Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Consanguinity and Adverse Pregnancy Outcomes: The North of Jordan Experience

  • Published:
Maternal and Child Health Journal Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

This cross-sectional study was carried out to assess the association between consanguineous marriages and adverse pregnancy outcome in the north of Jordan. Women delivered in four major hospitals in the north of Jordan between April 2007 and May 2007 were included in the study. Non-Jordanian women and women with multiple pregnancies were excluded. Mothers answered a pilot-tested structured questionnaire administered by trained personnel in the maternity ward. Data regarding pregnancy outcomes were obtained from the patients’ individual records. A total of 3,269 women with a mean age of 27.2 (SD 6.6) years were included. About 49% of women had consanguineous marriages. Consanguineous marriages were significantly associated with low birth weight delivery (13.9% vs. 10.1%), preterm delivery (19.9% vs. 12.3%), and births with congenital anomalies (4.1% vs. 0.8%) compared with non-consanguineous marriages. In the multivariate analysis, consanguinity was significantly associated with preterm delivery (OR = 1.5, 95% CI 1.2, 1.9), and congenital malformations (OR = 6.5, 95% CI 2.8, 15.3). In conclusions, this study supports the association between consanguinity and some adverse pregnancy outcomes.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Modell, B., & Darr, A. (2002). Science and society: Genetic counseling and customary consanguineous marriage. Nature Reviews. Genetics, 3, 225–229. doi:10.1038/nrg754.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. al-Salem, M., & Rawashdeh, N. (1993). Consanguinity in north Jordan: Prevalence and pattern. Journal of Biosocial Science, 25(4), 553–556. doi:10.1017/S0021932000021921.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Tamim, H., Khogali, M., Beydoun, H., Melki, I., Yunis, K., & National Collaborative Perinatal Neonatal Network. (2003). Consanguinity and apnea of prematurity. American Journal of Epidemiology, 158, 942–946. doi:10.1093/aje/kwg226.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Yunis, K., El Rafei, R., & Mumtaz, G. (2008). Consanguinity: Perinatal outcomes and prevention—a view from the middle east. NeoReviews, 9(2), e59. doi:10.1542/neo.9-2-e59.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Alwan, A., & Modell, B. (1997). Community control of genetic and congenital disorders. EMRO Technical Publication Series 24. Egypt: WHO Regional Office for the Eastern Mediterranean Region.

    Google Scholar 

  6. Khoury, S. A., & Massad, D. (1992). Consanguineous marriages in Jordan. American Journal of Medical Genetics, 43, 769–775. doi:10.1002/ajmg.1320430502.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Hamamy, H., Janhawi, L., Al-Darawsheh, J., & Ajlouni, K. (2005). Consanguineous marriages in Jordan: Why is the rate changing with time? Clinical Genetics, 67, 511–516. doi:10.1111/j.1399-0004.2005.00426.x.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Mumtaz, G., Tamim, H., Kanaan, M., Khawaja, M., Khogali, M., Wakim, G., et al. (2007). Effect of consanguinity on birth weight for gestational age in a developing country. American Journal of Epidemiology, 165, 742–752. doi:10.1093/aje/kwk108.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. de Costa, C. M. (2002). Consanguineous marriage and its relevance to obstetric practice. Obstetrical and Gynecological Survey, 57, 530–536. doi:10.1097/00006254-200208000-00023.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Yunis, K., Mumtaz, G., Bitar, F., Chamseddine, F., Kassar, M., Rashkidi, J., et al. (2006). Consanguineous marriage and congenital heart defects: A case–control study in the neonatal period. American Journal of Medical Genetics, 140, 1524–1530.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Sezik, M., Ozkaya, O., Sezik, H. T., Yapar, E. G., & Kaya, H. (2006). Does marriage between first cousins have any predictive value for maternal and perinatal outcomes in pre-eclampsia? Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology Research, 32, 475–481. doi:10.1111/j.1447-0756.2006.00432.x.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Benson, J. W. (2005). Recessive disorders and consanguineous marriage. BMJ (Clinical Research Ed.), 331, 1475. doi:10.1136/bmj.331.7530.1475.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Hamamy, H. A., Masri, A. T., Al-Hadidy, A. M., & Ajlouni, K. M. (2007). Consanguinity and genetic disorders. Profile from Jordan. Saudi Medical Journal, 28, 1015–1017.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Koury, S. A., & Massad, D. F. (2000). Consanguinity, fertility, reproductive wastage, infant mortality and congenital malformations in Jordan. Saudi Medical Journal, 21, 150–154.

