Cheikh Ismail Leila, Mohamad Maysm N, Ohuma Eric O, ElHalik Mahmoud S, Dash Swarup K, Osaili Tareq M, Hasan Hayder, Hashim Mona, Saleh Sheima T, Daour Rameez Al, Parker Simon R, Ali Habiba I, Stojanovska Lily, Al Dhaheri Ayesha S
Department of Clinical Nutrition and Dietetics, College of Health Sciences, University of Sharjah, Sharjah, 27272, United Arab Emirates.
Nuffield Department of Women's & Reproductive Health, University of Oxford, Oxford, OX1 2JD, UK.
BMC Pediatr. 2024 Dec 19;24(1):814. doi: 10.1186/s12887-024-04928-3.
Accurate growth assessment of preterm infants is essential in guiding medical care and suitable nutritional interventions. Currently, different growth references are used across hospitals in the United Arab Emirates (UAE). This study aims to compare the INTERGROWTH-21st standards with Fenton growth references regarding birth size classification and at the time of discharge in a sample of preterm infants in the UAE.
A retrospective single-center evaluation of medical records of infants born < 37 weeks of gestation was conducted using data from 2018 to 2020. Anthropometric measurements (weight, length, and head circumference) were obtained at birth and at the time of discharge, and then converted to percentiles according to the two reference standards.
A total of 1537 infants with a median birth gestation of 35.3 weeks, and a median birthweight of 2320 g were included. The rates of SGA, AGA, and LGA at birth were 11.5%, 80.42%, and 9.08% using INTERGROWTH-21st growth charts compared to 9.5%, 83.2%, and 7.3% respectively according to Fenton charts. The findings indicated statistically significant differences between the two growth charts classifying of preterm infants based on weight, length, and head circumference (p < 0.05). For every 5 cases assessed as SGA at discharge according to Fenton charts, only 3 were classified as SGA by INTERGROWTH-21st curves.
Differences exist between the two growth charts with only moderate agreement. Thus, there is a need for harmonizing growth assessment standards. Misclassification of these vulnerable infants would affect their in-hospital and post-discharge nutrition and medical care plan.
准确评估早产儿的生长情况对于指导医疗护理和适当的营养干预至关重要。目前，阿拉伯联合酋长国（阿联酋）各医院使用不同的生长参考标准。本研究旨在比较INTERGROWTH-21st标准与芬顿生长参考标准在阿联酋一组早产儿出生时大小分类及出院时的情况。
使用2018年至2020年的数据对孕周小于37周出生的婴儿的病历进行回顾性单中心评估。在出生时和出院时获取人体测量数据（体重、身长和头围），然后根据这两种参考标准将其转换为百分位数。
共纳入1537例婴儿，中位出生孕周为35.3周，中位出生体重为2320克。使用INTERGROWTH-21st生长图表时，出生时小于胎龄儿（SGA）、适于胎龄儿（AGA）和大于胎龄儿（LGA）的发生率分别为11.5%、80.42%和9.08%，而根据芬顿图表分别为9.5%、83.2%和7.3%。研究结果表明，这两种生长图表在根据体重、身长和头围对早产儿进行分类方面存在统计学显著差异（p<0.05）。根据芬顿图表，出院时每评估5例为SGA的病例，根据INTERGROWTH-21st曲线只有3例被分类为SGA。
这两种生长图表之间存在差异，一致性仅为中等。因此，需要统一生长评估标准。这些脆弱婴儿的分类错误会影响他们住院期间和出院后的营养及医疗护理计划。
