Giuliani Francesca, Cheikh Ismail Leila, Bertino Enrico, Bhutta Zulfiqar A, Ohuma Eric O, Rovelli Ilaria, Conde-Agudelo Agustin, Villar José, Kennedy Stephen H
Department of Public Health and Pediatrics, University of Turin, Turin, Italy;
Nuffield Department of Obstetrics & Gynaecology, and Oxford Maternal & Perinatal Health Institute, Green Templeton College, University of Oxford, Oxford, United Kingdom;
Am J Clin Nutr. 2016 Feb;103(2):635S-47S. doi: 10.3945/ajcn.114.106310. Epub 2016 Jan 20.
There is no consensus with regard to which charts are most suitable for monitoring the postnatal growth of preterm infants.
We aimed to assess the strategies used to develop existing postnatal growth charts for preterm infants and their methodologic quality.
A systematic review of observational longitudinal studies, having as their primary objective the creation of postnatal growth charts for preterm infants, was conducted. Thirty-eight items distributed in 3 methodologic domains ("study design," "statistical methods," and "reporting methods") were assessed in each study. Each item was scored as a "low" or "high" risk of bias. Two reviewers independently selected the studies, assessed the risk of bias, and extracted data. A total quality score [(number of "low risk" of bias marks/total number of items assessed) × 100%] was calculated for each study. Median (range, IQR) quality scores for each methodologic domain and for all included studies were computed.
Sixty-one studies met the inclusion criteria. Twenty-seven (44.3%) of the 61 studies scored ≥50%, of which 10 scored >60% and only 1 scored >66%. The median (range, IQR) quality score for the 61 included studies was 47% (26-75%, 34-56%). The scores for the domains study design, statistical methods, and reporting methods were 44% (19-67%, 33-52%), 25% (0-88%, 13-38%), and 33% (0-100%, 0-33%), respectively. The most common shortcomings were observed in items related to anthropometric measures (the main variable of interest), gestational age estimation, follow-up duration, reporting of postnatal care and morbidities, assessment of outliers, covariates, and chart presentation.
The overall methodologic quality of existing longitudinal studies was fair to low. To overcome these problems, the Preterm Postnatal Follow-up Study, 1 of the 3 main components of The International Fetal and Newborn Growth Consortium for the 21st Century Project, was designed to construct preterm postnatal growth standards from a prospective cohort of "healthy" pregnancies and preterm newborns without evidence of fetal growth restriction.
关于哪些图表最适合监测早产儿出生后的生长情况,目前尚无共识。
我们旨在评估用于制定现有早产儿出生后生长图表的策略及其方法学质量。
对以创建早产儿出生后生长图表为主要目标的观察性纵向研究进行系统评价。在每项研究中,对分布于3个方法学领域(“研究设计”、“统计方法”和“报告方法”)的38项内容进行评估。每项内容的偏倚风险被评为“低”或“高”。两名评审员独立选择研究、评估偏倚风险并提取数据。为每项研究计算总质量得分[(偏倚风险评分为“低风险”的项目数/评估的项目总数)×100%]。计算每个方法学领域以及所有纳入研究的中位数(范围,四分位间距)质量得分。
61项研究符合纳入标准。61项研究中有27项(44.3%)得分≥50%,其中10项得分>60%,只有1项得分>66%。61项纳入研究的中位数(范围,四分位间距)质量得分为47%(26 - 75%,34 - 56%)。研究设计、统计方法和报告方法领域的得分分别为44%(19 - 67%,33 - 52%)、25%(0 - 88%,13 - 38%)和33%(0 - 100%,0 - 33%)。在与人体测量指标(主要研究变量)、孕周估计、随访持续时间、出生后护理和疾病报告、异常值评估、协变量以及图表呈现相关的项目中观察到最常见的缺陷。
现有纵向研究的总体方法学质量为中等偏下。为克服这些问题,作为21世纪国际胎儿和新生儿生长联盟项目3个主要组成部分之一的早产儿出生后随访研究,旨在从“健康”妊娠和无胎儿生长受限证据的早产儿的前瞻性队列中构建早产儿出生后生长标准。