Skip to content

Advertisement

You're viewing the new version of our site. Please leave us feedback.

Learn more

BMC Pregnancy and Childbirth

Open Access
Open Peer Review

This article has Open Peer Review reports available.

How does Open Peer Review work?

Prevalence of anaemia and associated risk factors among pregnant women attending antenatal care in Gulu and Hoima Regional Hospitals in Uganda: A cross sectional study

BMC Pregnancy and ChildbirthBMC series – open, inclusive and trusted201616:76

https://doi.org/10.1186/s12884-016-0865-4

Received: 20 May 2015

Accepted: 7 April 2016

Published: 11 April 2016

Abstract

Background

Anaemia is a public health problem affecting over 1.62 billion people globally. It affects all age groups of people and is particularly more prevalent in pregnant women. Africa carries a high burden of anaemia; in Uganda 24 % of women of child bearing age have anaemia. Pregnant women living in poverty are at greater risk of developing iron deficiency anaemia. The objective of this study was to determine the prevalence of anaemia and the associated risk factors in pregnant women attending antenatal care at Gulu and Hoima Regional Hospitals in Northern and Western Uganda respectively.

Methods

We conducted a cross sectional study in Gulu and Hoima Regional Hospitals from July to October 2012. Our study participants were pregnant women attending antenatal care. Socio-demographic data were collected using structured questionnaires and blood samples were collected for haemoglobin estimation. Haemoglobin concentration was determined using an automated analyzer closed mode of blood sampling. Data were analysed using Stata version 12. Odds ratio was used as a measure of association, with 95 % confidence interval; and independent risk factors for anaemia were investigated using logistic regression analyses. Ethical approval was obtained from Gulu University Research Ethics Committee and written informed consent was obtained from each study participant.

Results

The overall prevalence of anaemia was 22.1 %; higher in Gulu (32.9 %) than in Hoima (12.1 %), p < 0.001. In Gulu, the prevalence of mild anaemia was 23 %, moderate anaemia was 9 %, and severe anaemia was 0.8 %, while in Hoima, the prevalence of mild anaemia was 9 %, moderate anaemia was 2.5 %, and severe anaemia was 0.5 %. Independent risk factors for anaemia were: being a housewife [Adjusted Odds Ratio (AOR) = 1.7, 95 % CI: 1.05–2.68]; and being a resident in Gulu (AOR = 3.6, 95 % CI: 2.41–5.58).

Conclusion

The prevalence of anaemia in pregnant women in Gulu is higher than in Hoima. Amongst pregnancy women, being a housewife is an independent risk factor for anaemia. Greater efforts are required to encourage early antenatal attendance from women in these at risk groups. This would allow iron and folic acid supplementation during pregnancy, which would potentially reduce the prevalence of anaemia.

Keywords

AnaemiaGuluHoimaHospitalPregnant womenPrevalence

Background

Anaemia is a global public health problem affecting over 1.62 billion people [1]. It affects all age groups of people but pregnant women and children are more vulnerable. Iron deficiency is the leading cause of anaemia among pregnant women globally [2]. Other causes of anaemia in pregnancy are heavy blood loss as may occur during menstruation and parasitic infections, conditions such as malaria and HIV which lower blood haemoglobin (Hb) concentrations, and micronutrient deficiencies [1]. Low intake and poor absorption of iron especially during growth and pregnancy when iron requirements are higher remain risk factors for anaemia [3]. The World Health Organisation defines anaemia in pregnant women as Hb concentration less than 11.0 g/dl [4]. In pregnant women, anaemia increases risk for maternal and child mortality and has negative consequences on the cognitive and physical development of children [5], and on work productivity [6, 7]. Severe anaemia is associated with fatigue, weakness, breathlessness, dizziness, drowsiness and perceived paleness of the skin [8]. In the developing world, anaemia is a priority nutritional problem because of the economic, social, and other negative consequences associated with it [9]. Africa carries a high burden of anaemia with a prevalence of 65.8 % among pregnant women [1]. In Uganda, the prevalence of anaemia among women of child bearing age has been reported to be 24 % overall, and 13.1 and 18.8 % in Northern and Western Uganda, respectively [10].

