GÖÇMEN GEBELER VE TÜRK GEBELERDE YEME TUTUMU İLE YEME FARKINDALIĞININ GEBELİK VE DOĞUM SONUÇLARINA ETKİSİ

Yıl 2024, , 78 - 91, 31.01.2024

Emine Aksüt Akçay , Zehra İncedal Sonkaya , Serap İncedal Irgat

https://doi.org/10.52369/togusagbilderg.1320302

Öz

Amaç; Bu çalışmada gebeliği boyunca antenatal takip almayan/alamayan Suriyeli göçmen ve Türk gebelerin yeme tutumu ve yeme farkındalığının değerlendirilmesi, elde edilen sonuçların karşılaştırılması ve iki grubun tıbbi parametreleri arasındaki muhtemel farklılıkları tespit etmek amaçlanmıştır.
Yöntem; Araştırma Nisan-Haziran 2021 tarihleri arasında bir eğitim ve araştırma hastanesinde 296 göçmen, 315 türk gebe ile yürütülmüştür. Veriler araştırmacılar tarafından hazırlanan; sosyodemografik veri formu, Yeme Farkındalığı Ölçeği (YFÖ-30) ve Yeme Tutum Anketi (EAT-40) ile toplanmıştır.
Bulgular; Göçmen gebelerin yaş ortalaması 25,99±5,95, Türk gebelerin yaş ortalaması 27,02±4,91’dir. Göçmenlerin Yeme Tutumu Anketinden (EAT-40) 25,53±18,73 puan, Türk gebeler ise 25,31±18,93 puan almıştır. Araştırmada hipertansiyon öyküsü olan, plasenta previa yaşayan, anemik olan ve üriner sistem enfeksiyonu geçiren gebelerin yeme tutum puanları daha düşük bulunmuştur (p<0,05). Göçmen katılımcıların EAT-40 toplam puanı ile YFÖ düşünmeden yeme, farkındalık ve bilinçli beslenme alt boyut puanları arasında istatistiksel olarak anlamlı ilişki bulunamamıştır. Bununla birlikte göçmen grupta duygusal yeme, yeme disiplini, enterferans ve toplam puanı ile yeme tutumu arasında pozitif korelasyon saptanmıştır.
Sonuç; Elde edilen sonuçlar ışığında yeme tutumu ve yeme farkındalığını gebelikte önemli olduğu, gebelerin sağlık davranışlarından etkilendiği saptanmıştır. Sayıları her geçen gün artan suriyeli göçmenlerin gebelik doğum ve doğum sonrası dönemde takipleri ana-çocuk sağlığının korunması bakımından önemlidir.

Anahtar Kelimeler

Gebe, Göçmen, Yeme Farkındalığı, Yeme Tutumu

Destekleyen Kurum

Yok

Proje Numarası

Yok

THE EFFECT OF EATİNG ATTİTUDES AND EATİNG AWARENESS ON PREGNANCY AND BİRTH OUTCOMES İN MİGRANT PREGNANTS AND TURKİSH CİTİZENS PREGNANT

Öz

Aim; In this study, it was aimed to evaluate the eating attitude and eating awareness of pregnant Syrian immigrants and Turkish citizens who did not / could not receive antenatal follow-up during their pregnancy, to compare the results obtained and to determine the possible differences between the medical parameters of the two groups.
Materials and Methods; The research was conducted in a training and research hospital between April and June 2021, with 296 immigrants, 315 Turkish citizens. The study was carried out with pregnant citizens. The data were prepared by the researchers; sociodemographic data form, Mindful Eating Questionnaire (MEQ) and Eating Attitude Test (EAT-40).
Results; The mean age of the immigrant pregnant women was 25.99±5.95, Turkish The mean age of pregnant women was 27.02±4.91 years. The Eating Attitudes Test of immigrants (EAT-40) scored 25.53±18.73, while Turkish pregnant women scored 25.31±18.93. In the study, the eating attitude scores of the pregnant women who had a history of hypertension, placenta previa, who were anemic and had urinary system infection were found to be lower (p<0.05). No statistically significant correlation was found between the EAT-40 total score of the immigrant participants and the sub-dimension scores of eating without thinking, mindfulness, and conscious eating in the MEQ. On the other hand, a positive correlation was found between emotional eating, eating discipline, interference and total score in the immigrant group and eating attitude.
Conclusion; In the light of the results obtained, it has been determined that eating attitude and eating awareness are important during pregnancy and are affected by the health behaviors of pregnant women. The follow-up of Syrian immigrants, whose numbers are increasing day by day, during pregnancy, birth and postpartum period is important in terms of protecting mother and child health.

