Journal of Pregnancy

Journal of Pregnancy / 2017 / Article

Clinical Study | Open Access

Volume 2017 |Article ID 1630967 |

Ana Raquel Neves, Fabiane Neves, Isabel Santos Silva, Maria do Céu Almeida, Pitorra Monteiro, "Mode of Delivery in Drug-Dependent Pregnant Women: A Case Control Study", Journal of Pregnancy, vol. 2017, Article ID 1630967, 6 pages, 2017.

Mode of Delivery in Drug-Dependent Pregnant Women: A Case Control Study

Academic Editor: Jeffrey Keelan
Received16 Aug 2016
Revised21 Jan 2017
Accepted01 Feb 2017
Published26 Feb 2017


Objective. To determine the contribution of drug use during pregnancy to the route of delivery. Methods. A case-control study was conducted at a hospital in Coimbra, Portugal, between 2001 and 2014. Drug-dependent pregnant women () were compared with a control group of low risk women () in terms of maternal characteristics, obstetric history, pregnancy complications, and labor details. Factors that influenced the mode of delivery were determined. Statistical analysis was performed with SPSS v. 23.0 (IBM Corp.). p values < 0.05 were considered statistically significant. Results. Drug-dependent women presented a lower rate of cesarean delivery (18.2 versus 28.9%, ). After adjusting for the factors that were significantly related to the mode of delivery, drug dependency influenced the rate of cesarean section (; 95% CI = 0.328–0.980). Within the drug-dependent group, the mode of delivery was significantly related to previous cesarean or vaginal delivery ( and , resp.) and fetal presentation (), but not with the type of drug, route of administration, or substitution maintenance therapy. Conclusions. The drug-dependent group presented a significantly higher rate of vaginal delivery. However, this was not associated with the behavioral factors analyzed. We hypothesize that other social and psychological factors might explain this difference.

1. Introduction

Substance abuse during pregnancy is associated with considerable obstetrical morbidity and mortality. Its prevalence is largely unknown, although the USA 2013 National Survey on Drug Use and Health estimated it on 5,4% [1]. An increased risk of spontaneous abortion, preterm delivery, placental abnormalities, hypertensive complications, fetal growth restriction (FGR), low birth weight infants, neonatal abstinence syndrome, sudden infant death syndrome, and long term behavioral effects have all been associated with antenatal substance use [27]. However, little attention has been drawn to their effect on the mechanism of labor and delivery. In vitro studies have proved that opioids and cannabinoids exert uterorelaxant action whereas cocaine augments contractility in human myometrium [812]. Nevertheless, the clinical correlation of these findings has never been studied.

Our aim was to evaluate the mode of delivery and the factors that influence it in drug-dependent pregnant women.

2. Material and Methods

We conducted a retrospective study of drug-dependent (DD) pregnant women whose antenatal care and delivery took place at the Department of Obstetrics B of Centro Hospitalar e Universitário de Coimbra, a tertiary-care university hospital, between January 2001 and December 2014. Because the study involved completely deidentified data extraction from electronic patient records, patient consent was not required. The study was conducted according to the Declaration of Helsinki and regional authority requirements.

A total of 269 DD patients delivered in our institution during the study period. We excluded 33 women (12,3%) because they were Human Immunodeficiency Virus- (HIV-) positive (), had missing outcome data (), fetal malformations (), multiple pregnancy (), and Rh isoimmunization (one case). None of the patients reviewed presented chronic medical comorbidities other than psychiatric and/or infectious. A total of 236 DD patients were enrolled in our study. Controls were non-drug-dependent (non-DD) healthy women, randomly selected from our institutional administrative records, with a delivery date during the study period ().

DD patients’ antenatal care was based on a multidisciplinary model involving a program of care between hospital services and drug agencies working with drug users. Antenatal care is available on a regular basis at the local drug dependency unit as well as within our institution. The control group had a model of care shared between primary care and hospital specialist services.

The patients’ records were reviewed and the following data were registered:

2.1. Maternal Characteristics

The woman’s age, educational level, ethnicity, and body mass index (BMI) were recorded. BMI was calculated upon maternal self-report of height and prepregnancy weight. Educational level was considered high if high school or higher education had been completed.

Regarding obstetric history, gravity, parity, previous cesarean section or vaginal delivery, previous abortion, and trimester of first antenatal visit were also registered.

