Site Overlay


Moreover, Lubchenco’s growth curves have no birth weight or of (72%) infants whose GA were documented in the OB chart (defined as. These growth chart guidelines for preterm, LBW, and VLBW infants were developed to ensure curves commonly used (e.g. Babson/Benda, Lubchenco, etc.). applicable because the growth potential of the fetus is influenced by sex . Lubchenco intrauterine growth charts [1], for the 10th, 50th and 90th.

Author: Kahn Netilar
Country: Guatemala
Language: English (Spanish)
Genre: Technology
Published (Last): 16 October 2013
Pages: 477
PDF File Size: 11.20 Mb
ePub File Size: 12.13 Mb
ISBN: 531-7-17912-892-1
Downloads: 90141
Price: Free* [*Free Regsitration Required]
Uploader: Nikus

The use of charts, such as those given by Lubchenco et al1 based on the distribution of measurements taken on neonates with different gestational age, should be restricted to the auxological assessment of babies at birth. These charts, now called neonatal anthropometric charts, must not be confused with the intrauterine growth charts, which are a tool for monitoring fetal growth, based on ultrasound measurements of anthropometric traits lubchenck pregnancy: SGA includes infants who have not achieved their own growth potential, because of maternal, uterine, placental and fetal factors, 56 as well as small but otherwise healthy infants.

IUGR refers to a clinical and functional condition and denotes fetuses unable to achieve their own growth potential: Such a condition can be assessed by ultrasonography during pregnancy by a longitudinal evaluation of fetal growth rate.

The current gold standard in neonatal auxological evaluation is based on information obtained from both neonatal anthropometric charts and intrauterine growth charts. Furthermore, Doppler velocimetry can detect altered flow states in the fetal—placental and uterine—placental circulation, and may contribute to the differentiation between a fetus with Gorwth and a fetus who is constitutionally SGA.

An alternative proxy is based on the prediction of birth weight based on early ultrasound assessments of fetal growth 9: So far, there is insufficient evidence that this alternative method performs better than those based on fetal or neonatal charts.

Weight, length and head circumference at birth are indicators of the quality and quantity of growth: The validity of neonatal charts is also based on reliable estimates of gestational age, expressed as complete weeks, in accordance with international recommendations. The lubchencp population is the population on which the chart is built and to which the chart will apply.

A target population is defined by its inclusion criteria—that is, geographical area, ethnic group, sex, single birth, live birth dhart so on. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention growth charts for the US 15 are a reference in the sense that they are explicitly descriptive, although the authors recognise that some compromises were made on developing a true reference.

Differences between reference charts reflect the different anthropometric characteristics of healthy neonates belonging to different populations and also the different prevalences of risk factors for prenatal growth in those populations.

For this reason, by means of reference charts, the differences in the health conditions of two populations, or of one population over time, may be evaluated. On the other hand, the clinical use of a reference raises some methodological problems, as a neonate is compared with a group of peers, also including infants who may have had prenatal growth impairment; therefore, a reference might possess low sensitivity in detecting a neonate with growth anomalies.

From a practical groowth, when the chart is based on a population with low prevalence of risk factors such as the populations of developed countriesthe clinical use of a reference can be safely accepted.


To avoid the methodological weakness of clinical use of a reference, a set of exclusion criteria can be defined, concerning mothers for example, hypertension, diabetes or renal diseases, fetuses genetic disorders or congenital anomaliesor uterine or placental factors.

Highly restrictive criteria aiming to exclude all neonates exposed to any known risk factor for intrauterine growth define the characteristics of infants who fully lubcehnco their growth potential. Such characteristics constitute a model to which a neonate should conform, and a basis for a prescriptive standard or norm that indicates how growth should be. Moreover, it is rare to find neonates without IUGR with low gestational age when highly restrictive exclusion criteria are adopted, so that a norm cbart a severely preterm neonate may be difficult to draw.

An example of neonatal standards are the Italian charts based on a multicentre survey carried out between and Even if an accurate neonatal standard were available, its clinical use could be questionable: Strictly speaking, as a reference chart describes the anthropometry of a given population, we need as many reference charts as the number of different populations, no matter whether their anthropometric growh are ascribable to ethnic characteristics or to environmental, nutritional, socioeconomic and health conditions.

Do we really need, however, as many standards as the number of different populations? If the main reason for the differences emerging by comparison between different reference charts is the inequality in health between poor and rich populations, these differences tend to vanish when the restrictive exclusion criteria that define a standard population are adopted.

In this case, only one standard could apply to all populations.

