Development of birth weight for gestational age charts and comparison with currently used charts: defining growth in the Polish population

Kajdy, Anna; Modzelewski, Jan; Filipecka-Tyczka, Dagmara; Pokropek, Artur; Rabijewski, Michał

doi:10.1080/14767058.2019.1676412

Cited by 18 publications

(23 citation statements)

References 31 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…The resultant standardised birthweight within this population was 3477.1 g (Table II). This is similar to a birthweight reference chart generated from a Polish population [22] which had a 40-week average birthweight of 3509 g. The constant is also similar to those from similarly standardised weights from other mothers of European descent: Slovenia (3451 g) [23], England (3456 g) [15], the US (3453 g) [20], Australia (3464 g) [18] and New Zealand (3464 g) [19].…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 71%

Customized birthweight standard for a Polish population

et al. 2020

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Introduction: There is a growing body of evidence supporting the role of customized growth charts in improving detection of fetal growth restriction (FGR) and decreasing false positive diagnoses. The aim of the study is to produce a customised birthweight standard for Poland. Material and methods: Maternal height and weight, ethnicity, gestational age, weight and sex at birth as well as pre-existing and gestational complications were collected. Coefficients were derived using a backwards stepwise multiple regression technique. Smallness for gestational age by the customised standard was compared with the in-use Fenton standard in assessing risk of adverse outcomes using relative risk with 95% confidence intervals. Results: Data from 4,270 pregnancies were used as the study cohort. Fenton and customised SGA rates were 6.6% and 11.9%, respectively. The customised standard identified more cases that were at significantly increased risk of stillbirth, admission to neonatal intensive care or other neonatal complications, many of which were missed by the Fenton standard. Conclusions: The analysis confirmed the physiological variables that affect birthweight in studies from other countries and was able to quantify additional pathological factors of high maternal age and pregnancy-induced hypertension. Comparison with the Fenton standard showed that adverse outcomes associated with SGA birthweight are better identified by the customised standard in a Polish population.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 71%

Customized birthweight standard for a Polish population

et al. 2020

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…This percentage was higher when exclusively preterm neonates were evaluated. The lower percentage of SGA infants in the population evaluated by Kajdy et al [9], than in our population may be caused by the different inclusion criteria applied. Our study group consisted of consecutive neonates, including those from multifetal pregnancies, as well as those with congenital defects and infections or karyotype abnormalities, and therefore may better represent the general newborn population described by the Fenton growth charts than the population studied by Kajdy et al…”

Section: Discussioncontrasting

confidence: 54%

“…Large discrepancies in SGA estimates conducted with various growth charts were observed by Kajdy et al [9]. In a population of Polish neonates, 5.01% of newborns were identified as SGA according to the Fenton charts, 3.88% according to the Dubiel [6] percentiles, and only 2.33% according to INTERGROWTH-21st [9]. These findings might justify the adjustment of global charts to account for the characteristics of the given population [9].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…This indicates that the percentage of preterm neonates who are classified as SGA may differ depending on the characteristics of the population evaluated. A recent study by Kajdy et al [9], classified 9.8% of singleton neonates born between weeks 23 and 40 of pregnancy as SGA, and 10.27% as…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In 2013, Fenton et al [7], published a revised version of these charts, resulting from a large meta-analysis including nearly 4 million preterm births in Germany, the USA, Italy, Australia, Scotland, and Canada. Recently, Kajdy et al [9], developed growth charts for a population of nearly 38,000 Polish singleton neonates, excluding those with major congenital defects and infections.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Polish growth charts for preterm infants — comparison with reference Fenton charts

et al. 2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objectives: Proper infant classification, particularly a preterm infant, as small or large for gestational age, is crucial to undertake activities to improve postnatal outcomes.This study aimed to assess the usability of the Fenton preterm growth charts to evaluate the anthropometric parameters of Polish preterm neonates. Material and methods: In this single-center, retrospective study data extracted from the medical documentation of preterm neonates born 2002-2013 were analyzed. Body weight, body length, and head circumference were evaluated and used to develop growth charts, which were compared with the reference Fenton growth charts.Results: This study included 3,205 preterm neonates, of whom 937 were born before 30 weeks of pregnancy. Overall, 11.04%, 3.3%, and 5.2% of neonates were below the 10 th percentile on the Fenton charts for birth weight, body length, and head circumference, respectively. Only 26 (6.67%) of 390 analyzed anthropological parameters differed significantly between the study and the Fenton groups. Statistically significant differences between the study and the Fenton populations were found only in body length for both sexes, and in head circumference for female neonates. Conclusions:The growth charts developed in this study for a population of Polish preterm neonates corresponded to the Fenton charts in terms of birth weight but differed in terms of body length and head circumference. Our findings suggest the need to evaluate growth charts for Polish preterm newborns.

show abstract