    Google Scholar 

  15. Hussain, R., Bittles, A. H., & Sullivan, S. (2001). Consanguinity and early mortality in the Muslim populations of India and Pakistan. American Journal of Human Biology, 13, 777–787. doi:10.1002/ajhb.1124.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Stoltenberg, C., Magnus, P., Skrondal, A., & Lie, R. T. (1999). Consanguinity and recurrence risk of stillbirth and infant death. American Journal of Public Health, 89, 517–523.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Jaber, L., Merlob, P., Gabriel, R., & Shohat, M. (1997). Effects of consanguineous marriage on reproductive outcome in an Arab community in Israel. American Journal of Medical Genetics, 34, 1000–1002.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  18. Al-Eissa, Y. A., & Ba’Aqeel, H. S. (1994). Risk factors for spontaneous preterm birth in a Saudi population. European Journal of Obstetrics, Gynecology, and Reproductive Biology, 57, 19–24. doi:10.1016/0028-2243(94)90104-X.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Saad, F. A., & Jauniaux, E. (2002). Recurrent early pregnancy loss and consanguinity. Reproductive Biomedicine Online, 5, 167–170.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Pedersen, J. (2002). The influence of consanguineous marriage on infant and child mortality among Palestinians in the West Bank and Gaza, Jordan, Lebanon and Syria. Community Genetics, 5, 178–181. doi:10.1159/000066333.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Bacon, C., & Fryers, P. (1994). Infant death and consanguineous marriage. BMJ (Clinical Research Ed.), 308, 980.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  22. Orstavik, K. H., Lindemann, R., & Steen, J. (1994). Infant death and consanguineous marriage. BMJ (Clinical Research Ed.), 308, 659.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  23. al Husain, M., & al Bunyan, M. (1997). Consanguineous marriages in a Saudi population and the effect of inbreeding on prenatal and postnatal mortality. Annals of Tropical Paediatrics, 17, 155–160.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Jaber, L., Romano, O., Halpern, G. J., Livne, I., Green, M., & Shohat, T. (2005). Awareness about problems associated with consanguineous marriages: Survey among Israeli Arab adolescents. The Journal of Adolescent Health, 36, 530. doi:10.1016/j.jadohealth.2004.08.003.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Stunkard, A., & Albaum, J. (1981). The accuracy of self-reported weights. The American Journal of Clinical Nutrition, 31, 1593–1599.

    Google Scholar 

  26. Wing, R., Epsein, L. H., & Ossip, D. J. (1979). Reliability and validity of self report and observers estimates of relative weight. Addictive Behaviors, 4(2), 133–140. doi:10.1016/0306-4603(79)90047-9.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Shafi, T., Khan, M. R., & Atiq, M. (2003). Congenital heart disease and associated malformation in children with cleft lip and palate in Pakistan. British Journal of Plastic Surgery, 56, 106–109. doi:10.1016/S0007-1226(03)00044-4.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Kulkarni, M. L., & Kurian, M. (1990). Consanguinity and its effect on growth and development: A South Indian study. Journal of Medical Genetics, 27(6), 348–352.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Nath, A., Patil, C., & Naik, V. A. (2004). Prevalence of consanguineous marriages in a rural community and its effect on pregnancy outcome. Indian Journal of Community Medicine, 29, 1–3.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Jordan University of Science and Technology, P.O. Box 2954, Irbid, 21110, Jordan

    Basil R. Obeidat & Zouhair O. Amarin

  2. Department of Community Medicine and Public Health, Jordan University of Science and Technology, Irbid, Jordan

    Yousef S. Khader & Mousa Al Omari

  3. Department of Pediatrics, Jordan University of Science and Technology, Irbid, Jordan

    Mohammad Kassawneh

Authors
  1. Basil R. Obeidat
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Yousef S. Khader
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Zouhair O. Amarin
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Mohammad Kassawneh
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Mousa Al Omari
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Basil R. Obeidat.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Obeidat, B.R., Khader, Y.S., Amarin, Z.O. et al. Consanguinity and Adverse Pregnancy Outcomes: The North of Jordan Experience. Matern Child Health J 14, 283–289 (2010). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10995-008-0426-1

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10995-008-0426-1

Keywords

Search

Navigation