| Literature DB >> 31193593 |
Chiara Greco1, Iman F Iskander2, Salma Z El Houchi2, Rinawati Rohsiswatmo3, Lily Rundjan3, Williams N Ogala4, Akinyemi O D Ofakunrin5, Luciano Moccia6, Nguyen Thi Xuan Hoi7, Giorgio Bedogni8, Claudio Tiribelli1,8, Carlos D Coda Zabetta1.
Abstract
IMPORTANCE: The real prevalence and clinical burden of severe neonatal jaundice are undefined due to difficulties in measuring total serum bilirubin (TSB) outside secondary and tertiary clinical centers.Entities:
Keywords: Bilirubin; Bilistick System; Diagnostic accuracy study; Low-medium income countries; Neonatal jaundice; Neonatal screening; Point-of-care system; STARD; Severe hyperbilirubinemia
Year: 2018 PMID: 31193593 PMCID: PMC6537563 DOI: 10.1016/j.eclinm.2018.06.003
Source DB: PubMed Journal: EClinicalMedicine ISSN: 2589-5370
Fig. 1Diagram reporting flow of participants through the study.
Stratification of the population according to categorical measures.
| Total | ||
|---|---|---|
| Continent | ||
| Africa | 298 (20.4%) | |
| Asia | 1160 (79.6%) | |
| State | ||
| Egypt | 130 (8.9%) | |
| Nigeria | 168 (11.5%) | |
| Indonesia | 530 (36.4%) | |
| Viet Nam | 630 (43.2%) | |
| Hospital | ||
| Egypt | E-CUCH | 130 (8.9%) |
| Nigeria | N-ABUTH | 58 (4.0%) |
| N-AKTH | 34 (2.3%) | |
| N-JUTH | 76 (5.2%) | |
| Indonesia | I-BADH | 76 (5.2%) |
| I-CIPTO | 154 (10.6%) | |
| I-JGH | 24 (1.6%) | |
| I-KDH | 103 (7.1%) | |
| I-KMH | 42 (2.9%) | |
| I-PRDH | 77 (5.3%) | |
| I-TDH | 54 (3.7%) | |
| Viet Nam | V-MCRGH | 92 (6.3%) |
| V-NBOPH | 154 (10.6%) | |
| V-QTPGH | 40 (2.7%) | |
| V-SPH | 87 (6.0%) | |
| V-VPOPH | 185 (12.7%) | |
| V-VSH | 72 (4.9%) | |
| AGE (NICE cut-point in hours) | ||
| 0 | 26 (1.8%) | |
| 6 | 4 (0.3%) | |
| 12 | 7 (0.5%) | |
| 18 | 11 (0.8%) | |
| 24 | 69 (4.7%) | |
| 30 | 17 (1.2%) | |
| 36 | 33 (2.3%) | |
| 42 | 18 (1.2%) | |
| 48 | 156 (10.7%) | |
| 54 | 29 (2.0%) | |
| 60 | 27 (1.9%) | |
| 66 | 10 (0.7%) | |
| 72 | 254 (17.4%) | |
| 78 | 15 (1.0%) | |
| 84 | 14 (1.0%) | |
| 90 | 10 (0.7%) | |
| 96 | 758 (52.0%) | |
| Nice management according to laboratory | ||
| Not requiring treatment | 1159 (79.5%) | |
| Perform phototherapy or ET | 299 (20.5%) | |
| Nice management according to Bilistick System | ||
| Not requiring treatment | 1230 (84.4%) | |
| Perform phototherapy or ET | 228 (15.6%) | |
All data are presented as frequency (percentage).
Main measurements of the study subjects.
| Africa | Asia | Total | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Egypt | Nigeria | Indonesia | Viet Nam | ||
| (n = 130) | (n = 168) | (n = 530) | (n = 630) | (n = 1458) | |
| Male-to-female ratio | 1.55: 1 | 1.30: 1 | 1.12: 1 | 1.36: 1 | 1.27: 1 |
| Age (hours) | 144 | 96 | 96 | 72 | 96 |
| Weight (g) | 3200 | 2900 | 2470 | 3000 | 2950 |
| Hematocrit (%) | 35.0 | 44.0 | 44.1 | 43.0 | 42.7 |
| Bilirubin by Laboratory (mg/dL) | 12.9 | 12.7 | 13.6 | 13.4 | 13.4 |
| Bilirubin by Bilistick (mg/dL) | 11.6 | 12.0 | 12.9 | 12.5 | 12.5 |
All data are presented as 50th percentile [25th–75th percentile].
Estimates of diagnostic accuracy of Bilistick System.
| Africa | Asia | Total | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Egypt | Nigeria | Indonesia | Viet Nam | |||
| (n = 130) | (n = 168) | (n = 530) | (n = 630) | (n = 1458) | ||
| Prevalence | Pr(A) | 15.0% | 20.0% | 16.0% | 26.0% | |
| [9.7%–22.8%] | [14.0%–26.5%] | [13.0%–19.4%] | [22.0%–29.2%] | [ | ||
| Sensitivity | Pr(+|A) | 60.0% | 69.7% | 67.1% | 73.9% | |
| [36.1%–80.9%] | [51.3%–84.4%] | [56.0%–76.9%] | [66.4%–80.5%] | [ | ||
| Specificity | Pr(−|N) | 98.2% | 97.8% | 99.8% | 97.7% | |
| [93.6%–99.8%] | [93.6%–99.5%] | [98.8%–100%] | [95.8%–98.8%] | [ | ||
| ROC Area | (Sens. + Spec.)/2 | 0.791 | 0.837 | 0.834 | 0.858 | |
| [0.680–0.902] | [0.757–0.918] | [0.784–0.884] | [0.823–0.893] | [ | ||
| Likelihood ratio | Pr(+|A)/Pr(+|N) | 33.0 | 31.4 | 298.0 | 31.5 | |
| [8.0–136.0] | [10.0–98.2] | [41.9–2126.0] | [17.4–56.9] | [ | ||
| Likelihood ratio | Pr(−|A)/Pr(−|N) | 0.41 | 0.31 | 0.33 | 0.27 | |
| [0.24–0.70] | [0.19–0.52] | [0.24–0.45] | [0.21–0.35] | [ | ||
| Odds ratio | LR(+)/LR(−) | 81.0 | 101.0 | 904.0 | 118.0 | |
| [16.7– .] | [27.1–371.0] | [151.0– .] | [59.4–234.0] | [ | ||
| Positive | Pr(A |+) | 85.7% | 88.5% | 98.3% | 91.5% | |
| [57.2%–98.2%] | [69.8%–97.6%] | [90.8%–100%] | [85.4%–95.7%] | [ | ||
| Negative | Pr(N |−) | 93.1% | 93.0% | 94.1% | 91.6% | |
| [86.9%–97.0%] | [87.4%–96.6%] | [91.5%–96.0%] | [88.8%–93.9%] | [ | ||
All data are presented as value [95% Confidence Interval].
Fig. 2Bland–Altman analysis of Bilistick vs TSB. The lines are the mean difference and the limits of agreement (LOA).