Literature DB >> 34255007

Association Between Iatrogenic Delivery for Suspected Fetal Growth Restriction and Childhood School Outcomes.

Roshan John Selvaratnam1,2, Euan Morrison Wallace1,2, Rory Wolfe3, Peter John Anderson4,5,6, Mary-Ann Davey1,2.   

Abstract

Importance: Timely delivery of infants suspected of having fetal growth restriction (FGR) is a balance between preventing stillbirth and minimizing prematurity, particularly because many infants with suspected FGR have normal growth. Objective: To explore the association between iatrogenic delivery for suspected FGR and childhood school outcomes. Design, Setting, and Participants: A retrospective whole-population cohort study linking perinatal data from births 32 weeks' or more gestation between January 1, 2003, to December 31, 2013, to developmental and educational test scores at preparatory school, and at school grades 3, 5, and 7 in Victoria, Australia. Follow-up was concluded in 2019. Exposures: Suspicion or nonsuspicion of FGR, presence or absence of iatrogenic delivery (defined as early induction of labor or cesarean delivery prior to labor) for suspected FGR, and presence or absence of small for gestational age (SGA). Main Outcomes and Measures: The coprimary outcomes were being in the bottom 10th percentile on 2 or more of 5 developmental domains at school entry and being below the national minimum standard on 2 or more of 5 educational domains in grades 3, 5, or 7.
Results: In the birth population of 705 937 infants, the mean gestation at birth was 39.1 (SD, 1.5) weeks and the mean birth weight was 3426 (SD, 517) grams. The birth population linked to 181 902 children with developmental results and 425 717 children with educational results. Compared with infants with severe SGA (birth weight <3rd percentile) not suspected of having FGR, infants with severe SGA delivered for suspected FGR were born earlier (mean gestation, 37.9 weeks vs 39.4 weeks). They also had a significantly increased risk of poor developmental outcome at school entry (16.2% vs 12.7%; absolute difference, 3.5% [95% CI, 0.5%-6.5%]); adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 1.36 [95% CI, 1.07-1.74]) and poor educational outcomes in grades 3, 5, and 7 (for example, in grade 7: 13.4% vs 10.5%; absolute difference, 2.9% [95% CI, 0.4%-5.5%]); aOR, 1.33 [95% CI, 1.04-1.70]). There was no significant difference between infants with normal growth (birth weight ≥10th percentile) delivered for suspected FGR and those not suspected of having FGR in developmental outcome (8.6% vs 8.1%; absolute difference, 0.5% [95% CI, -1.1% to 2.0%]); aOR, 1.17 [95% CI, 0.95-1.45]) or educational outcome in grade 3, 5 or 7, despite being born earlier (mean gestation, 38.0 weeks vs 39.1 weeks). Conclusions and Relevance: In this exploratory study conducted in Victoria, Australia, iatrogenic delivery of infants with severe SGA due to suspected FGR was associated with poorer school outcomes compared with infants with severe SGA not suspected of having FGR. Iatrogenic delivery of infants with normal growth due to suspected FGR was not associated with poorer school outcomes compared with infants with normal growth not suspected of having FGR.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2021        PMID: 34255007      PMCID: PMC8278267          DOI: 10.1001/jama.2021.8608

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  JAMA        ISSN: 0098-7484            Impact factor:   56.272


  27 in total

1.  Does detection of fetal growth restriction improve neonatal outcomes?

Authors:  Roshan J Selvaratnam; Euan M Wallace; Sophie Treleaven; Stuart B Hooper; Peter G Davis; Mary-Ann Davey
Journal:  J Paediatr Child Health       Date:  2020-12-14       Impact factor: 1.954

2.  Effects on (neuro)developmental and behavioral outcome at 2 years of age of induced labor compared with expectant management in intrauterine growth-restricted infants: long-term outcomes of the DIGITAT trial.

Authors:  Linda van Wyk; Kim E Boers; Joris A M van der Post; Maria G van Pampus; Aleid G van Wassenaer; Anneloes L van Baar; Marc E A Spaanderdam; Jeroen H Becker; Anneke Kwee; Johannes J Duvekot; Henk A Bremer; Friso M C Delemarre; Kitty W M Bloemenkamp; Christianne J M de Groot; Christine Willekes; Frans J M E Roumen; Jan M M van Lith; Ben W J Mol; Saskia le Cessie; Sicco A Scherjon
Journal:  Am J Obstet Gynecol       Date:  2012-03-22       Impact factor: 8.661

Review 3.  Differential effect of intrauterine growth restriction on childhood neurodevelopment: a systematic review.

Authors:  E Murray; M Fernandes; M Fazel; S H Kennedy; J Villar; A Stein
Journal:  BJOG       Date:  2015-05-19       Impact factor: 6.531

4.  Does public reporting of the detection of fetal growth restriction improve clinical outcomes: a retrospective cohort study.

Authors:  R J Selvaratnam; M-A Davey; S Anil; S J McDonald; T Farrell; E M Wallace
Journal:  BJOG       Date:  2019-12-22       Impact factor: 6.531

5.  Association of Intrauterine Growth Restriction and Small for Gestational Age Status With Childhood Cognitive Outcomes: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.

Authors:  Chiara Sacchi; Claudia Marino; Chiara Nosarti; Alessio Vieno; Silvia Visentin; Alessandra Simonelli
Journal:  JAMA Pediatr       Date:  2020-08-01       Impact factor: 16.193

6.  Reducing stillbirth safely in Australia.

Authors:  Roshan Selvaratnam; Mary-Ann Davey; Euan M Wallace
Journal:  Med J Aust       Date:  2020-06-21       Impact factor: 7.738

7.  Intellectual and psychological performance in males born small for gestational age with and without catch-up growth.

Authors:  E M Lundgren; S Cnattingius; B Jonsson; T Tuvemo
Journal:  Pediatr Res       Date:  2001-07       Impact factor: 3.756

8.  Cerebral palsy and intrauterine growth in single births: European collaborative study.

Authors:  Stephen Jarvis; Svetlana V Glinianaia; Maria-Giulia Torrioli; Mary-Jane Platt; Maria Miceli; Pierre-Simon Jouk; Ann Johnson; Jane Hutton; Karla Hemming; Gudrun Hagberg; Helen Dolk; James Chalmers
Journal:  Lancet       Date:  2003-10-04       Impact factor: 79.321

9.  The pitfalls of using birthweight centile charts to audit care.

Authors:  Roshan John Selvaratnam; Mary-Ann Davey; Euan Morrison Wallace
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2020-06-23       Impact factor: 3.240

View more
  1 in total

1.  Evaluation of the Growth Assessment Protocol (GAP) for antenatal detection of small for gestational age: The DESiGN cluster randomised trial.

Authors:  Matias C Vieira; Sophie Relph; Walter Muruet-Gutierrez; Maria Elstad; Bolaji Coker; Natalie Moitt; Louisa Delaney; Chivon Winsloe; Andrew Healey; Kirstie Coxon; Alessandro Alagna; Annette Briley; Mark Johnson; Louise M Page; Donald Peebles; Andrew Shennan; Baskaran Thilaganathan; Neil Marlow; Lesley McCowan; Christoph Lees; Deborah A Lawlor; Asma Khalil; Jane Sandall; Andrew Copas; Dharmintra Pasupathy
Journal:  PLoS Med       Date:  2022-06-21       Impact factor: 11.613

  1 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.