Jan L Wallander1, Carla Bann2, Elwyn Chomba3, Shivaprasad S Goudar4, Omrana Pasha5, Fred J Biasini6, Elizabeth M McClure2, Vanessa Thorsten2, Dennis Wallace2, Waldemar A Carlo7. 1. University of California, Merced, Merced, CA, United States. Electronic address: Jwallander@ucmerced.edu. 2. Research Triangle Institute International, Durham, NC, United States. 3. Centre for Infectious Disease Research in Zambia, Lusaka, Zambia; University of Zambia, Lusaka, Zambia. 4. KLE University's Jawaharlal Nehru Medical College, Belgaum, India. 5. Aga Kahn University Medical College, Karachi, Pakistan. 6. University of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham, AL, United States. 7. Centre for Infectious Disease Research in Zambia, Lusaka, Zambia; University of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham, AL, United States.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Resuscitation following birth asphyxia reduces mortality, but may be argued to increase risk for neurodevelopmental disability in survivors. AIMS: To test the hypothesis that development of infants who received resuscitation following birth asphyxia is not significantly different through 36months of age from infants who had healthy births. STUDY DESIGN: Prospective observational cohort design comparing infants exposed to birth asphyxia with resuscitation or healthy birth. SUBJECTS: A random sample of infants with birth asphyxia who received bag-and-mask resuscitation was selected from birth records in selected communities in 3 countries. EXCLUSION CRITERIA: birth weight<1500g, severely abnormal neurological examination at 7days, mother<15years, unable to participate, or not expected to remain in the target area. A random sample of healthy-birth infants (no resuscitation, normal neurological exam) was also selected. Eligible=438, consented=407, and ≥1 valid developmental assessment during the first 36months=376. OUTCOME MEASURE(S): Bayley Scales of Infant Development-II Mental (MDI) and Psychomotor (PDI) Development Index. RESULTS: Trajectories of MDI (p=.069) and PDI (p=.143) over 3 yearly assessments did not differ between children with birth asphyxia and healthy-birth children. Rather there was a trend for birth asphyxia children to improve more than healthy-birth children. CONCLUSIONS: The large majority of infants who are treated with resuscitation and survived birth asphyxia can be expected to evidence normal development at least until age 3. The risk for neurodevelopmental disability should not justify the restriction of effective therapies for birth asphyxia.
BACKGROUND: Resuscitation following birth asphyxia reduces mortality, but may be argued to increase risk for neurodevelopmental disability in survivors. AIMS: To test the hypothesis that development of infants who received resuscitation following birth asphyxia is not significantly different through 36months of age from infants who had healthy births. STUDY DESIGN: Prospective observational cohort design comparing infants exposed to birth asphyxia with resuscitation or healthy birth. SUBJECTS: A random sample of infants with birth asphyxia who received bag-and-mask resuscitation was selected from birth records in selected communities in 3 countries. EXCLUSION CRITERIA: birth weight<1500g, severely abnormal neurological examination at 7days, mother<15years, unable to participate, or not expected to remain in the target area. A random sample of healthy-birth infants (no resuscitation, normal neurological exam) was also selected. Eligible=438, consented=407, and ≥1 valid developmental assessment during the first 36months=376. OUTCOME MEASURE(S): Bayley Scales of Infant Development-II Mental (MDI) and Psychomotor (PDI) Development Index. RESULTS: Trajectories of MDI (p=.069) and PDI (p=.143) over 3 yearly assessments did not differ between children with birth asphyxia and healthy-birth children. Rather there was a trend for birth asphyxiachildren to improve more than healthy-birth children. CONCLUSIONS: The large majority of infants who are treated with resuscitation and survived birth asphyxia can be expected to evidence normal development at least until age 3. The risk for neurodevelopmental disability should not justify the restriction of effective therapies for birth asphyxia.
Authors: Waldemar A Carlo; Shivaprasad S Goudar; Omrana Pasha; Elwyn Chomba; Jan L Wallander; Fred J Biasini; Elizabeth M McClure; Vanessa Thorsten; Hrishikesh Chakraborty; Dennis Wallace; Darlene L Shearer; Linda L Wright Journal: J Pediatr Date: 2012-11-16 Impact factor: 4.406
Authors: Stephen N Wall; Anne C C Lee; Susan Niermeyer; Mike English; William J Keenan; Wally Carlo; Zulfiqar A Bhutta; Abhay Bang; Indira Narayanan; Iwan Ariawan; Joy E Lawn Journal: Int J Gynaecol Obstet Date: 2009-10 Impact factor: 3.561
Authors: Sally Grantham-McGregor; Yin Bun Cheung; Santiago Cueto; Paul Glewwe; Linda Richter; Barbara Strupp Journal: Lancet Date: 2007-01-06 Impact factor: 79.321
Authors: Sophie Janet; Verena I Carrara; Julie A Simpson; Nant War War Thin; Wah Wah Say; Naw Ta Mlar Paw; Kesinee Chotivanich; Claudia Turner; Jane Crawley; Rose McGready Journal: PLoS One Date: 2018-01-05 Impact factor: 3.240
Authors: Christabel C Enweronu-Laryea; Eric Nsiah-Boateng; Hilary D Andoh; Audrey Frimpong-Barfi; Francis M Asenso-Boadi; Moses Aikins Journal: Ghana Med J Date: 2019-12