Poverty is one of the risk factors for iron deficiency in pregnant women [11, 12], and given the fact that Northern region is the poorest region in Uganda [13] with high rates of malnutrition, the problem of anaemia cannot be underestimated. Despite the known consequences of anaemia in pregnancy, there is scanty information on the prevalence of anaemia in pregnant women in Northern Uganda since the end of the Lord’s Resistance Army (LRA) rebellion in 2006. The two decades of civil war in Northern Uganda led to the destruction of social services and left the majority of the population in poverty. Western Uganda on the other hand remained peaceful during the same period. It was therefore necessary to compare the prevalence of anaemia in the two regional hospitals. This would give an insight into the long term effect of the war on women of child bearing age. The objective of this study was to determine the prevalence of anaemia and associated risk factors among pregnant women attending antenatal care at Gulu and Hoima Regional Hospitals so that evidence-based interventions can be put in place.

Methods

Study design and setting

We conducted a cross sectional study at Gulu and Hoima Regional Hospitals from July to October 2012. Gulu and Hoima Regional Hospitals are located in Northern and Western Uganda, respectively. Gulu district headquarters are located approximately 340 km North of Uganda’s capital city, Kampala. The population of Gulu District is 443,733 [14]. The coordinates of the district are: 02 45 N, 32 00E. Hoima district headquarters are located approximately 230 km Northwest of Kampala. The population of Hoima district is 573,903 [14]. The coordinates of the district are: 01 24 N, 31 18E.

Study population

Our study participants were pregnant women attending antenatal care in the two regional hospitals. All pregnant women who consented to the study and who reported that they did not have sickle cell disease were eligible to participate in the study. This is because persons who have sickle cell disease usually have lower Hb levels than the normal persons.

Sample size and sampling procedures

The sample size for this study was calculated using Kish Leslie formula. We considered 95 % confidence interval, 5 % margin of error, and 45 and 64 % prevalence of anaemia for Gulu (Northern Uganda) and Hoima (Western Uganda), respectively as was reported by Ugandan Demographic and Health surveys [15]. We factored a 10 % non response rate in the sample size calculation. The two hospitals were purposively sampled since they are regional referral hospitals in the study areas with high patient load, from different backgrounds and settings. We used simple random sampling to select the study participants. Each day, before the provision of health education, the names of every pregnant woman attending the antenatal clinic was taken. Fifty percent of the women were then randomly selected until the required sample size was attained. The probability sampling was employed to avoid selection bias.

Socio-demographic data

Data on socio-demographic characteristics were collected using structured questionnaires (Additional file 1). The questionnaire was pre-tested in an area with similar settings to those of the study hospitals. The questionnaire was then refined to further improve its validity and reliability. The questionnaires were both in English and the local languages. Trained research assistants who were fluent in both English and the local language (Luo or Lunyoro) conducted face-to-face interviews with the pregnant women. The interviews were conducted in privacy to maintain confidentiality, within the hospital premises.

Collection and analysis of blood samples

The vein puncture site was cleaned using a swab containing 70 % alcohol and using aseptic methods, an appropriate vein was identified and a hypodermic needle introduced into the vein. About 3–4 ml of venous blood was drawn into a syringe and then transferred into a sterile vacutainer containing EDTA and transported to the laboratory for analysis. Trained laboratory technicians did the analyses both in Gulu and Hoima Regional Hospitals. Laboratory analysis was done using an automated analyser, (Celltac, Automated Haematology Analyzer, MEK-6400. NIHON KOHDEN). The manufacturer supplied controls were run every morning to ensure that the analyser was operating within 2.0 standard deviations. The closed mode of blood sampling was used; the analyser automatically sampled blood, processed, analysed and printed out the haemoglobin concentration levels. Pregnant women with haemoglobin concentration of less than 11.0 g/dl were categorised as anaemic. Anaemia was considered severe when haemoglobin concentration was less than 7.0 g/dL, moderate when haemoglobin was between 7.0 and 9.9 g/dL, and mild from 10 to 10.9 g/dL [4].

Statistical analysis

Both the laboratory and questionnaire data were checked and cleaned for completeness and consistency. Participants with missing data on haemoglobin level were excluded from the analyses. Statistical analysis was performed using Stata version 12. Quantitative variables were categorised into groups basing on either biologically recognised groupings like trimester in pregnancy or societal recognised groupings like education levels. Descriptive statistics was employed for the analysis of demographic data. We used odds ratios as a measure of association, with a 95 % confidence interval. Variables with p-values <0.2 at bivariable analysis and those with biological plausibility with respect to anaemia were put into backward stepwise multivariable logistic regressions to determine the independent predictors for anaemia in pregnancy. Statistical significance was set at P < 0.05.

