Harville Emily W, Tong Van T, Gilboa Suzanne M, Moore Cynthia A, Cafferata Maria Luisa, Alger Jackeline, Gibbons Luz, Bustillo Carolina, Callejas Allison, Castillo Mario, Fúnes Jenny, García Jorge, Hernández Gustavo, López Wendy, Ochoa Carlos, Rico Fátima, Rodríguez Heriberto, Zúniga Concepción, Ciganda Alvaro, Stella Candela, Tomasso Giselle, Buekens Pierre
Department of Epidemiology, Tulane School of Public Health and Tropical Medicine, New Orleans, LA 70112, USA.
Division of Birth Defects and Infant Disorders, National Center on Birth Defects and Developmental Disabilities, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Atlanta, GA 30333, USA.
Trop Med Infect Dis. 2020 Dec 29;6(1):5. doi: 10.3390/tropicalmed6010005.
Worldwide recognition of the Zika virus outbreak in the Americas was triggered by an unexplained increase in the frequency of microcephaly. While severe microcephaly is readily identifiable at birth, diagnosing less severe cases requires comparison of head circumference (HC) measurement to a growth chart. We examine measured values of HC and digit preference in those values, and, by extension, the prevalence of microcephaly at birth in two data sources: a research study in Honduras and routine surveillance data in Uruguay. The Zika in Pregnancy in Honduras study enrolled pregnant women prenatally and followed them until delivery. Head circumference was measured with insertion tapes (SECA 212), and instructions including consistent placement of the tape and a request to record HC to the millimeter were posted where newborns were examined. Three indicators of microcephaly were calculated: (1) HC more than 2 standard deviations (SD) below the mean, (2) HC more than 3 SD below the mean (referred to as "severe microcephaly") and (3) HC less than the 3rd percentile for sex and gestational age, using the INTERGROWTH-21st growth standards. We compared these results from those from a previous analysis of surveillance HC data from the Uruguay Perinatal Information System (Sistema Informático Perinatal (SIP). Valid data on HC were available on 579 infants, 578 with gestational age data. Nine babies (1.56%, 95% CI 0.71-2.93) had HC < 2SD, including two (0.35%, 95% CI 0.04-1.24) with HC < 3SD, and 11 (1.9%, 95% CI, 0.79-3.02) were below the 3rd percentile. The distribution of HC showed strong digit preference: 72% of measures were to the whole centimeter (cm) and 19% to the half-cm. Training and use of insertion tapes had little effect on digit preference, nor were overall HC curves sufficient to detect an increase in microcephaly during the Zika epidemic in Honduras. When microcephaly prevalence needs to be carefully analyzed, such as during the Zika epidemic, researchers may need to interpret HC data with caution.
美洲地区寨卡病毒疫情在全球范围内受到关注,起因是小头畸形发病率出现不明原因的上升。虽然严重小头畸形在出生时很容易识别,但诊断不太严重的病例需要将头围(HC)测量值与生长图表进行比较。我们研究了头围的测量值及其数字偏好,并由此推断出两个数据源中出生时小头畸形的患病率:一项在洪都拉斯开展的研究以及乌拉圭的常规监测数据。洪都拉斯的“孕期寨卡病毒研究”在产前招募孕妇,并跟踪她们直至分娩。使用插入式软尺(SECA 212)测量头围,在新生儿检查处张贴了相关说明,包括软尺的一致放置方法以及要求将头围记录到毫米。计算了小头畸形的三个指标:(1)头围比均值低2个标准差(SD)以上,(2)头围比均值低3个标准差以上(称为“严重小头畸形”),以及(3)根据INTERGROWTH - 21st生长标准,头围低于性别和孕周的第3百分位数。我们将这些结果与之前对乌拉圭围产期信息系统(Sistema Informático Perinatal,SIP)监测头围数据的分析结果进行了比较。有579名婴儿获得了有效的头围数据,其中578名有孕周数据。9名婴儿(1.56%,95%置信区间0.71 - 2.93)头围 < 2SD,其中2名(0.35%,95%置信区间0.04 - 1.24)头围 < 3SD,11名(1.9%,95%置信区间0.79 - 3.02)低于第3百分位数。头围分布显示出强烈的数字偏好:72%的测量值精确到整厘米(cm),19%精确到半厘米。插入式软尺的培训和使用对数字偏好影响不大,而且总体头围曲线也不足以检测出洪都拉斯寨卡疫情期间小头畸形的增加情况。当需要仔细分析小头畸形患病率时,比如在寨卡疫情期间,研究人员可能需要谨慎解读头围数据。