli Ryckman, Sky K. Feuer, Gretchen Bandoli, Christina Chambers, Elena Flowers, et al. “Second trimester inflammatory and metabolic markers in women delivering preterm with and without preeclampsia.”. J Perinatol. 2019;39:314–20. doi: 10.1038/s41372-018-0275-8. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 46.Adams JW, Watts DH, Phelps BR. A systematic review of the effect of HIV infection and antiretroviral therapy on the risk of pre-eclampsia. Int J Gynaecol Obstet. 2016;133:17–21. doi: 10.1016/j.ijgo.2015.08.007. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 47.Autran B, Carcelain G, Li TS, Blanc C, Mathez D, Tubiana R, et al. Positive effects of combined antiretroviral therapy on CD4+ T cell homeostasis and function in advanced HIV disease. Science. 1997;277:112–6. doi: 10.1126/science.277.5322.112. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 48.Condò V, Cipriani S, Colnaghi M, Bellù R, Zanini R, Bulfoni C, et al. Neonatal respiratory distress syndrome: Are risk factors the same in preterm and term infants? J Matern Fetal Neonatal Med. 2017;30:1267–72. doi: 10.1080/14767058.2016.1210597. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 49.Pickerd N, Kotecha S. Pathophysiology of respiratory distress syndrome. Paediatr Child Health. 2009;19:153–7. [Google Scholar]
  • 50.Cornelius DC. Preeclampsia: From inflammation to immunoregulation. Clin Med Insights Blood Disord. 2018;11:1179545X17752325. doi: 10.1177/1179545X17752325. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

Articles from Annals of African Medicine are provided here courtesy of Wolters Kluwer -- Medknow Publications

RESOURCES