Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-2pzkn Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-06-01T11:47:50.869Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Social Cost of Twin Births

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 August 2014

Emile Papiernik
Emile Papiernik*
Affiliation:
Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Faculté de Médicine, Paris-Sud, Unité de Recherches INSERM 187, Hôpital Antoine Béclère, 92141 Clamart, France
*
Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Faculté de Médicine, Paris-Sud, Unité de Recherches INSERM 187, Hôpital Antoine Béclère, 92141 Clamart, France

Abstract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.

This study analyzes costs for neonatal care and costs for care of handicapped children related to twin pregnancies and births. These costs are highly related to the unfavorable birthweight distribution for twins. Each twin pregnancy may cost 10 times more than a single pregnancy. This economic analysis favors all kinds of preventive policies and a calculation is proposed for measuring the probable effect in costs of even a slight decrease in the proportion of very low and low birthweight for twins.

Keywords

Twin pregnancyNeonatal careBirthweightSocial cost
Type
Research Article
Information
Acta geneticae medicae et gemellologiae: twin research , Volume 32 , Issue 2 , April 1983 , pp. 105 - 111
Copyright
Copyright © The International Society for Twin Studies 1983

References

REFERENCES

1.Alberman, E (1980): Prospects for better perinatal health. Lancet 1:189–192.Google Scholar
2.Barter, RH, Hsu, I, Erkenbeck, RV, Pugsley, LQ (1965): The prevention of prematurity in multiple pregnancy. Am J Obstet Gynecol 91:787–796.Google Scholar
3.Bleker, OP, Breuer, W, Huidekoper, BL (1979): A study of birth weight, placental weight and mortality of twins as compared to singletons. Br J Obstet Gynecol 86:111–118.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
4.Chase, HC, Byrnes, ME (1970): Trends in “prematurity,” United States, 1950–1967. Am J Publ Health 60:1967–1983.Google Scholar
5.Claireaux, A (1975): Still births and first-week deaths. In Chamberlain, R, Chamberlain, G, Howlett, B, Claireaux, A (eds): “British Births 1970, Vol 1. The First Week of Life. London: Heinemann, pp 235–253.Google Scholar
6.Döring, GK, Hobfeld, C, Auer, A (1978): Über Die Risiken Der Zwillingsschwangerschaft und-geburt. Geburtsh U Frauenheilk 38:516–524.Google Scholar
7.Dunn, P (1976): Premature delivery and the preterm infant. J Irish Med Ass 69:246–254.Google ScholarPubMed
8.Fabia, J (1979): Mortalité périnatale au Québec: II. Jumeaux. Vie Med Can Fr 8:28–35.Google Scholar
9.Farroqui, MO, Grossman, JH, Shannon, RA (1973): A review of twin pregnancy and perinatal mortality. Obstet Gynecol Surv (Suppl) 28:144–153.Google Scholar
10.Grennert, L, Persoon, PH, Gennser, G (1978): A review of twin pregnancy and perinatal mortality. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand (Suppl) 78:5–14.Google Scholar
11.Hagberg, B (1979): Epidemiological and preventive aspects of cerebral palsy and severe mental retardation in Sweden. Eur J Pediatr 130:71–78.Google Scholar
12.Héluin, G, Bessis, R, Papiernik, E (1979): Clinical management of twin pregnancies. Acta Genet Med Gemellol 28:333.Google Scholar
13.Jouppila, P, Kaupilla, A, Koivisto, M, Moilanen, I, Ylikorkala, O (1975): Twin pregnancy. The role of active management during pregnancy and delivery. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand (Suppl) 44:13–19.Google Scholar
14.Keith, L, Ellis, R, Berger, G, Depp, R (1980): The North Western University Multihospital Twin Study. Am J Obstet Gynecol 138:781–789.Google Scholar
15.Lee, KS, Paneth, N, Gartner, LM, Pearlman, M (1980): The very low-birth weight rate: Principal predictor of neonatal mortality in industrialized populations. Pediatrics 97:759–764.Google Scholar
16.Medearis, A, Jonas, HS, Stockbauer, JW, Domke, HR (1979): Perinatal deaths in twin pregnancy: A five-year analysis of statewide statistics in Missouri. Am J Obstet Gynecol 134:413–421.Google Scholar
17.Misenhimer, HR, Kaltreider, DF (1978): Effects of decreased prenatal activity in patients with twin pregnancy. Obstet Gynecol 51:692–694.Google ScholarPubMed
18.O'Connor, MC, Murphy, H, Dalrymple, IJ (1979): Double blind trial of ritodrine and placebo in twin pregnancy. Br J Obstet Gynecol 86:706–709.Google Scholar
19.Persson, PH, Grennert, L (1979): Towards a normalization of outcome of the twin pregnancy. Acta Genet Med Gemellol 28:341–346.Google ScholarPubMed
20.Persson, PH, Grennert, L, Kullander, S (1979): On improved outcome of twin pregnancies. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand 58:3–7.Google Scholar
21.Rumeau-Rouquette, C, Du Mazubrun, C, Arkipoff, J, Breart, G, Crost, M, Hennequin, JF (1979): Naitre en France. Enquête Nationales sur la grossesse et l'accouchement. Santé Publique. Paris: INSERM.Google Scholar
22.Rumeau-Rouquette, C (1978): Malformations congénitales et risques périnatals. Enquête prospective. Paris: INSERM.Google Scholar
23.Sachs, VH, Kuhl, HO (1977): Lasst sich der hohe Prozentsatz frühegeborener Zwillingstkinder reduzieren. Znäk 99:552–563.Google Scholar
24.Simpson, H, Walker, G (1981): Estimating the costs required for neonatal intensive care. Arch Dis Child 56:90–93.Google Scholar
25.Stanley, FJ (1981): Improved male neonatal outcome in western Australia. Early Hum Dev 5:179–185.Google Scholar
26.Stewart, A, Reynolds, EOR (1979): Intensive care and the very-low-birthweight infant. Lancet ii: 846.Google Scholar
27.Tudehope, DI, Sinclair, JC (1977): Birth weight, gestational age and neonatal risk. In Berhman, RE (ed): “Neonatal-Perinatal Medicine.” St. Louis: CV Mosby, pp 116–127.Google Scholar
28.Vignier, B, Chapalain, MT, Damato, D, Pinkham, L, Prigent, P. Theys, J, Williams, P, Leclerco, G, Kastler, O, Cahen, , Perruchio, P, Papiernik-Berkhauer, E, Farcat, , Lefevre-Paul, , Verlodt, , Rumeau-Rouquette, , Fagnani, (1971): La perinatalité (etude de R.C.B.). In Ministère de la Santé Publique et de la Sécurité Sociale, Pour une Politique de Santé, Vol. 1. Paris: La Documentation française, pp 46–107.Google Scholar