Anahtar Kelimeler

Eating Attitude, Eating Awareness, Immigrant

Proje Numarası

Yok

Kaynakça

• 1. Eroğlu Y, Kaya Ş. Toplumsal değişimde göç olgusunun kültürel güvenliğe yansıması. Akademik İncelemeler Dergisi. 2023;18(1):20-45.
• 2. Cihan EG, Özşahin Z, Karakayalı Ay Ç. Mülteci kadınlarda üreme sağlığı problemleri. Journal of Midwifery and Health Sciences. 2023;20:1-6.
• 3. Watson HJ, Holle AV, Knoph C,Hamer RM, Torgersen L, Reichborn-Kjennerud T, et al. Psychosocial factors associated with bulimia nervosa during pregnancy: An internal validation study. Int J Eat Disord. 2014;48:654–662.
• 4. Paslakis G, de Zwaan M. Clinical management of females seeking fertility treatment and of pregnant females with eating disorders. European Eating Disorders Review. 2019;27(3):215-223.
• 5. American Psychiatric Association. Diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disorders (DSM) . Washington, DC: American Psychiatric Association. 1994.
• 6. Lowes H, Kopeika J, Micali N, Ash A. Anorexia nervosa in pregnancy. The Obstetrician & Gynaecologist. 2012;14:179–187.
• 7. Linna MS, Raevuori A, Haukka J, Suvisaari JM, Suokas JT, Gissler M. Pregnancy, obstetric, and perinatal health outcomes in eating disorders. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2014;211:392.e1-8.
• 8. Johnson EB, Reed SD, Hitti J, Batra M. Increased risk of adverse pregnancy outcome among Somali immigrants in Washington state. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2005;193(2):475-482.
• 9. Easter A, Solmi F, Bye A, Taborelli E, Corfield F, Schmidt U. Antenatal and postnatal psychopathology among women with current and past eating disorders: Longitudinal patterns. Eur. Eat. Disorders Rev. 2015;19–27.
• 10. Erginbas Kender E, Yüksel G, Ger C, Özer U. Eating attitudes, depression and anxiety levels of patients with hyperemesis gravidarum hospitalized in an obstetrics and gynecology clinic. Düşünen Adam The Journal o f Psychiatry and Neurological Sciences. 2015;28:119-126.
• 11. Nguyen AN, de Barse LM, Tiemeier H, Jaddoe VW, Franco OH, Jansen PW, et al. Maternal history of eating disorders: Diet quality during pregnancy and infant feeding. Appetite. 2017;109:108-14.
• 12. Lee A, Muggli E, Halliday J, Lewis S, Gasparini E, Forster D. What do pregnant women eat, and are they meeting the recommended dietary requirements for pregnancy? Midwifery. 2018;67:70-76.
• 13. Gibson-Helm M, Teede H, Block A, Knight M, East C, Wallace EM, et al. Maternal health and pregnancy outcomes among women of refugee background from African countries: a retrospective, observational study in Australia. BMC Pregnancy Childbirth. 2014;14(1):392.
• 14. Gibson-Helm M, Boyle J, Cheng IH, East C, Knight M, Teede H. Maternal health and pregnancy outcomes among women of refugee background from Asian countries. Int J Gynaecol Obstet. 2015;129(2):146-51.
• 15. Gagnon AJ, McDermott S, Rigol-Chachamovich J, Bandyopadhyay M, Stray-Pedersen B, Stewart D; ROAM Collaboration. International migration and gestational diabetes mellitus: a systematic review of the literature and meta-analysis. Paediatr Perinat Epidemiol. 2011;25(6):575-92.
