Cargando…

Approaching the diagnosis of growth-restricted neonates: a cohort study

BACKGROUND: The consequences of in utero growth restriction have been attracting scholarly attention for the past two decades. Nevertheless, the diagnosis of growth-restricted neonates is as yet an unresolved issue. Aim of this study is the evaluation of the performance of simple, common indicators...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autor principal: Sifianou, Popi
Formato: Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2010
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2830965/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20122167
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1471-2393-10-6
_version_ 1782178191470755840
author Sifianou, Popi
author_facet Sifianou, Popi
author_sort Sifianou, Popi
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: The consequences of in utero growth restriction have been attracting scholarly attention for the past two decades. Nevertheless, the diagnosis of growth-restricted neonates is as yet an unresolved issue. Aim of this study is the evaluation of the performance of simple, common indicators of nutritional status, which are used in the identification of growth-restricted neonates. METHODS: In a cohort of 418 consecutively born term and near term neonates, four widely used anthropometric indices of body proportionality and subcutaneous fat accretion were applied, singly and in combination, as diagnostic markers for the detection of growth-restricted babies. The concordance of the indices was assessed in terms of positive and negative percent agreement and of Cohen's kappa. RESULTS: The agreement between the anthropometric indices was overall poor with a highest positive percent agreement of 62.5% and a lowest of 27.9% and the κ ranging between 0.19 and 0.58. Moreover, 6% to 32% of babies having abnormal values in just one index were apparently well-grown and the median birth weight centile of babies having abnormal values of either of two indices was found to be as high as the 46(th )centile for gestational age (95%CI 35.5 to 60.4 and 29.8 to 63.9, respectively). On the contrary, the combination of anthropometric indices appeared to have better distinguishing properties among apparently and not apparently well-grown babies. The median birth weight centile of babies having abnormal values in two (or more) indices was the 11(th )centile for gestational age (95%CI 6.3 to 16.3). CONCLUSIONS: Clinical assessment and anthropometric indices in combination can define a reference standard with better performance compared to the same indices used in isolation. This approach offers an easy-to-use tool for bedside diagnosis of in utero growth restriction.
format Text
id pubmed-2830965
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2010
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-28309652010-03-03 Approaching the diagnosis of growth-restricted neonates: a cohort study Sifianou, Popi BMC Pregnancy Childbirth Research article BACKGROUND: The consequences of in utero growth restriction have been attracting scholarly attention for the past two decades. Nevertheless, the diagnosis of growth-restricted neonates is as yet an unresolved issue. Aim of this study is the evaluation of the performance of simple, common indicators of nutritional status, which are used in the identification of growth-restricted neonates. METHODS: In a cohort of 418 consecutively born term and near term neonates, four widely used anthropometric indices of body proportionality and subcutaneous fat accretion were applied, singly and in combination, as diagnostic markers for the detection of growth-restricted babies. The concordance of the indices was assessed in terms of positive and negative percent agreement and of Cohen's kappa. RESULTS: The agreement between the anthropometric indices was overall poor with a highest positive percent agreement of 62.5% and a lowest of 27.9% and the κ ranging between 0.19 and 0.58. Moreover, 6% to 32% of babies having abnormal values in just one index were apparently well-grown and the median birth weight centile of babies having abnormal values of either of two indices was found to be as high as the 46(th )centile for gestational age (95%CI 35.5 to 60.4 and 29.8 to 63.9, respectively). On the contrary, the combination of anthropometric indices appeared to have better distinguishing properties among apparently and not apparently well-grown babies. The median birth weight centile of babies having abnormal values in two (or more) indices was the 11(th )centile for gestational age (95%CI 6.3 to 16.3). CONCLUSIONS: Clinical assessment and anthropometric indices in combination can define a reference standard with better performance compared to the same indices used in isolation. This approach offers an easy-to-use tool for bedside diagnosis of in utero growth restriction. BioMed Central 2010-02-01 /pmc/articles/PMC2830965/ /pubmed/20122167 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1471-2393-10-6 Text en Copyright ©2010 Sifianou; licensee BioMed Central Ltd. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0 This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Research article
Sifianou, Popi
Approaching the diagnosis of growth-restricted neonates: a cohort study
title Approaching the diagnosis of growth-restricted neonates: a cohort study
title_full Approaching the diagnosis of growth-restricted neonates: a cohort study
title_fullStr Approaching the diagnosis of growth-restricted neonates: a cohort study
title_full_unstemmed Approaching the diagnosis of growth-restricted neonates: a cohort study
title_short Approaching the diagnosis of growth-restricted neonates: a cohort study
title_sort approaching the diagnosis of growth-restricted neonates: a cohort study
topic Research article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2830965/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20122167
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1471-2393-10-6
work_keys_str_mv AT sifianoupopi approachingthediagnosisofgrowthrestrictedneonatesacohortstudy