Ethical considerations

The study was approved by Gulu University Research Ethics Committee. Written informed consent was obtained from each study participant before data collection. Privacy and confidentiality was maintained throughout the study process.

Results

A total of 743 pregnant women took part in this study for a response rate of 91.1 %. Some participants withdrew from the study at the point of blood collection. A large majority of the study participants were below the age of 25 years (Table 1). A total of 164 (22.1 %) women were anaemic. The prevalence of anaemia in Gulu was 32.9 % (117/356) and that in Hoima was 12.1 % (47/387). The prevalence of mild, moderate and severe anaemia in Gulu were 23, 9, and 0.8 % respectively; and in Hoima were 9, 2.5, and 0.5 %, respectively (Table 2). In the bivariable analysis, anaemia was significantly associated with the level of education attained, occupation, being in or out of school, and being a resident of Gulu district (Table 3). Being a housewife (AOR = 1.7, 95 % CI: 1.05–2.68) and a resident in Gulu districts (AOR = 3.6, 95 % CI: 2.41–5.58) were independent risk factors for anaemia (Table 4).
Table 1

Socio-demographic characteristics of the study participants (N = 743)

 

Hoima (N = 387)

Gulu (N = 356)

Characteristic

Number

Percent

Number

Percent

Age

    

   ≤19

102

26.4

97

27.3

   20–24

116

30.0

127

35.7

   25–29

91

23.5

87

24.4

   30–34

54

14.0

32

9.0

   35–39

22

5.7

9

2.5

   >39

2

0.5

4

1.2

Education level

    

   No education

26

6.7

23

6.5

   Primary

186

48.1

204

57.3

   Secondary

149

38.5

104

29.2

   Tertiary

26

6.7

25

7.0

Still in school

    

   Yes

26

6.7

13

3.7

   No

361

93.3

343

96.3

Marital status

    

   Married

321

83.0

332

93.3

   Single

60

15.5

19

5.3

   Widowed

1

0.3

3

0.8

   Separated/divorced

5

1.3

2

0.6

Occupation

    

   Farming

130

33.6

92

25.8

   Trader

92

23.8

62

17.4

   Formal employment

51

13.2

32

9.0

   Handicraft

0

0.0

10

2.8

   Housewife

114

29.4

160

44.9

Household size

    

   1–5

286

73.9

249

69.9

   6–10

94

24.3

96

27.0

   >10

7

1.8

11

3.1

Wealth index

    

   Lowest

278

71.8

184

51.7

   Second lowest

85

22.0

149

41.9

   Medium

15

3.9

17

4.8

   High

9

2.3

6

1.7

Residence

    

   Rural

164

42.4

137

38.5

   Urban

223

57.6

219

61.5

Trimester

    

   First

42

10.8

13

3.7

   Second

200

51.7

105

29.5

   Third

145

37.5

238

66.8

Gravidity

    

   1–4

309

79.8

301

84.6

   >4

78

20.2

55

15.4

Delivery gap

    

   Never delivered

130

33.6

120

33.7

   1–11 months

10

2.6

12

3.4

   12–24

75

19.4

41

11.5

   25–36

60

15.5

79

22.2

   >36

112

28.9

104

29.2

Table 2

Anaemia prevalence in Gulu and Hoima districts

District

Number

Percent

Gulu

  

   Total anaemia

117

32.9

   Mild anaemia

82

23.0

   Moderate anaemia

32

9.0

   Severe anaemia

3

0.8

Hoima

  

   Total anaemia

47

12.1

   Mild anaemia

35

9.0

   Moderate anaemia

10

2.5

   Severe anaemia

2

0.5

Table 3

Chi- square tests of anaemia and associated risk factors among pregnant women in Gulu and Hoima Regional Hospitals

Variable

Anaemic

Non anaemic

P-value

 

Number

Percentage

Number

Percentage

 

Age

     

   ≤19

47

23.6

152

76.4

 

   20–24

48

19.8

195

80.2

0.62

   25–29

42

23.6

136

79.4

 

