Boyd P A, Armstrong B, Dolk H, Botting B, Pattenden S, Abramsky L, Rankin J, Vrijheid M, Wellesley D
National Perinatal Epidemiology Unit, University of Oxford, Oxford OX3 7LF.
BMJ. 2005 Jan 1;330(7481):27. doi: 10.1136/bmj.38300.665301.3A. Epub 2004 Nov 23.
Firstly, to assess the completeness of ascertainment in the National Congenital Anomaly System (NCAS), the basis for congenital anomaly surveillance in England and Wales, and its variation by defect, geographical area, and socioeconomic deprivation. Secondly, to assess the impact of the lack of data on pregnancies terminated because of fetal anomaly.
Comparison of the NCAS with four local congenital anomaly registers in England.
Four regions in England covering some 109,000 annual births.
Cases of congenital anomalies registered in the NCAS (live births and stillbirths) and independently registered in the four local registers (live births, stillbirths, fetal losses from 20 weeks' gestation, and pregnancies terminated after prenatal diagnosis of fetal anomaly).
The ratio of cases identified by the national register to those in local registry files, calculated for different specified anomalies, for whole registry areas, and for hospital catchment areas within registry boundaries.
Ascertainment by the NCAS (compared with data from local registers, from which terminations of pregnancy were removed) was 40% (34% for chromosomal anomalies and 42% for non-chromosomal anomalies) and varied markedly by defect, by local register, and by hospital catchment area, but not by area deprivation. When terminations of pregnancy were included in the register data, ascertainment by NCAS was 27% (19% for chromosomal anomalies and 31% for non-chromosomal anomalies), and the geographical variation was of a similar magnitude.
The surveillance of congenital anomalies in England is currently inadequate because ascertainment to the national register is low and non-uniform and because no data exist on termination of pregnancy resulting from prenatal diagnosis of fetal anomaly.
首先,评估英国国家先天性异常系统(NCAS)(英格兰和威尔士先天性异常监测的基础)的病例确诊完整性,以及其在缺陷类型、地理区域和社会经济贫困程度方面的差异。其次,评估因胎儿异常而终止妊娠的数据缺失所产生的影响。
将NCAS与英格兰的四个地方先天性异常登记处进行比较。
英格兰的四个地区,年出生人数约为109,000人。
在NCAS登记的先天性异常病例(活产和死产)以及在四个地方登记处独立登记的病例(活产、死产、妊娠20周后的胎儿丢失以及产前诊断出胎儿异常后终止的妊娠)。
针对不同特定异常、整个登记区域以及登记范围内医院服务区域,计算国家登记处识别的病例数与地方登记处档案中的病例数之比。
NCAS的确诊率(与去除妊娠终止数据后的地方登记处数据相比)为40%(染色体异常为34%,非染色体异常为42%),并且在缺陷类型、地方登记处和医院服务区域方面存在显著差异,但在区域贫困程度方面无差异。当登记数据中纳入妊娠终止情况时,NCAS的确诊率为27%(染色体异常为19%,非染色体异常为31%),地理差异幅度相似。
英格兰目前对先天性异常的监测不足,原因是国家登记处的确诊率低且不统一,以及缺乏产前诊断出胎儿异常导致的妊娠终止数据。