We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
To save content items to your account,
please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies.
If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account.
Find out more about saving content to .
To save content items to your Kindle, first ensure [email protected]
is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings
on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part
of your Kindle email address below.
Find out more about saving to your Kindle.
Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations.
‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi.
‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.
To examine prenatal APAP exposure in relation to language development in offspring at 30 months of age.
Method:
A population-based pregnancy cohort study including 754 women who enrolled in the Swedish Environmental Longitudinal, Mother and child, Asthma and allergy (SELMA) study in pregnancy week 8–13. Two exposure measures were used: (1) maternally reported number of APAP tablets taken between conception and enrollment; (2) APAP urinary concentration at enrollment. Language development at 30 months was assessed by nurse's evaluation and parental questionnaire, including the number of words the child used (<25, 25–50 and >50). Main study outcome; parental report of use of fewer than 50 words, termed language delay (LD).
Results:
59.2% of women enrolled in weeks 8–13 reported taking APAP between conception and enrollment. APAP was measurable in all urine samples and urinary APAP was correlated with the number of APAP taken during pregnancy (P<0.01). Language delay was more prevalent in boys (12.6%) than girls (4.1%) (8.5% in total). Both the number of APAP tablets and urinary APAP concentration were associated with greater LD in girls but not in boys. The adjusted odds ratio (OR) for LD among girls whose mothers reported >6 vs. 0 APAP tablets was 5.92 (95% confidence interval (CI) 1.10–31.94). The OR for LD in girls whose mothers’ urinary APAP was in the highest compared to the lowest quartile was 10.34 (95% CI 1.37–77.86). While it cannot be ruled out, our available data do not support confounding by indication.
Conclusions:
Given the prevalence of prenatal APAP use and the importance of language development, these findings, if replicated, would suggest that pregnant women should limit their use of this analgesic during pregnancy.
Recommend this
Email your librarian or administrator to recommend adding this to your organisation's collection.