   30–34

21

24.4

65

75.6

 

   35–39

4

12.9

27

87.1

0.58b

   >39

2

33.3

4

66.7

 

Education

     

   No education

11

45.8

13

54.2

 

   Primary

87

22.8

295

77.2

0.01a

   Secondary

59

20.9

224

79.1

 

   Higher

7

13.0

47

87.0

 

Still in school

     

   Yes

3

7.7

36

92.3

0.03b

   No

161

22.9

543

77.1

0.03a

Occupation

     

   Farmer

38

17.1

184

81.9

 

   Trader

31

20.1

123

79.9

0.03a

   Formal employment

15

18.1

68

81.9

 

   Handicraft

3

30.0

7

70.0

0.03b

   Housewife

77

28.1

197

71.9

 

Residence

     

   Rural

67

22.3

234

77.7

0.9

   Urban

97

22.0

345

78.0

 

Marital status

     

   Single

14

17.7

65

82.3

0.2

   Married

145

22.2

508

77.8

 

   Widowed

2

50.0

2

50.0

0.1b

   Separated/divorced

3

42.9

4

57.1

 

District

     

   Hoima

47

12.1

340

87.9

<0.01a

   Gulu

117

32.9

239

67.1

 

Trimester

     

   First

8

14.6

47

85.4

0.2

   Second

63

20.7

242

79.3

 

   Third

93

24.3

290

75.7

 

Gravidity

     

   1–4

133

21.8

477

78.2

0.7

   >5

31

23.3

102

76.7

 

Delivery gap (months)

     

   Never delivered

61

24.4

189

75.6

0.8

   1–11

5

22.7

17

77.3

 

   12–24

23

19.8

93

80.2

 

   25–36

31

22.3

108

77.7

 

   >36

44

20.4

172

79.6

 

Household size

     

   1–5

111

20.8

424

79.2

0.3

   6–10

48

25.3

142

74.7

 

   >10

5

27.8

13

72.2

 

Wealth index

     

   Lowest

100

21.7

362

78.3

0.7

   Second lowest

56

23.9

178

76.1

 

   Middle

5

15.6

27

84.4

 

   High

3

20.0

12

80.0

 

aStatistically significant

bFisher’s exact test

Table 4

Multivariable logistic regression analysis for risk factors for anaemia in Gulu and Hoima Regional Hospitals

Variable

Number

Anaemic (%)

Crude OR (95 % CI)

AOR (95 % CI)

Age

    

   <20

199

47 (23.6)

1.0

1.0

   20–24

243

48 (19.8)

0.8 (0.51–1.60)

1.8 (0.50–1.32)

   25–29

178

42 (23.6)

1.0 (0.62–1.61)

1.1 (0.63–1.80)

   30–34

86

21 (24.4)

1.0 (0.58–1.89)

1.3 (0.68–2.56)

   35–39

31

4 (12.9)

0.5 (0.16–1.45)

0.6 (0.19–1.85)

   ≥40

6

2 (33.3)

1.6 (0.29–9.16)

1.4 (0.22–8.99)

Education

    

   No education

24

16 (32.7)

1.0

1.0

   Primary

382

86 (22.1)

0.3 (0.15–0.81)

0.5 (0.27–1.10)

   Secondary

283

55 (21.7)

0.3 (0.13–0.74)

0.6 (0.30–1.31)

   Higher

547

7 (13.0)

0.2 (0.52–0.60)

0.4 (0.11–1.20)

Occupation

    

   Farmer

222

38 (17.1)

1.0

1.0

   Trader

154

31 (20.1)

1.2 (0.72–2.07)

1.3 (0.73–2.21)

   Formal employment

83

15 (18.1)

1.1 (0.55–2.07)

1.4 (0.63–2.96)

   Handicraft

10

3 (30.0)

2.1 (0.51–8.44)

1.1 (0.25–4.45)

   Housewife

274

77 (28.1)

1.9 (1.22–2.94)

1.7 (1.05–2.68)

Residence

    

   Rural

301

67 (22.3)

1.0

 

   Urban

442

97 (22.0)

1.0 (0.69–1.40)

 

Marital status

    

   Single

79

14 (17.7)

1.0

1.0

   Married

653

145 (22.2)

1.3 (0.72–2.43)

0.8 (0.43–1.64)