2.2. Pregnancy and Neonatal Outcomes

Pregnancy complications associated with drug dependence including hypertensive disorders of pregnancy (gestational hypertension, preeclampsia, and eclampsia), placental abnormalities (placenta previa and abruptio placentae), and FGR were registered. The definitions of gestational hypertension, preeclampsia, and eclampsia were those adopted by the International Society for the Study of Hypertension in Pregnancy [13]. FGR was defined as estimated birth weight <10th centile. Delivery data included gestational age at delivery, fetal presentation at delivery, labor induction, and mode of delivery. Newborn birth weight and 5-minute Apgar score were also recorded.

2.3. DD Group Characteristics

A woman was considered a drug user if she had self-reported use of substitution maintenance treatment, heroin, cocaine, or cannabinoids at any time during pregnancy. Urine drug testing was performed only as an adjunct to detect or confirm suspected substance abuse after obtaining patient consent. Nonactive consumption was defined as drug withdrawal at any time during pregnancy. Data regarding the type of drug abused (opioids, cannabinoids, and cocaine), the route of administration (intravenous, smoked, and mixed), opioid replacement therapy (methadone, buprenorphine, and naloxone), associated addictions (smoking and alcohol history during the index pregnancy), and infectious diseases (HIV, Hepatitis C, Hepatitis B, and Syphilis) were recorded. HIV-positive women were excluded due to the fact that elective cesarean section was performed in all patients until 2014.

Power software v. 3.1.3. was used to calculate the sample size. The mode of delivery was the endpoint used in power analysis calculation. For a power of 80% and , the sample size should be and . After applying the exclusion criteria, we obtained a sample size of and , with a power of 0.784 for . We accepted these values for our study.

Categorical variables were compared using the test or Fisher’s exact test, according to the Cochran rules. Continuous variables were tested for normal distribution (Kolmogorov-Smirnov test). Those following a normal distribution were compared using the independent samples Student -test and the independent samples Mann–Whitney test was conducted to compare those that did not follow a normal distribution. Factors influencing the mode of delivery were determined using logistic regression analysis. All statistical analysis was performed using SPSS v. 23.0 (IBM Corp.). values < 0.05 were considered statistically significant.

The following steps were taken to determine if drug dependency influenced the mode of delivery and the factors that influenced the mode of delivery in DD patients: the factors that predicted the mode of delivery in the study population were determined. Binary logistic regression was performed to analyze the independent influence of drug dependency in the mode of the delivery. Finally, the factors that influenced the mode of delivery within the DD group were analyzed.

3. Results

Maternal characteristics and pregnancy and labor details were compared with a low risk control-population of non-DD patients (Table 1). Drug-dependent patients were younger ( versus years, ) and presented a lower BMI ( Kg/m2 versus  Kg/m2, ). The rate of nulliparity was also lower in this group (46.2% versus 64.5%, ), with a higher rate of previous vaginal delivery (83.5% versus 72.8%, ) despite no difference in the previous cesarean section rate. The incidence of FGR was 20.3%, significantly higher than in the control group (). Preterm delivery was also more frequent amongst drug-using women, complicating 16.6% of births (). The incidence of low birth weight was 25.8% amongst DD women compared to 13.6% in control women (). Of note is the extremely low incidence of placental abnormalities (0.8%) and hypertensive complications (3%) in the DD group.

DD group
Non-DD group
Odds ratio (95% CI) value

Maternal characteristics
Maternal age (years)28.40 (5.84)29.51 (4.81)0.021
Body mass index (Kg/m2)21.89 (3.73)24.16 (4.27)<0.001
Ethnicity1.463 (0.458–4.679)0.519
 Caucasian231 (97.9)221 (96.9)
Educational level0.130 (0.084–0.202)<0.001
 Low170 (77.6)60 (31.1)
Nulliparous109 (46.2)147 (64.5)0.473 (0.326–0.687)<0.001
Within multiparous
 Previous cesarean section22 (17.3)22 (27.2) 0.562 (0.287–1.100)0.090
 Previous vaginal delivery106 (83.5)59 (72.8)2.002 (1.022–3.922)0.041
Pregnancy complications
Placental abnormalities2 (0.8)3 (1.8)0.641 (0.106–3.872)0.625
Hypertensive complications7 (3.0)5 (2.2)1.363 (0.426–4.359)0.600
Fetal growth restriction48 (20.3)6 (2.6)9.447 (3.955–22.563)<0.001
Labor and neonatal outcomes
Gestational age (weeks)37.97 (1.53)38.83 (31.20)<0.001
Prematurity (<37 weeks)39 (16.6)9 (3.9)4.842 (2.287–10.250)<0.001
 32+0–36+6 weeks35 (14.9)9 (3.9)4.258 (1.997–9.080)<0.001
 28+0–31+6 weeks4 (1.7)00.503 (0.460–0.551)0.124
Fetal presentation0,963 (0.496–1.870)0.912
 Cephalic217 (91.9)209 (91.7)
 Noncephalic19 (8.1)19 (8.3)
Induction of labor58 (24.9)60 (26.3)0.928 (0.611–1.410)0.726
Cesarean section43 (18.2)66 (28.9)0.547 (0.353–0.847)0.006
Newborn birth weight (g)2812.23 (456.59)3180.47 (2812.23)<0.001
 <2500 g61 (25.8)31 (13.6)2.215 (1.374–3.572)0.001
 <1500 g4 (1.7)00.504 (0.460–0.552)0.124
5 min Apgar score <72 (0.8)00.506 (0.463–0.554)0.499

