Cargando…

Validation of the foot length measure as an alternative tool to identify low birth weight and preterm babies in a low-resource setting like Nepal: a cross-sectional study

BACKGROUND: The majority of infants who die in the neonatal period are born with a low birth weight (LBW, <2500 grams), or prematurely (before 37 weeks). Most deaths among these infants could be prevented with simple, low-cost interventions like kangaroo mother care (KMC) or prevention and early...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: KC, Ashish, Nelin, Viktoria, Vitrakoti, Ravi, Aryal, Surabhi, Målqvist, Mats
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2015
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4403672/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25928804
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12887-015-0361-4
_version_ 1782367361132658688
author KC, Ashish
Nelin, Viktoria
Vitrakoti, Ravi
Aryal, Surabhi
Målqvist, Mats
author_facet KC, Ashish
Nelin, Viktoria
Vitrakoti, Ravi
Aryal, Surabhi
Målqvist, Mats
author_sort KC, Ashish
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: The majority of infants who die in the neonatal period are born with a low birth weight (LBW, <2500 grams), or prematurely (before 37 weeks). Most deaths among these infants could be prevented with simple, low-cost interventions like kangaroo mother care (KMC) or prevention and early identification of infection. It is difficult, however, to determine birth weight and gestational age in community settings, and therefore necessary to find an appropriate alternative screening tool that can identify LBW and preterm infants. METHODS: This cross-sectional study was conducted at a tertiary hospital in Nepal to compare the validity of using three different foot length measurement methods (plastic ruler, measuring tape, and paper footprint) as screening tools for identifying babies with birth weights <2000 grams or infants born preterm (<37 weeks). LBW was defined as less than 2000 grams because of the implication for use of KMC for these infants. Non-parametric receiver operating characteristics (ROC) analysis was completed to determine which measurement method best predicted LBW and preterm birth. For the method that was the best predictor for each outcome (i.e. highest area under the curve), further analyses were completed to determine sensitivity, specificity, likelihood ratios and predictive values of an operational screening cutoff to predict LBW or preterm birth in this setting. RESULTS: Of the 811 infants included in this study, 30 infants had LBW and 54 were born preterm. The plastic ruler was the measurement method with the highest area under the curve, and thus predictive score for estimating both outcomes, so operational cutoffs were identified based on this method. An operational cutoff of 7.2 cm was identified to screen for infants weighing <2000 grams at birth (sensitivity: 75.9%, specificity: 90.3%), and 7.8 cm was determined as the operational cutoff to identify preterm infants (sensitivity: 76.9%, specificity: 53.9%). CONCLUSIONS: In Nepal, at least in community settings, foot length measurement with a hard ruler may be a valid proxy to identify at-risk infants when birth weight or gestational age is unavailable. Further studies and piloting should be conducted to identify exact cutoffs that can be used within community settings.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-4403672
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2015
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-44036722015-04-21 Validation of the foot length measure as an alternative tool to identify low birth weight and preterm babies in a low-resource setting like Nepal: a cross-sectional study KC, Ashish Nelin, Viktoria Vitrakoti, Ravi Aryal, Surabhi Målqvist, Mats BMC Pediatr Research Article BACKGROUND: The majority of infants who die in the neonatal period are born with a low birth weight (LBW, <2500 grams), or prematurely (before 37 weeks). Most deaths among these infants could be prevented with simple, low-cost interventions like kangaroo mother care (KMC) or prevention and early identification of infection. It is difficult, however, to determine birth weight and gestational age in community settings, and therefore necessary to find an appropriate alternative screening tool that can identify LBW and preterm infants. METHODS: This cross-sectional study was conducted at a tertiary hospital in Nepal to compare the validity of using three different foot length measurement methods (plastic ruler, measuring tape, and paper footprint) as screening tools for identifying babies with birth weights <2000 grams or infants born preterm (<37 weeks). LBW was defined as less than 2000 grams because of the implication for use of KMC for these infants. Non-parametric receiver operating characteristics (ROC) analysis was completed to determine which measurement method best predicted LBW and preterm birth. For the method that was the best predictor for each outcome (i.e. highest area under the curve), further analyses were completed to determine sensitivity, specificity, likelihood ratios and predictive values of an operational screening cutoff to predict LBW or preterm birth in this setting. RESULTS: Of the 811 infants included in this study, 30 infants had LBW and 54 were born preterm. The plastic ruler was the measurement method with the highest area under the curve, and thus predictive score for estimating both outcomes, so operational cutoffs were identified based on this method. An operational cutoff of 7.2 cm was identified to screen for infants weighing <2000 grams at birth (sensitivity: 75.9%, specificity: 90.3%), and 7.8 cm was determined as the operational cutoff to identify preterm infants (sensitivity: 76.9%, specificity: 53.9%). CONCLUSIONS: In Nepal, at least in community settings, foot length measurement with a hard ruler may be a valid proxy to identify at-risk infants when birth weight or gestational age is unavailable. Further studies and piloting should be conducted to identify exact cutoffs that can be used within community settings. BioMed Central 2015-04-17 /pmc/articles/PMC4403672/ /pubmed/25928804 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12887-015-0361-4 Text en © KC et al.; licensee BioMed Central. 2015 This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly credited. 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.
spellingShingle Research Article
KC, Ashish
Nelin, Viktoria
Vitrakoti, Ravi
Aryal, Surabhi
Målqvist, Mats
Validation of the foot length measure as an alternative tool to identify low birth weight and preterm babies in a low-resource setting like Nepal: a cross-sectional study
title Validation of the foot length measure as an alternative tool to identify low birth weight and preterm babies in a low-resource setting like Nepal: a cross-sectional study
title_full Validation of the foot length measure as an alternative tool to identify low birth weight and preterm babies in a low-resource setting like Nepal: a cross-sectional study
title_fullStr Validation of the foot length measure as an alternative tool to identify low birth weight and preterm babies in a low-resource setting like Nepal: a cross-sectional study
title_full_unstemmed Validation of the foot length measure as an alternative tool to identify low birth weight and preterm babies in a low-resource setting like Nepal: a cross-sectional study
title_short Validation of the foot length measure as an alternative tool to identify low birth weight and preterm babies in a low-resource setting like Nepal: a cross-sectional study
title_sort validation of the foot length measure as an alternative tool to identify low birth weight and preterm babies in a low-resource setting like nepal: a cross-sectional study
topic Research Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4403672/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25928804
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12887-015-0361-4
work_keys_str_mv AT kcashish validationofthefootlengthmeasureasanalternativetooltoidentifylowbirthweightandpretermbabiesinalowresourcesettinglikenepalacrosssectionalstudy
AT nelinviktoria validationofthefootlengthmeasureasanalternativetooltoidentifylowbirthweightandpretermbabiesinalowresourcesettinglikenepalacrosssectionalstudy
AT vitrakotiravi validationofthefootlengthmeasureasanalternativetooltoidentifylowbirthweightandpretermbabiesinalowresourcesettinglikenepalacrosssectionalstudy
AT aryalsurabhi validationofthefootlengthmeasureasanalternativetooltoidentifylowbirthweightandpretermbabiesinalowresourcesettinglikenepalacrosssectionalstudy
AT malqvistmats validationofthefootlengthmeasureasanalternativetooltoidentifylowbirthweightandpretermbabiesinalowresourcesettinglikenepalacrosssectionalstudy