Current pattern of Ponderal Indices of term small-for-gestational age in a population of Nigerian babies

BMC Pediatrics

Tinuade A Ogunlesi¹  Elizabeth A Disu²  Fidelis O Njokanma²  Olubanke R Oluwafemi³ 

[1] Department of Paediatrics, Olabisi Onabanjo University Teaching Hospital, Sagamu, Ogun State, Nigeria;Department of Paediatrics and Child Health, Lagos State University Teaching Hospital, Ikeja, Lagos, Nigeria;Department of Paediatrics, Mother and Child Hospital, Akure, Ondo State, Nigeria

关键词: Ponderal Index;    Intrauterine growth;    Small-for-gestational age;   

Others  :  1144679
DOI  :  10.1186/1471-2431-13-110

 received in 2013-01-15, accepted in 2013-07-16,  发布年份 2013

【 摘 要 】

Background

Small-for-gestational age (SGA) newborns constitute a special group of neonates who may have suffered varying degrees of intrauterine insults and deprivation. Variations in birth weight, length and Ponderal Index (PI) depend on the type and degree of intrauterine insults the babies were exposed to. The objective of the study was to determine the current prevalence of term SGA births in a Nigerian Tertiary Hospital and the current pattern of Ponderal Indices among term SGA in a population of Nigerian babies.

Methods

Subjects comprised of consecutive term singleton mother-baby pairs in the first 24 hours of life. It was a cross sectional study. The anthropometric parameters of each baby were recorded and the PI was also determined.

Results

Out of 1,052 live births during the study period (September to December, 2009), 825 were term, singleton babies. Five hundred and eight-one babies (70.4%) fall into the upper socio-economic classes 1 and II, 193 (23.4%) in the middle class and 51 (6.2%) were of the lower classes IV and V. None of the mothers indicated ingestion of alcohol or smoking of cigarette. Fifty-nine babies (7.2%) were small-for gestational age (SGA). Of the 59 SGA subjects, 26 (44.1%) were symmetrical SGA while 33 (55.9%) were asymmetrical SGA. There was no significant sex or socioeconomic predilection for either symmetrical or asymmetrical growth (p = 0.59, 0.73 respectively).

Conclusion

The findings showed that proportionality in SGA fetuses is a continuum, with the PI depending on the duration of intrauterine insult and the extent of its effects on weight and length before delivery.