   Widowed

4

2 (50)

4.6 (0.58–37.46)

2.0 (0.21–18.89)

   Separated/divorced

7

3 (42.9)

3.0 (0.68–17.92)

3.0 (0.55–16.85)

District

    

   Hoima

387

47 (12.1)

1.0

1.0

   Gulu

356

117 (32.9)

3.5 (2.40–5.23)

3.6 (2.41–5.58)

Trimester

    

   First

55

8 (14.6)

1.0

1.0

   Second

305

63 (20.7)

1.5 (0.69–3.41)

1.5 (0.63–3.39)

   Third

383

93 (24.3)

1.9 (0.86–4.14)

1.2 (0.52–2.74)

Gravidity

    

   1–4

610

133 (21.80)

1.0

 

   ≥5

133

31 (23.3)

1.1 (0.70–1.70)

 

Delivery gap

    

   None

250

61 (24.2)

1.0

 

   1–11

22

5 (22.7)

0.9 (0.32–2.58)

 

   12–24

116

23 (19.8)

0.8 (0.45–1.32)

 

   25–36

139

31 (22.3)

0.9 (0.54–1.46)

 

   >36

216

44 (20.4)

0.8 (0.51–1.23)

 

Household size

    

   1–5

535

111 20.8

1.0

 

   6–10

190

48 25.3

1.3 (0.25–1.79)

 

   >10

18

5 27.8

1.5 (0.51–4.21)

 

Wealth index

    

   Lowest

462

100 (21.7)

1.0

 

   Second lowest

234

56 (23.9)

1.1 (0.78–1.66)

 

   Middle

32

5 (15.6)

0.7 (0.25–1.79)

 

   High

15

3 (20.0)

0.9 (0.25–3.27)

 

Still in school

    

   Yes

39

3 (7.7)

1.0

1.0

   No

704

161 (22.9)

3.7 (1.11–12.10)

2.6 (0.73–9.26)

Discussion

The overall prevalence of anaemia was 22.1 % which agrees with findings in Ethiopia and Nigeria, [16, 17] but lower than those reported elsewhere [1821], and the WHO estimate of 40–60 % in developing countries [1]. The variations in the prevalence of anaemia may be due to the fact that the interventions employed to address anaemia in pregnancy vary in different settings.

The prevalence of anaemia was significantly higher in Gulu than in Hoima (P < 0.001). Gulu district was ravaged by a twenty-year war between the LRA and the Government of Uganda that left most of the social services in the district in ruins and a large majority of its population in poverty [22]. Our findings also show that being a housewife is an independent risk factor for anaemia. Because most housewives depend solely on their husbands’ earnings for their financial needs, the majority of them tend to be of low socio-economic status which has been reported as a known determinant of anaemia [23, 24]. This is also manifested by the finding that anaemia was more prevalent among women who had low monthly family income. Anaemia was also more prevalent among women who live in big households (>5 people) compared to those who live in small households. These might be low income families that were displaced from their family land during the LRA insurgency but have since decided to remain in the urban settings for a better life. Education level attained was also found to be associated with anaemia. In Uganda, low level of education is associated with unemployment, which consequently leads to poverty, a known risk factor for anaemia in pregnancy [21, 24].

Anaemia prevalence was highest (24.3 %) during the third trimester as compared to the first trimester (14.6 %) and second trimester (20.7 %). Haemodilution in pregnancy increases to peak during the second trimester which may explain the high prevalence of anaemia during this period. However, the increased incidence of anaemia during the third trimester may also indicate poor antenatal care and nutrition. These findings agree with that of Karaoglu and the WHO report [23, 25], but differ to those from Porto Novo, Cape Verde and Abeokuta, Nigeria [24, 26]. Although a study conducted in Trinidad and Tobago reported increased presence of anaemia with increasing gravidity [27], this study found no evidence of increased incidence of anaemia in a grand multigravid woman as compared to primigravid, secundigravid or multigravid woman. This finding is in agreement with other studies [16]. Perhaps the health education provided to pregnant women during antenatal visits leads to better health seeking behaviour and dietary habits, especially during pregnancy.

