Home
Issues
Aim & Scope
Open Access
Editorial Board
Indexing
Supporting Midwifery Associations
Contact us
Manuscript Types
Manuscript Formatting
How to submit
Special publications and Reprints
Authorship & COI
Principles of Transparency Checklist
Publication Ethics and Publication Malpractice Statement
CONFERENCE PROCEEDING
Redefining nutritional assessment in adolescent pregnant women: A WHO-based standard proposal to enhance prenatal monitoring and minimize perinatal risks
1
University of Chile, Department of Women and Newborn Health Promotion, Santiago, Chile
2
Corporación Municipal de Educación- Salud y Menores de Puente Alto- Chile, Salud, Santiago, Chile
3
University of Chile, Public Health Institute, Santiago, Chile
Eur J Midwifery 2026;10(Supplement 1):A333
ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND:
In Chile, the main nutritional issue among adolescent pregnant women (PA) is excess malnutrition (EM), with a prevalence of 24% obesity, 28.85% overweight, and 5.46% underweight in 2023. Currently, nutritional status (NS) is assessed using body mass index (BMI) cut-off points developed for adult women (AW), which may not be appropriate for adolescents.
OBJECTIVES:
To propose and evaluate a specific standard for assessing NS in PA using WHO BMI cut-off points for adolescents (WHO-A).
METHODS:
A retrospective cohort study was conducted with 753 PA who initiated prenatal care before 15 weeks of gestation between 2013 and 2020 in Santiago, Chile. Data were extracted from clinical records, including sociodemographic, obstetric, anthropometric, and perinatal variables. Descriptive statistics were used, and comparisons between WHO-A and AW standards were made using the chi-square test (p<0.05). Associations with adverse perinatal outcomes were assessed through a negative binomial regression model. Ethical approval was obtained from the institutional review board.
RESULTS:
The mean age was 17.7 years (SD=1.4); 72.4% had 8–12 years of education, 57.4% were without a partner, 95% were primiparous, and 69% had vaginal delivery. Among newborns, 6.4% had low birth weight (LBW), and 5.4% presented macrosomia. WHO-A allowed differentiation between pregestational undernutrition and underweight (0.53% and 2.26%, respectively), while AW only identified 3.2% as underweight. WHO-A showed a lower prevalence of normal NS (47.4% vs 52.1%) and a higher prevalence of overweight (32.5% vs 30%), obesity (17.3% vs 14.7%), and EM (49.8% vs 44.8%). WHO-A had stronger associations with small-for-gestational-age (SGA) and LBW, though differences were not statistically significant compared to AW.
CONCLUSIONS:
Using AW standards overestimates normal NS and underestimates EM in PA, risking excessive weight gain and obesity; WHO-A standards are recommended for this population
KEY MESSAGE:
Using AW standards overestimates normal NS and underestimates EM in PA, risking excessive weight gain and obesity; WHO-A standards are recommended Education faculty development 2
In Chile, the main nutritional issue among adolescent pregnant women (PA) is excess malnutrition (EM), with a prevalence of 24% obesity, 28.85% overweight, and 5.46% underweight in 2023. Currently, nutritional status (NS) is assessed using body mass index (BMI) cut-off points developed for adult women (AW), which may not be appropriate for adolescents.
OBJECTIVES:
To propose and evaluate a specific standard for assessing NS in PA using WHO BMI cut-off points for adolescents (WHO-A).
METHODS:
A retrospective cohort study was conducted with 753 PA who initiated prenatal care before 15 weeks of gestation between 2013 and 2020 in Santiago, Chile. Data were extracted from clinical records, including sociodemographic, obstetric, anthropometric, and perinatal variables. Descriptive statistics were used, and comparisons between WHO-A and AW standards were made using the chi-square test (p<0.05). Associations with adverse perinatal outcomes were assessed through a negative binomial regression model. Ethical approval was obtained from the institutional review board.
RESULTS:
The mean age was 17.7 years (SD=1.4); 72.4% had 8–12 years of education, 57.4% were without a partner, 95% were primiparous, and 69% had vaginal delivery. Among newborns, 6.4% had low birth weight (LBW), and 5.4% presented macrosomia. WHO-A allowed differentiation between pregestational undernutrition and underweight (0.53% and 2.26%, respectively), while AW only identified 3.2% as underweight. WHO-A showed a lower prevalence of normal NS (47.4% vs 52.1%) and a higher prevalence of overweight (32.5% vs 30%), obesity (17.3% vs 14.7%), and EM (49.8% vs 44.8%). WHO-A had stronger associations with small-for-gestational-age (SGA) and LBW, though differences were not statistically significant compared to AW.
CONCLUSIONS:
Using AW standards overestimates normal NS and underestimates EM in PA, risking excessive weight gain and obesity; WHO-A standards are recommended for this population
KEY MESSAGE:
Using AW standards overestimates normal NS and underestimates EM in PA, risking excessive weight gain and obesity; WHO-A standards are recommended Education faculty development 2
| eISSN: | 2585-2906 |
We process personal data collected when visiting the website. The function of obtaining information about users and their behavior is carried out by voluntarily entered information in forms and saving cookies in end devices. Data, including cookies, are used to provide services, improve the user experience and to analyze the traffic in accordance with the Privacy policy. Data are also collected and processed by Google Analytics tool (more).
You can change cookies settings in your browser. Restricted use of cookies in the browser configuration may affect some functionalities of the website.
You can change cookies settings in your browser. Restricted use of cookies in the browser configuration may affect some functionalities of the website.