Values are mean (standard deviation) for continuous variables or (%) for categorical variables.

Regarding the mode of delivery during the study period, the DD group presented a significantly lower rate of cesarean section (18.2% versus 28.9%, ).

The factors that influenced the mode of delivery (vaginal delivery versus cesarean section) in the study sample were determined (Table 2). Maternal age (), nulliparity (), previous cesarean section () or vaginal delivery (), drug dependence (), placental abnormalities (), and fetal presentation at delivery () were significantly associated with the mode of delivery.

Vaginal delivery
Cesarean section
Odds ratio (95% CI) value

Maternal characteristics
Maternal age (years)28.75 (5.08)29.88 (5.22)0.038
Body mass index (Kg/m2)22.45 (4.09)23.86 (4.45)0.055
Ethnicity0.919 (0.244–3.456)0.901
 Caucasian346 (97.5)106 (97.2)
 Non-Caucasian9 (2.5)3 (2.8)
Nulliparity185 (52.1)71 (65.1)1.717 (1.100–2.681)0.017
Previous cesarean section18 (5.1)26 (23.9)5.865 (3.070–11.203)<0.001
Previous vaginal delivery153 (43.1)12 (11.0)0.163 (0.087–0.301)<0.001
Drug dependence193 (54.5)43 (39.1)0.547 (0.353–0.847)0.006
Pregnancy complications
Placental abnormalities05 (4.6)0.227 (0.191–0.260)0.001
Hypertensive complications10 (2.8)2 (1.8)0.645 (0.139–2.989)0.572
Fetal growth restriction44 (12.4)10 (12.2)0.714 (0.397–1.471)0.359
Labor characteristics
Gestational age (weeks)38.43 (1.41)38.48 (1.47)0.581
Fetal presentation30.395 (11.491–80.400)<0.001
 Cephalic350 (98.6)76 (69.7)
 Noncephalic5 (1.4)33 (30.3)
Induction of labor95 (27.0)23 (21.1)0.724 (0.432–1.213)0.218

Values are mean (standard deviation) for continuous variables or (%) for categorical variables.

In order to analyze the individual effect of each of these factors on the mode of delivery, binary logistic regression analysis was conducted and demonstrated that significant independent contributions were provided by drug dependence, previous cesarean section, previous vaginal delivery, and fetal presentation (resp., , 95% CI = 0.328–0.980; , 95% CI = 3.092–12.753; , 95% CI = 0.075–0.374; and , 95% CI = 18.150–164.792; = 0.416; ). Among DD women, the risk of cesarean section was approximately one-half the risk among the control population.

DD group characteristics are displayed in Table 3. A total of 161 women (68.2%) presented active consumption at the time of delivery. Opioids were the most common drugs reported (89.4%). Within the 75.8% of patients under substitution maintenance therapy, methadone was the most frequent (66.1%).

Pattern of consumption
Active consumption during pregnancy161 (68.2)
Type of drug
 Cocaine99 (41.9)
 Opioids211 (89.4)
 Cannabinoids69 (29.2)
 Mixed123 (52.1)
 Only opioids93 (39.4)
 Only cannabinoids16 (6.8)
 Only cocaine4 (1.7)
Route of administration
 Smoked113 (47.9)
 Intravenous41 (17.4)
 Mixed22 (9.3)
Substitution maintenance therapy
Methadone156 (66.1)
Buprenorphine18 (7.6)
Naltrexone5 (2.1)
None57 (24.2)
Psychiatric disease58 (24.6)
Infectious diseases
 Hepatitis C118 (50)
 Hepatitis B6 (2.5)
 Syphilis6 (2.5)
Smoking history180 (76.3)
Alcohol abuse15 (6.4)

Values are (%).

Finally, the factors that influenced the mode of delivery within the DD group were determined (Table 4). No difference was found regarding the pattern of consumption. Curiously, there was no difference in relation to the mode of delivery between women with active consumption at delivery and those who stopped consumption at any time during pregnancy.

