Assessment of physical development healthy full-term newborns of the Republic of Crimea centile standards INTERGROWTH-21st

A. I. Balakchina, N. Kaladze
{"title":"Assessment of physical development healthy full-term newborns of the Republic of Crimea centile standards INTERGROWTH-21st","authors":"A. I. Balakchina, N. Kaladze","doi":"10.21886/2219-8075-2023-14-1-43-49","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Objective: to determine the feasibility of using INTERGROWTH-21st centile tables in assessing the physical development of full-term newborns in the Republic of Crimea. Materials and methods: a retrospective analysis of 1300 birth histories of full-term newborns whose mothers permanently reside on the territory of the Republic of Crimea was carried out. Mass and length, chest and chest circumference were analyzed. The assessment of the obtained anthropometric indicators was carried out by the centile method according to the INTERGROWTH-21st tables. In the study, we conducted a comparative assessment using the accepted INTERGROWTH-21st standards, comparing them with the accepted domestic assessments of the state of the physical development of newborns. Results: the values of anthropometric indicators of boys in the Republic of Crimea are shifted towards higher estimates. Estimates “below average”, “low”, “very low” are found in no more than 3% of cases. “Above average”, “high”, “very high” are much more common: with 10% — for weight/length ratio, 18% — for weight, 34% — for length, and 51% — for head circumference. The values of anthropometric indicators of girls in the Republic of Crimea are also biased towards higher estimates. Ratings of “below average”, “low”, “very low” are very rare: 6% — for the weight/length ratio, 4% — for the weight rating, less than 1% — for the body length rating and 2% — for the head circumference. “Above average”, “high”, “very high” scores are much more common: 8% — for weight/length ratio, 15% — for weight score, 45% — for length score, and 30%— for OH. Conclusions: we consider the use of centile tables INTERGROWTH-21st in assessing the physical development of full-term newborns of the Republic of Kazakhstan to be inappropriate and we see the need to develop regional standards.","PeriodicalId":18314,"journal":{"name":"Medical Herald of the South of Russia","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-01-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Medical Herald of the South of Russia","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.21886/2219-8075-2023-14-1-43-49","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objective: to determine the feasibility of using INTERGROWTH-21st centile tables in assessing the physical development of full-term newborns in the Republic of Crimea. Materials and methods: a retrospective analysis of 1300 birth histories of full-term newborns whose mothers permanently reside on the territory of the Republic of Crimea was carried out. Mass and length, chest and chest circumference were analyzed. The assessment of the obtained anthropometric indicators was carried out by the centile method according to the INTERGROWTH-21st tables. In the study, we conducted a comparative assessment using the accepted INTERGROWTH-21st standards, comparing them with the accepted domestic assessments of the state of the physical development of newborns. Results: the values of anthropometric indicators of boys in the Republic of Crimea are shifted towards higher estimates. Estimates “below average”, “low”, “very low” are found in no more than 3% of cases. “Above average”, “high”, “very high” are much more common: with 10% — for weight/length ratio, 18% — for weight, 34% — for length, and 51% — for head circumference. The values of anthropometric indicators of girls in the Republic of Crimea are also biased towards higher estimates. Ratings of “below average”, “low”, “very low” are very rare: 6% — for the weight/length ratio, 4% — for the weight rating, less than 1% — for the body length rating and 2% — for the head circumference. “Above average”, “high”, “very high” scores are much more common: 8% — for weight/length ratio, 15% — for weight score, 45% — for length score, and 30%— for OH. Conclusions: we consider the use of centile tables INTERGROWTH-21st in assessing the physical development of full-term newborns of the Republic of Kazakhstan to be inappropriate and we see the need to develop regional standards.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
克里米亚共和国足月新生儿身体发育健康评估百分位标准intergrowth -21
目的:探讨使用intergrowth -21百分位表评价克里米亚共和国足月新生儿身体发育的可行性。材料和方法:对母亲长期居住在克里米亚共和国境内的1300名足月新生儿的出生史进行了回顾性分析。分析体重、体长、胸围。根据intergrowth -21表格,采用百分位法对获得的人体测量指标进行评估。在本研究中,我们使用公认的intergrowth -21标准进行了比较评估,并将其与国内公认的新生儿身体发育状态评估进行了比较。结果:克里米亚共和国男孩的人体测量指标值向更高的估计值转移。在不超过3%的病例中发现“低于平均水平”、“低”、“非常低”的估计值。“高于平均水平”、“高”、“非常高”更为常见:体重/长度比为10%,体重为18%,长度为34%,头围为51%。克里米亚共和国女孩的人体测量指标值也偏向于较高的估计值。“低于平均水平”、“低”、“非常低”的评级非常罕见:体重/长度比为6%,体重评级为4%,体长评级低于1%,头围评级为2%。“高于平均水平”、“高”、“非常高”的分数更为常见:重量/长度比为8%,重量分数为15%,长度分数为45%,OH为30%。结论:我们认为在评估哈萨克斯坦共和国足月新生儿身体发育时使用intergrowth -21百分位表是不合适的,我们认为有必要制定区域标准。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Results of ligation the internal iliac and ovarian arteries in the experiment Clinical observation of early prenatal diagnosis of the coronary of hypospadias Polymorphisms of interferon γ and NKG2D receptor genes in predicting vertical transmission of HIV/HCV coinfection Features of both immune and psycho-emotional factors in the adaptive reactions of first-year students Dynamics of indicators of the functional state of the body and working capacity in young schoolchildren with different school success
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1