• 16. Wanigaratne S, Cole DC, Bassil K, Hyman I, Moineddin R, Urquia ML. The influence of refugee status and secondary migration on preterm birth. J Epidemiol Community Health. 2016;70(6):622-8.
• 17. Framson C, Kristal AR, Schenk JM, Littman AJ, Zeliadt S, Benitez D. Development and Validation of the Mindful Eating Questionnaire. J. Am. Diet. Assoc. 2009;109(8):1439–1444.
• 18. Köse G, Tayfur M, Birincioğlu I, Dönmez A. Adaptation study of the Mindful Eating Questiionnare (MEQ) into Turkish. J. Cogn. Psychother. 2017;Res.:1.
• 19. Garner DM, Garfinkel PE. The eating attitudes test: An index of the symptoms of anorexia nervosa. Psychological medicine. 1979;9(02):273-280.
• 20. Savaşır I, Erol N. Yeme tutum testi: anoreksiya nervoza belirtileri indeksi. Psikoloji Dergisi. 1989;7:19-25.
• 21. Erenel H, Aydogan Mathyk B, Sal V, Ayhan I, Karatas S, Koc Bebek A. Clinical characteristics and pregnancy outcomes of Syrian refugees: a case-control study in a tertiary care hospital in Istanbul, Turkey. Arch Gynecol Obstet. 2017;295(1):45-50. doi: 10.1007/s00404-016-4188-5.
• 22. Kanmaz AG, İnan AH, Beyan E, Özgür S, Budak A. Obstetric outcomes of Syrian refugees and Turkish citizens. Arch Iran Med. 2019;22(9):482-88.
• 23. Demirci H, Yildirim Topak N, Ocakoglu G, Karakulak Gomleksiz M, Ustunyurt E, Ulku Turker A. Birth characteristics of Syrian refugees and Turkish citizens in Turkey in 2015. Int J Gynaecol Obstet. 2017;137(1):63-66. doi: 10.1002/ijgo.12088.
• 24. Alnuaimi K, Kassab M, Ali R, Mohammad K, Shattnawi K. Pregnancy outcomes among Syrian refugee and Jordanian women: a comparative study. Int Nurs Rev. 2017;64(4):584- 92. doi: 10.1111/inr.12382
• 25. Vural T, Gölbaşı C, Bayraktar B, Gölbaşı H, Yıldırım AGŞ. Are Syrian refugees at high risk for adverse pregnancy outcomes? A comparison study in a tertiary center in Turkey. J Obstet Gynaecol Res. 2021;47(4):1353-61. doi: 10.1111/jog.14673.
• 26. Annagür BB, Kerimoğlu ÖS, Gündüz Ş, Tazegül A. Are there any differences in psychiatric symptoms and eating attitudes between pregnant women with hyperemesis gravidarum and healthy pregnant women? J Obstet Gynaecol Res. 2014;40(4):1009-14. doi: 10.1111/jog.12274.
• 27. Bayram S, Çalışkan H, Yeşil E. Gebelerde ağırlık kazanımı, yeme tutum ve farkındalığının değerlendirilmesi. Gevher Nesıbe Journal Of Medıcal And Health Scıences. 2021;6(10):63-71.
• 28. Hutchinson AD, Charters M, Prichard I, Fletcher C, Wilson C. Understanding maternal dietary choices during pregnancy: The role of social norms and mindful eating. Appetite. 2017:112:227–234.
• 29. Durukan A, Gül A. Mindful eating: Differences of generations and relationship of mindful eating with BMI. International Journal of Gastronomy and Food Science. 2019;18:100172.
• 30. Apolzan JW, Myers CA, Cowley AD, Brady H, Hsia DS, Stewart TM, et al. Examination of the reliability and validity of the Mindful Eating Questionnaire in pregnant women. Appetite. 2016;100:142-51. doi: 10.1016/j.appet.2016.02.025