Vaginal delivery
Cesarean section
Odds ratio (95% CI) value

Maternal characteristics
Maternal age (years)28.13 (5.28)29.39 (5.86)0.297
Body mass index (Kg/m2)21.82 (3.85)22.04 (3.28)0.452
Ethnicity0.889 (0.097–8.157)0.917
 Caucasian189 (97.9)42 (97.7)
 Non-Caucasian4 (2.1)1 (2.3)
Nulliparous84 (43.5)25 (58.1)1.802 (0.923–3.520)0.082
Previous cesarean section13 (6.7)9 (20.9)3.665 (1.453–9.248)0.008
Previous vaginal delivery97 (50.3)9 (20.9)0.262 (0.119–0.576)<0.001
Pattern of consumption
State of consumption0.646 (0.325–1.281)0.209
 Active135 (70.3)26 (60.5)
 Nonactive57 (29.7)17 (39.5)
Type of drug
 Only opioids71 (36.8)22 (51.2)1.800 (0.925–3.503)0.081
 Only cocaine3 (1.6)1 (2.3)1.508 (0.153–14.857)0.555
 Only cannabinoids15 (7.8)1 (2.3)0.283 (0.036–2.199)0.317
 Mixed104 (53.9)19 (44.2)0.677 (0.348–1.317)0.350
Route of administration
 Intravenous33 (17.2)8 (18.6)1.101 (0.469–2.589)0.825
 Smoked91 (47.4)22 (51.2)1.163 (0.600–2.253)0.655
 Mixed17 (77.3)5 (22.7)1.354 (0.471–3.898)0.566
Substitution maintenance therapy
 Methadone128 (66.3)28 (65.1)0.948 (0.473–1.898)0.880
 Buprenorphine13 (6.7)5 (11.6)1.822 (0.613–5.414)0.336
 Naltrexone4 (2.1)1 (2.3)1.125 (0.123–10.324)1.000
 None48 (24.9)9 (20.9)0.800 (0.358–1.787)0.585
Infectious diseases
Hepatitis C91 (47.2)27 (62.8)1.891 (0.958–3.733)0.064
Hepatitis B4 (2.1)2 (4.7)2.305 (0.408–13.009)0.300
Syphilis4 (2.1)2 (4.7)2.305 (0.408–13.009)0.300
Associated addictions
Smoking history148 (82.2)32 (78)0.769 (0.334–1.767)0.535
Alcohol use12 (6.8)3 (7.5)1,115 (0.299–4.150)0.871
Pregnancy data
Delayed prenatal care123 (63.7)29 (67.4)1.179 (0.584–2.379)0.646
Placental abnormalities02 (4.7)0.175 (0.133–0.231)0.033
Hypertensive complications5 (2.6)2 (4.7)1.834 (0.344–9.785)0.614
Fetal growth restriction39 (20.2)9 (20.9)1.045 (0.463–2.360)0.915
Labor characteristics
Gestational age (weeks)37.98 (1.56)37.86 (1.73)0.895
Fetal presentation25.313 (7.839–81.734)<0.001
 Cephalic189 (97.9)28 (65.1)
 Noncephalic4 (2.1)15 (34.9)
Induction of labor49 (25.8)9 (20.9)0.762 (0.341–1.701)0.506
Newborn birth weight (g)2781.99 (508.96)2719.30 (541.49)0.786

Values are mean (standard deviation) for continuous variables or (%) for categorical variables.

4. Discussion

Previous studies have focused on the influence of drug abuse on maternal and neonatal morbidity and mortality as well as on the impact of substitution maintenance therapy on these outcomes.

In view of the fact that in vitro studies have shown the influence of the analyzed drugs in myometrial function [812], we undertook this study to analyze the factors that influence the mode of delivery in DD pregnant women. Our results demonstrate that the DD population presented a lower rate of cesarean section. Curiously, the state of consumption, type of drug, route of administration, and substitution maintenance therapy did not contribute to this difference. This may be partially attributable to sample size as the subgroups may lack the statistical power to exclude such differences. Also, their lower BMI, obstetric history, delayed prenatal care, higher rate of coaddictions and infectious diseases, and the higher incidence of prematurity and low birth weight did not seem to influence the route of delivery.