These findings will go a long way in addressing the problem of anaemia, which can affect psychological and physical behaviour. This is especially important because even very mild forms of anaemia have been reported to influence the sense of well being, lessen resistance to fatigue, lower productivity [28], aggravate other disorders, and affect work capacity [26]. In pregnant women, anaemia can result in increased risk of maternal and perinatal mortality, low birth weight, [29] and reduced resistance to blood loss with the result that death may occur from the blood loss associated with delivery. The strength of this study is the use of power formula to calculate the sample size and the random sampling of the study participants which enhances its generalisability.

Limitations of this study

We did not consider other factors like parasitic infections which can lead to anaemia. We were therefore not able to determine their contribution to anaemia in our study population. Being a cross sectional study, we could not identify the cause and effect relationship.

Conclusion

The prevalence of anaemia in pregnant women in Gulu is higher than in Hoima. Amongst pregnancy women, being a housewife is an independent risk factor for anaemia. Greater efforts are required to encourage early antenatal attendance from women in these at risk groups. This would allow iron and folic acid supplementation during pregnancy, which would potentially reduce the prevalence of anaemia.

Abbreviations

AOR: 

adjusted odds ratio

Hb: 

haemoglobin

HIV: 

human immuno-deficiency virus

LRA: 

Lord’s Resistance Army

WHO: 

World Health Organisation

Declarations

Acknowledgements

We are grateful to Dr Benjamin Hopwood, Medical Officer, Paediatric Department, Hoima Regional Referral Hospital, who edited the manuscript to address typographical and grammatical errors. This work was supported by Training Health Researchers into Vocational Excellence in East Africa (THRiVE); grant number 087540 funded by the Welcome Trust. Its contents are solely the responsibility of the authors and do not necessarily represent the official views of the supporting offices.

Open AccessThis article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated.

Authors’ Affiliations

(1)
Department of Physiology, Faculty of Medicine, Gulu University
(2)
Department of Internal Medicine, Hoima Regional Hospital
(3)
Department of Biochemistry, Faculty of Medicine, Gulu University

