Suppr超能文献

婴儿汽车座椅挑战与出院时多导睡眠图的比较。

A comparison of the infant car seat challenge and the polysomnogram at the time of hospital discharge.

机构信息

Division of Neonatology, Department of Pediatrics, Albert Einstein Medical Center, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, USA.

出版信息

Arch Dis Child Fetal Neonatal Ed. 2013 Sep;98(5):F411-5. doi: 10.1136/archdischild-2012-303244. Epub 2013 Feb 12.

Abstract

OBJECTIVE

The American Academy of Pediatrics recommends all infants born at <37 weeks gestation spend a period of observation in a car seat prior to hospital discharge to assess for apnoea, bradycardia or oxygen desaturation. The most recent Cochrane review suggested further studies to determine if the infant car seat challenge (ICSC) accurately predicts the risk of clinically adverse events. We reviewed our experience with the ICSC and the polysomnogram (PSG) to determine if the ICSC accurately predicts the risk of adverse events when compared with the PSG.

STUDY DESIGN

Retrospective chart review of all infants in our institution who had an ICSC and a PSG between January 2005 and December 2008.

RESULT

785 infants had ICSCs. In addition, 313 infants (56.6%) had an abnormal PSG, even though the vast majority, 158 (88.3%), passed their ICSC. There were no significant differences in gestational age at birth, birth weight, chronological age at study or postmenstrual age at study between infants who either passed or failed the ICSC with those who passed or failed the PSG. The sensitivity of the ICSC was 0.11 and specificity was 0.96. The positive predictive value of the ICSC was 0.77 and the negative predictive value was 0.45.

CONCLUSIONS

The ICSC has a low negative predictive value (0.45) when compared with the PSG as a reference standard for identifying adverse cardiorespiratory events. Although less time consuming and cumbersome than extended polysomnography, the ICSC is not a reliable substitute.

摘要

目的

美国儿科学会建议所有 <37 孕周出生的婴儿在出院前在汽车座椅上观察一段时间,以评估有无呼吸暂停、心动过缓或氧饱和度降低。最近的 Cochrane 综述建议进一步研究以确定婴儿汽车座椅挑战(ICSC)是否能准确预测临床不良事件的风险。我们回顾了我们使用 ICSC 和多导睡眠图(PSG)的经验,以确定与 PSG 相比,ICSC 是否能准确预测不良事件的风险。

研究设计

对 2005 年 1 月至 2008 年 12 月期间在我们机构进行 ICSC 和 PSG 的所有婴儿进行回顾性图表审查。

结果

785 名婴儿进行了 ICSC。此外,313 名婴儿(56.6%)PSG 异常,尽管绝大多数婴儿(158 名,88.3%)通过了 ICSC。通过 ICSC 的婴儿与通过或未通过 PSG 的婴儿在出生时的胎龄、出生体重、研究时的年龄或研究时的校正胎龄方面无显著差异。ICSC 的灵敏度为 0.11,特异性为 0.96。ICSC 的阳性预测值为 0.77,阴性预测值为 0.45。

结论

与 PSG 作为识别不良心肺事件的参考标准相比,ICSC 的阴性预测值(0.45)较低。虽然与延长的多导睡眠图相比,ICSC 耗时更少、操作更简单,但它并不是一个可靠的替代方法。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验