Limitations to this study are mainly related to the fact that the study design cannot remove all potential biases and our findings might be explained by the variety of confounders presented by the study population. In particular, DD pregnant women are more likely to have a lower socioeconomical status and suffer the psychological impact of family instability and high-risk behaviors, such as prostitution and violence. These factors, associated with negative feelings about pregnancy or an unintended or unwanted pregnancy, may contribute to delayed medical care during labor, with patients attending the hospital at a more advanced stage of labor. Therefore, we hypothesize that psychological factors may explain the difference in the route of delivery in DD pregnant women demonstrated in this study.

Further research is needed to elucidate the underlying psychosocial reasons for the higher rate of vaginal delivery found in our study.


BMI:Body mass index
CI:Confidence interval
DD:Drug dependent
FGR:Fetal growth restriction
HIV:Human Immunodeficiency Virus.


The initial results of the manuscript were presented at ECIC 2015 2nd European Congress on Intrapartum Care “Making Birth Safer,” Centro de Congressos da Alfandega, Porto, May 21st–23rd, 2015.

Competing Interests

The authors declare that there is no conflict of interests regarding the publication of this paper.


The authors wish to thank Dr. Joana Amaral and Dr. Joana Mesquita for their contribution in data collection and Dr. Pedro Gil for editing the manuscript.


  1. Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration, Results from the 2013 National Survey on Drug Use and Health: Summary of National Findings, NSDUH Ser H-48, HHS Publ No 14-4863, Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration, Rockville, Md, USA, 2014.
  2. M. Behnke and V. C. Smith, “Prenatal substance abuse: short- and long-term effects on the exposed fetus,” Pediatrics, vol. 131, no. 3, pp. e1009–e1024, 2013. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  3. American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists, “Opioid abuse, dependence, and addiction in pregnancy: committee opinion no. 524,” Obstetrics & Gynecology, vol. 119, no. 5, pp. 1070–1076, 2012. View at: Google Scholar
  4. J. L. Young and P. R. Martin, “Treatment of opioid dependence in the setting of pregnancy,” Psychiatric Clinics of North America, vol. 35, no. 2, pp. 441–460, 2012. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  5. S. Wong, A. Ordean, M. Kahan et al., “Substance use in pregnancy,” Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology Canada, vol. 33, no. 4, pp. 367–384, 2011. View at: Google Scholar
  6. A. Aghamohammadi and M. Zafari, “Crack abuse during pregnancy: maternal, fetal and neonatal complication,” Journal of Maternal-Fetal and Neonatal Medicine, vol. 29, no. 5, pp. 795–797, 2016. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  7. S. Narkowicz, J. Płotka, Ż. Polkowska, M. Biziuk, and J. Namieśnik, “Prenatal exposure to substance of abuse: a worldwide problem,” Environment International, vol. 54, pp. 141–163, 2013. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  8. M. C. Dennedy, A. M. Friel, D. D. Houlihan, V. M. Broderick, T. Smith, and J. J. Morrison, “Cannabinoids and the human uterus during pregnancy,” American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology, vol. 190, no. 1, pp. 2–9, 2004. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  9. R. A. Fanning, J. P. McMorrow, D. P. Campion, M. F. Carey, and J. J. O'Connor, “Opioid mediated activity and expression of mu and delta opioid receptors in isolated human term non-labouring myometrium,” European Journal of Pharmacology, vol. 698, no. 1–3, pp. 170–177, 2013. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  10. N. Kayacan, F. Ertugrul, G. Arici, B. Karsli, M. Akar, and M. Erman, “In vitro effects of opioids on pregnant uterine muscle,” Advances in Therapy, vol. 24, no. 2, pp. 368–375, 2007. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  11. W. W. Hurd, A. L. Betz, M. P. Dombrowski, and V. P. Fomin, “Cocaine augments contractility of the pregnant human uterus by both adrenergic and nonadrenergic mechanisms,” American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology, vol. 178, no. 5, pp. 1077–1081, 1998. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  12. V. P. Fomin, D. M. Singh, H. L. Brown, V. Natarajan, and W. W. Hurd, “Effect of cocaine on intracellular calcium regulation in myometrium from pregnant women,” Journal of the Society for Gynecologic Investigation, vol. 6, no. 3, pp. 147–152, 1999. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  13. A. L. Tranquilli, G. Dekker, L. Magee et al., “The classification, diagnosis and management of the hypertensive disorders of pregnancy: a revised statement from the ISSHP,” Pregnancy Hypertension, vol. 4, no. 2, pp. 97–104, 2014. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar

Copyright © 2017 Ana Raquel Neves et al. This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

More related articles

 PDF Download Citation Citation
 Download other formatsMore
 Order printed copiesOrder

Related articles

Article of the Year Award: Outstanding research contributions of 2020, as selected by our Chief Editors. Read the winning articles.