Lula Lubchenco – Wikipedia

The new World Health Organization child growth standards are based on such an assumption. The extent to which the anthropometric differences between ethnic groups are the result of charf, socioeconomic and environmental factors is still debated.

As asserted by Karlberg et al24 clinicians seem to prefer local references when communicating with patients and their parents, and do not seem to take seriously any attempt to establish an international standard. Severely preterm neonates who match the requirements for a standard can hardly be found; thus, neonatal charts can lubcgenco based only on a local or national reference population. Establishing neonatal charts adjusted for factors permanently bound to differences in fetal growth such as sex, and single lubbchenco multiple pregnancy 2526 is indeed useful: An alternative is to adopt statistical definitions instead of clinical ones, chagt the thresholds based on statistical criteria are only indirectly related to risk.

In accordance with the statistical criterion, a neonate is defined to be SGA when his or her weight is below the 10th, 5th or 3rd centile of the lubcnenco chart or, under assumption of a gaussian distribution, 1.

The need to trace smooth centiles derives from the assumption that somatic growth is a continuous process, at least at a macroscopic level, and pattern irregularity is interpreted not as chwrt expression of an underlying biological phenomenon but rather as a combined effect of measurement error and sampling variability.

As an alternative, Cole 39 proposed the LMS method. The neonatal charts currently in use largely differ as regards inclusion and exclusion criteria, techniques and instruments for measurement, accuracy of assessment of gestational age and methods to compute centiles.

From an epidemiological viewpoint, a reference neonatal chart provides a picture of the health status of a population. The comparison of charts referring to different and clearly defined populations living in the same country or in different countries, or to the same population in different periods, is a way of measuring the extent of inequalities in health between populations or to monitor trends over time in response to lubchenxo health policies.


From a clinical viewpoint, a neonatal chart is essentially a tool to detect neonates at higher risk of neonatal and postnatal morbidity and growth impairment, and to compare neonatal anthropometric conditions with those observed during postnatal growth.

A comprehensive auxological evaluation of the neonate should consider not only weight, length and head circumference at birth but also fetal ultrasound biometry and Doppler velocimetry. At present, further clinical studies are needed to reach a growtth on how to combine neonatal and prenatal information to discriminate neonates with IUGR from those without IUGR. National Center for Biotechnology InformationU. Author information Article notes Copyright and License information Disclaimer.

Accepted Jun This article has been cited by other articles in PMC.

Are neonatal anthropometric growyh intrauterine growth charts? What about reliability of anthropometric and gestational age evaluations?

Should a neonatal chart be a reference or a standard? Many local reference charts or a unique standard?

Neonatal anthropometric charts: what they are, what they are not

Should neonatal charts be updated? What models are used to trace neonatal charts?

Conclusion The neonatal charts currently in groqth largely differ as regards inclusion and exclusion criteria, techniques and instruments for measurement, accuracy of assessment of gestational age and methods to compute centiles. Several neonates at term have poor effect on the precision of estimates at low GA. Open in a separate window. Pediatrics 32 — The risk of adverse neonatal outcome among preterm small for gestational age infants according to neonatal versus fetal growth standards.

Pediatrics — Acta Obstet Gynaecol Scand 69 — Physiological and pathological auxology. Edizioni Centro Studi Auxologici, — Ultrasound assessment of abnormal fetal growth.

Postnatal – Growth Charts

Frowth Perinatol 28 3— Bamberg C, Kalache K D. Prenatal diagnosis of fetal growth restriction. Semin Fetal Neonatal Med 9 — Semin Perinatol 28 23— Am J Obstet Gynecol — Measuring techniques and instruments. Pediatrics E35 [ PubMed ]. Pediatrics 11 — BJOG 31— Riv Ital Ped 25 — Bossi A, Milani S.

Ann Hum Biol 14 — The assessment of newborn size. Acta Paediatr Suppl 56— Ethnic differences in patterns of human growth in stature. Martorell R, Haschke F, eds. An update on the update of growth charts. Acta Paediatr 88 — Pediatrics E21 [ PubMed ]. Riv Ital Ped 23 98— New standards for birth weight by gestational age using family data.

Customized birthweight centiles predict SGA pregnancies with perinatal morbidity. BJOG — New definition of small for gestational age based on fetal growth potential. Horm Res 65 suppl 3 15— Customised fetal growth chart: J Obstet Gynaecol 25 — Pediatrics E1 [ PubMed ]. Growth and growth hormone in children born small for gestational age. Semin Neonatol 9 67— Hauspie R, Vercauteren M. Paediatr Perinat Epidemiol 17 — Ann Hum Biol 15 17— Fitting smoothed centile curves to reference data.

J R Stat Soc —