New birth weight reference standards customised to birth order and sex of babies from South India

BMC Pregnancy and Childbirth

Ruby Jose¹  Jiji Mathew¹  Annie Regi¹  Tunny Sebastian²  Lakshmanan Jeyaseelan²  Velusamy Saravana Kumar² 

[1] Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Christian Medical College and Hospital, Vellore, 632004, India;Department of Biostatistics, Christian Medical College and Hospital, Vellore, 632004, India

关键词: Cubic spline smoothing;    Box–Cox t;    Modelling;    Preterm;    Gestational age;    Birth weight;    Foetal growth;    Reference;   

Others  :  1138231
DOI  :  10.1186/1471-2393-13-38

 received in 2012-05-11, accepted in 2013-02-12,  发布年份 2013

【 摘 要 】

Background

The foetal growth standards for Indian children which are available today suffer due to methodological problems. These are, for example, not adhering to the WHO recommendation to base gestational age on the number of completed weeks and secondly, not excluding mothers with risk factors. This study has addressed both the above issues and in addition provides birthweight reference ranges with regard to sex of the baby and maternal parity.

Methods

Data from the labour room register from 1996 to 2010 was obtained. A rotational sampling scheme was used i.e. the 12 months of the year were divided into 4 quadrants. All deliveries in January were considered to represent the first quadrant. Similarly all deliveries in April, July and October were considered to represent 2^nd, 3^rd and 4^th quadrants. In each successive year different months were included in each quadrant. Only those mothers aged 20–39 years and delivered between 24 to 42 weeks gestational age were considered. Those mothers with obstetric risk factors were excluded. The reference standards were fitted using the Generalized Additive Models for Location Scale and Shape (GAMLSS) method for Box – Cox t distribution with cubic spline smoothing.

Results

There were 41,055 deliveries considered. When women with risk factors were excluded 19,501 deliveries could be included in the final analysis. The male babies of term firstborn were found to be 45 g heavier than female babies. The mean birthweights were 2934 g and 2889.5 g respectively. Similarly, among the preterm babies, the first born male babies weighed 152 g more than the female babies. The mean birthweights were 1996 g and 1844 g respectively.

In the case of later born babies, the term male babies weighed 116grams more than the females. The mean birth weights were 3085 grams and 2969 grams respectively. When considering later born preterm babies, the males outweighed the female babies by 111 grams. The mean birthweights were 2089 grams and 1978 grams respectively. There was a substantial agreement range from k=.883, (p<.01) to k=.943, (p<.01) between adjusted and unadjusted percentile classification for the subgroups of male and female babies and first born and later born ones.

Birth weight charts were adjusted for maternal height using regression methods. The birth weight charts for the first born and later born babies were regrouped into 4 categories, including male and female sexes of the babies. Reference ranges were acquired both for term and preterm babies.

With economic reforms, one expects improvement in birthweights. The mean (sd) birthweights of the year 1996 was 2846 (562) as compared to year 2010 (15 years later) which was 2907 (571). There was only a difference of 61 grams in the mean birthweights over one and a half decade.

Conclusion

New standards are presented from a large number of deliveries over 15 years, customised to the maternal height, from a south Indian tertiary hospital. Reference ranges are made available separately for first born or later born babies, for male and female sexes and for term and preterm babies.

【 授权许可】

   
2013 Kumar et al; licensee BioMed Central Ltd.

【 图 表 】

Figure 1.

Figure 2.

Figure 3.

Figure 4.

【 参考文献 】

• [1]Mohan M, Prasad SR, Chellani HK, Kapani V: Intrauterine growth curves in north Indian babies: weight, length, head circumference and ponderal index. Indian Pediatr 1990, 27:43-51.
• [2]Mathai M, Jacob S, Karthikeyan NG: Birthweight standards for south Indian babies. Indian Pediatr 1996, 33:203-209.
• [3]Kramer MS, McLean FH, Boyd ME, Usher RH: The Validity of Gestational Age Estimation by Menstrual Dating in Term, Preterm, and Postterm Gestations. JAMA 1988, 260:3306-3308.
• [4]Rj D: Population-based intrauterine growth curves from computerized birth certificates. South Med J 1983, 76:1401.
• [5]Gardosi J, Chang A, Kalyan B, Sahota D, Symonds EM: Customised antenatal growth charts. Lancet 1992, 339:283-287.
• [6]Zhang J, Bowes J: Birth-weight-for-gestational-age patterns by race, sex, and parity in the United States population. Obstet Gynecol 1995, 86:200-208.
• [7]Arbuckle TE, Wilkins R, Sherman GJ: Birth weight percentiles by gestational age in Canada. Obstet Gynecol 1993, 81:39-48.
• [8]Roberts C, Mueller L, Hadler J: Birth-weight percentiles by gestational age, Connecticut 1988–1993. Conn Med 1996, 60:131.
• [9]Eckler AR: Rotation sampling. Ann Math Stat 1955, 26:664-685.
• [10]Stasinopoulos DM, Rigby RA: Generalized additive models for location scale and shape (GAMLSS) in R. J Stat Softw 2007, 23:1-46.
• [11]Bhatia BD, Bhargava V, Chatterjee M, Kota VL, Singh LI, Jain NP: Studies on fetal growth patterns: intrauterine growth percentiles for singleton live born babies. Indian Pediatr 1981, 18:647-653.
• [12]Ghosh S, Bhargava SK, Madhavan S, Taskar AD, Bhargava V, Nigam SK: Intra-uterine growth of North Indian babies. Pediatrics 1971, 47:826-830.
• [13]Mittal SK, Singh PA, Gupta RC: Intrauterine growth and low birth weight criteria in Punjabi infants. Indian Pediatr 1976, 13:679-682.
• [14]Kramer MS, Platt RW, Wen SW, Joseph KS, Allen A, Abrahamowicz M, Blondel B, Bréart G: A new and improved population-based Canadian reference for birth weight for gestational age. Pediatrics 2001, 108:E35.
• [15]McLean FH, Boyd ME, Usher RH, Kramer MS: Postterm infants: too big or too small? Am J Obstet Gynecol 1991, 164:619-624.
• [16]Wilcox M, Gardosi J, Mongelli M, Ray C, Johnson I: Birth weight from pregnancies dated by ultrasonography in a multicultural British population. BMJ 1993, 307:588-591.
• [17]Secher NJ, Kern Hansen P, Thomsen BL, Keiding N: Growth retardation in preterm infants. Br J Obstet Gynaecol 1987, 94:115-120.
• [18]Hediger ML, Scholl TO, Schall JI, Miller LW, Fischer RL: Fetal growth and the etiology of preterm delivery. Obstet Gynecol 1995, 85:175-182.