References

  1. World Health Organisation. Worldwide prevalence of anaemia 1993–2005. WHO Global Database on Anaemia. Geneva: WHO; 2008.Google Scholar
  2. World Health Organization. The World Health Report 2002: reducing risks, promoting healthy life. Geneva: WHO; 2002.Google Scholar
  3. Cusick SE, Mei Z, Freedman DS, Looker AC, Ogden CL, Gunter E, et al. Unexplained decline in the prevalence of anemia among US children and women between 1988–1994 and 1999–2002. Am J Clin Nutr. 2008;88:1611.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. WHO. Haemoglobin concentrations for the diagnosis of anaemia and assessment of severity. Vitamin and Mineral Nutrition Information System. Geneva: WHO; 2011. http://www.who.int/vmnis/indicators/haemoglobin.pdf. Accessed 24 Dec 2015.Google Scholar
  5. Halterman JS, Kaczorowski JM, Aligne CA, Auinger P, Szilagyi PG. Iron deficiency and cognitive achievement among school-aged children and adolescents in the United States. Pediatrics. 2001;107:1381–6.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. Haas JD, Brownlie T. Iron deficiency and reduced work capacity: a critical review of the research to determine a casual relationship. J Nutr. 2001;131:2S-2.Google Scholar
  7. Verdon F, Burnand B, Stubi CL, Bonard C, Graff M, Michaud A, et al. Iron supplementation for unexplained fatigue in non-anaemic women: double blind randomised placebo controlled trial. BMJ. 2003;326(7399):1124.View ArticlePubMedPubMed CentralGoogle Scholar
  8. Gies S, Brabin BJ, Yassin MA, Cuevas LE. Comparison of screening methods for anaemia in pregnant women in Awassa, Ethiopia. Trop Med Int Health. 2003;8(4):301–9.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. Jamil KM, Rahman AS, Bardhan PK, Khan AI, Chowdhury F, Sarker SA, et al. Micronutrients and anaemia. J Health Popul Nutr. 2008;26(3):340–55.PubMedPubMed CentralGoogle Scholar
  10. Uganda Bureau of Statistics (UBOS) and ICF International Inc. Uganda Demographic and Health Survey 2011. 2012. ICF International Inc.: Kampala; UBOS and Calverton: Maryland.Google Scholar
  11. Bodnar LM, Cogswell ME, Scanlon KS. Low income postpartim women are at risk of iron deficiency. J Nutr. 2002;132(8):2298–302.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. U.S. Preventive Services Task Force. Screening for iron deficiency anemia, including iron supplementations for children and pregnant women: recommendation statement. Am Fam Physician. 2006;74(3):461–4.Google Scholar
  13. Uganda Bureau of Statistics (UBOS), ICF Macro. Uganda Malaria Indicator Survey 2009. Calverton: UBOS and ICF Macro; 2010.Google Scholar
  14. Uganda Bureau of Statistics. National Population and Housing Census 2014. Kampala: UBOS; 2014. http://www.ubos.org/onlinefiles/uploads/ubos/NPHC/NPHC%202014%20PROVISIONAL%20RESULTS%20REPORT.pdf. Accessed 5 Jan 2016.
  15. Uganda Bureau of Statistics (UBOS), Macro International Inc. Uganda Demographic and Health Survey 2006. Calverton: UBOS and Macro International Inc; 2007.Google Scholar
  16. Buseri FI, Uko EK, Jeremiah ZA, Usanga EA. Prevalence and risk factors of anaemia among pregnant women in Nigeria. Open Hematol J. 2008;2:14–9.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  17. Alem M, Enawgaw B, Gelaw A, Kena T, Seid M, Olkeba Y. Prevalence of anemia and associated risk factors among pregnant women attending antenatal care in Azezo Health Center Gondar town, Northwest Ethiopia. J Interdiscip Histopathol. 2013;1(3):137–44.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  18. Ahmad N, Kalakoti P, Bano R, Syed MMA. The prevalence of anaemia and associated factors in pregnant women in a rural Indian community. AMJ. 2010;3(5):276–80.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  19. Getachew M, Yewhalaw D, Tafess K, Getachew Y, Ahmed ZA. Anaemia and associated risk factors among pregnant women in Gilgel Gibe dam area, Southwest Ethiopia. Parasites Vectors. 2012;5:296.View ArticlePubMedPubMed CentralGoogle Scholar
  20. Hoque M, Kader SB, Hoque E. Prevalence of anaemia in pregnancy in the Uthungulu health district of KwaZulu-Natal, South Africa. SA Fam Pract. 2007;49:6.Google Scholar
  21. Lokare PO, Karanjekar VD, Gattani PL, Kulkarni AP. A study of prevalence of anemia and sociodemographic factors associated with anemia among pregnant women in Aurangabad city, India. Nigerian Med. 2012;6(1):30–4.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  22. Economic Development Policy and Research Department. Poverty status report 2014: Structural Change and Poverty Reduction in Uganda. Kampala: Ministry of finance, planning and economic development; 2014.Google Scholar
  23. Karaoglu L, Pehlivan R, Egri M, Deprem C, Gunes G, Genc FM, et al. The prevalence of nutritional anemia in pregnancy in an east Anatolian province, Turkey. BMC Public Health. 2010;10:329.View ArticlePubMedPubMed CentralGoogle Scholar
  24. Idowu OA, Mafiana CF, Sotiloye D. Anaemia in pregnancy: a survey of pregnant women in Abeokuta, Nigeria. Afr Health Sci. 2005;5(4):295–9.PubMedPubMed CentralGoogle Scholar
  25. WHO. The prevalence of anaemia in women: a tabilation of available information. Geneva: WHO; 1992.Google Scholar
  26. Okeke PU. Anaemia in pregnancy-is it a persisting public health problem in Porto Novo-Cape Verde? Res J Med Sci. 2011;5(4):193–9.Google Scholar
  27. Uche-Nwachi EO, Odekunle A, Jacinto S, Burnett M, Clapperton M, David Y, et al. Anaemia in pregnancy: associations with parity, abortions and child spacing in primary healthcare clinic attendees in Trinidad and Tobago. Afr Health Sci. 2010;10(1):66–70.PubMedPubMed CentralGoogle Scholar
  28. Balarajan Y, Ramakrishnan U, Ozaltin E, Shankar AH, Subramanian SV. Anaemia in low-income and middle-income countries. Lancet. 2011;378:2123–35.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  29. Kozuki N, Lee AC, Katz J. Moderate to severe, but not mild, maternal anemia is associated with increased risk of small-for-gestational-age outcomes. J Nutr. 2012;142:358–62.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright

© Obai et al. 2016

Advertisement