【 授权许可】

   
2013 Oluwafemi et al.; licensee BioMed Central Ltd.

【 参考文献 】

• [1]Lee PA, Chernausak SD, Hokken-Koelega ACS, Czernichow P: International small for gestational Age advisory board consensus development conference statement: management of short children born small for gestational age, April 24 - October 1, 2001. Pediatr 2003, 111:1253-1261.
• [2]Dogra VS, Shweta B: Intrauterine growth restriction. [Accessed April 10 2007]; [6 screens] Available from: http://www.emedicine.medscape.com webcite
• [3]Cnattingius S, Haglund B: Decreasing smoking prevalence during pregnancy in Sweden: the effect on small-for-gestational-age births. Am J Pub Health 1997, 87:410-413.
• [4]McCowan LM, Buist RG, North RA, Gamble G: Perinatal morbidity in chronic hypertension. Br J Obstet Gynaecol 1996, 103:123-129.
• [5]Njokanma OF, Sule–Odu AO: Intrauterine growth retardation in Nigerian neonates. Trop J Obstet Gynaecol 1998, 15:25-29.
• [6]Adebami OJ, Owa JA, Oyedeji GA, Oyelami OA: Prevalence and problems of fetal malnutrition in term babies at Wesley guild hospital, south-western Nigeria. West Afr J Med 2007, 26:278-282.
• [7]Lee KG, Cloherty JP: Identifying the high risk newborn and evaluating gestational age, prematurity, post-maturity, large-for-gestational-age and small-for-gestational age infants. In Manual of neonatal care. 5th edition. Edited by Cloherty JP, Eichenwald EC, Stark AR. Philadelphia: Lippincott Williams and Wilkins; 2004:51-53.
• [8]Lawrence EJ: A matter of size: evaluating the growth restricted neonate. Adv Neonatal Care 2006, 6:313-322.
• [9]Obed SA, Aniteye P: Birth weight and ponderal index in Pre-eclampsia: a comparative study. Ghana Med J 2006, 40:8-13.
• [10]Campbell S, Thoms A: Ultrasound measurement of the fetal head to abdominal circumference ratio in the assessment of growth retardation. Br J Obstet Gynaecol 1977, 84:165-174.
• [11]Olowe SA: Standards of intrauterine growth for an African population at sea level. J Pediatr 1981, 99:489-495.
• [12]Lubchenco LO, Hansman C, Boyd E: Intrauterine growth in length and head circumference as estimated from live births at gestational ages from 26 to 42 weeks. Pediatr 1966, 37:403-408.
• [13]Ballard JL, Khoury JC, Wedig K, Wang L, Eilers-Walsman BL, Lipp R: New Ballard Score, expanded to include extremely premature infants. J Pediatr 1991, 119:417-423.
• [14]Oyedeji GA: Socio-economic and cultural background of hospitalized children in Ilesa. Niger J Paediatr 1985, 12:111-117.
• [15]Bond J: Power calculator. Available at http://calculators.stat.ucla.edu/powercalc/ webcite. Accessed 5th December, 2009
• [16]Eng J: Sample size estimation: How many individuals should be studied? Radiol 2003, 227:309-313.
• [17]Dole N, Gleiter K, Savitz DA, Thomas HK, Michael T: Birthweight patterns in Harare, Zimbabwe. Int J Epidemiol 1990, 19:98-100.
• [18]Meis PJ, Michielutte R, Peters TJ, Wells HB, Sands RE, Coles EC, Johns KA: Factors associated with term, low birthweight in Cardiff, Wales. Paediatr Perinat Epidemiol 1997, 11:287-297.
• [19]Maruoka K, Yagi M, Akazawa K, Kinukawa N, Ueda K, Nose Y: Risk factors for low birth weight in Japanese infants. Acta Paediatr 1998, 87:304-309.
• [20]Bakewell JM, Stockbauer JW, Schramm WF: Factors associated with repetition of low birthweight: Missouri longitudinal study. Paediatr Perinat Epidemiol 1997, 1(11Supp):119-129.
• [21]Barbieri MA, Silva AAM, Bettiol H, Gomes UA: Risk factors for the increasing trend in low birth weight among live births born by vaginal delivery, Brazil. Rev Saude Publica 2000, 34:596-602.
• [22]Wang CS, Chou P: Risk factors for low birth weight among first-time mothers in southern Taiwan. J Formos Med Assoc 2001, 100:168-172.
• [23]Chan A, Keane RJ, Robinson JS: The contribution of maternal smoking to preterm birth, small for gestational age and low birth weight among Aboriginal and non-Aboriginal births in South Australia. Med J Aust 2001, 174:389-393.
• [24]Mehta S, Tandon A, Dua T, Kumari S, Singh SK: Clinical assessment of nutritional status at birth. Ind Pediatr 1998, 35:423-428.
• [25]Todros T, Plazzotta C, Pastorin L: Body proportionality of the small-for-date fetus: is it related to aetiological factors? Early Hum Dev 1996, 45:1-9.
• [26]Davies DP, Platts P, Pritchard JM, Wilkinson PW: Nutritional status of light for date infants at birth and its influence on early post natal growth. Arch Dis Child 1979, 54:703-706.
• [27]Adebami OJ, Oyedeji GA, Owa JA, Oyelami OA: Maternal factors in the etiology of fetal malnutrition in Nigeria. Paediatr Int 2007, 49:150-155.
• [28]Dawodu HA, Laditan AA: Low birth weight in an urban community in Nigeria. Ann Trop Paediatr 1985, 5:61-66.
• [29]Lechtig A: Predicting risk of delivering low birth weight babies: which indicator is better? J Trop Pediatr 1988, 34:34-41.
• [30]World Health Organization: Pregnant and lactating women. In: World Health Organization. Physical status: the use and interpretation of anthropometry. Report of WHO expert committee. World Health Organ Tech Rep Ser 1995, 854:37-120.
• [31]Rasmussen S, Irgens LM: Fetal growth and body proportion in pre-eclampsia. Obstet Gynecol 2003, 101:575-583.