Literature DB >> 10551498

Late diagnosis of congenital dislocation of the hip and presence of a screening programme: South Australian population-based study.

A Chan1, P J Cundy, B K Foster, R J Keane, R Byron-Scott.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: The Medical Research Council Working Party on Congenital Dislocation of the Hip have reported an ascertainment-adjusted incidence of a first operative procedure for congenital dislocation of the hip (CDH) of 0.78 per 1000 livebirths, which is similar to the incidence of CDH before the start of the UK screening programme. The report showed that CDH had not been detected by routine screening before age 3 months in 70% of children reported to the national orthopaedic surveillance scheme. This report raised concerns about the merit of screening at birth for CDH. We aimed to find out the incidence of an operative procedure for CDH in the first 5 years of life among children born in South Australia between 1988 and 1993, and the proportion of these patients that were detected at age 3 months or older.
METHODS: The state's database for inpatient separations between January, 1988, and April, 1998 was searched. Case records were examined for the age and circumstances of diagnosis, and type of operative procedures. Prevalence rates of CDH were obtained from the South Australian Birth Defects Register, which receives notifications from a statutory perinatal data collection of birth defects detected at birth and subsequent voluntary notifications for children up to age 5 years.
FINDINGS: Of the 55 children born in South Australia between 1988 and 1993 identified as having non-teratological CDH and operative procedures, only 22 (40%) had been diagnosed at age 3 months or older. 18 had an open reduction of the hip joint or osteotomy, or both, and the remainder had arthrograms, closed reductions, and/or tenotomy. The prevalence of non-teratological CDH in children was 7.74 per 1000 livebirths. The incidence of surgery for CDH in the first 5 years of life was 0.46 per 1000 livebirths (95% CI 0.34-0.59) and only 0.19 per 1000 livebirths (0.11-0.26) for those diagnosed late (age 3 months or older). These children diagnosed late represented 2.4% of all known cases of CDH.
INTERPRETATION: Only 2.4% of known cases of CDH in children born in South Australia had been detected late and required surgery. These results show that a screening programme for CDH can be successful, contrary to the findings of the UK Medical Research Council Working Party.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1999        PMID: 10551498     DOI: 10.1016/S0140-6736(98)12469-8

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Lancet        ISSN: 0140-6736            Impact factor:   79.321


  18 in total

1.  Hip dysplasia and ultrasound imaging of whole populations: the precautionary principle revisited.

Authors:  D Elbourne; C Dezateux
Journal:  Arch Dis Child Fetal Neonatal Ed       Date:  2005-01       Impact factor: 5.747

2.  Etamsylate for prevention of periventricular haemorrhage.

Authors:  R W Hunt
Journal:  Arch Dis Child Fetal Neonatal Ed       Date:  2005-01       Impact factor: 5.747

3.  Differences in risk factors between early and late diagnosed developmental dysplasia of the hip.

Authors:  P Sharpe; K Mulpuri; A Chan; P J Cundy
Journal:  Arch Dis Child Fetal Neonatal Ed       Date:  2005-12-06       Impact factor: 5.747

Review 4.  Screening of Newborns and Infants for Developmental Dysplasia of the Hip: A Systematic Review.

Authors:  Ritesh Arvind Pandey; Ashok N Johari
Journal:  Indian J Orthop       Date:  2021-05-02       Impact factor: 1.251

5.  Performance, treatment pathways, and effects of alternative policy options for screening for developmental dysplasia of the hip in the United Kingdom.

Authors:  C Dezateux; J Brown; R Arthur; J Karnon; A Parnaby
Journal:  Arch Dis Child       Date:  2003-09       Impact factor: 3.791

6.  Efficiency of alternative policy options for screening for developmental dysplasia of the hip in the United Kingdom.

Authors:  J Brown; C Dezateux; J Karnon; A Parnaby; R Arthur
Journal:  Arch Dis Child       Date:  2003-09       Impact factor: 3.791

7.  To screen or not to screen? A decision analysis of the utility of screening for developmental dysplasia of the hip.

Authors:  Susan T Mahan; Jeffrey N Katz; Young-Jo Kim
Journal:  J Bone Joint Surg Am       Date:  2009-07       Impact factor: 5.284

8.  Developmental dysplasia of the hip: why are we still operating on them? A plea for institutional newborn clinical screening.

Authors:  Wu Chean Lee; Sumanth Kumar Gera; Arjandas Mahadev
Journal:  Singapore Med J       Date:  2018-05-18       Impact factor: 1.858

9.  Pubo-femoral distance: an easy sonographic screening test to avoid late diagnosis of developmental dysplasia of the hip.

Authors:  C Tréguier; M Chapuis; B Branger; B Bruneau; A Grellier; K Chouklati; M Proisy; P Darnault; P Violas; P Pladys; Y Gandon
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2012-10-20       Impact factor: 5.315

10.  [When is the optimal time for hip ultrasound screening?].

Authors:  S Farr; F Grill; D Müller
Journal:  Orthopade       Date:  2008-06       Impact factor: 1.004

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.