Usefulness of anthropometric measurements to identify low birth weight babies
Abstract
Background: India alone accounts for 40 per cent of LBW births in the developing world. More than half (58 percent) of births are not weighed. According to NFHS-3 survey (2005-2006) only 34% of births were weighed at birth and 22% of them were of LBW (<2.5kgs).
Objective: To compare the sensitivity and specificity of various anthropometric indicators and to determine the relationship between birth weight and the anthropometric indicators to find out the most precious indicator in detection of LBW babies.
Methods: The study was carried out on 500 newborns delivered in Silchar medical college hospital, over a period of one year, from July 2015 to June2016. Birth weight was recorded within 24 hours of birth. All anthropometric measurements were carried out within 48 hours of birth. The collected data was analyzed by using ROC curve for calculating sensitivity and specificity. To establish the co-relation between birth weight and anthropometric measurements karl pearson correlation co-efficient was used.
Results: The critical cut-off values for a birth weight of 2.5 kg were 30.6cm, 8.8cm, 14 cm and 9.3 cm for chest circumference, mid-arm circumference, thigh circumference and calf circumference and the sensitivity & specificity were 90.40% & 90.71%, 89.93% & 96.28%, 85.31% & 95.36% and 85.88% & 90.09% respectively. Mid-arm circumference had highest value of correlation coefficient (0.972) in relation to birth weight.
Conclusion: Mid-arm circumference of ≤8.8 cm at birth is a simple, reliable, cost effective and culturally acceptable method for screening the at risk neonate <2500 gm
Downloads
References
2. Low birth weight: country, regional and global estimates. New York: UNICEF, HO; 2004.P.2-9.
3. National family health survey (NFHS)-3[Internet]. India: Ministry of Health and Family Welfare (MOHFW); 2007 Sep. Available from: http://rchiips. org/ nfhs/chapters.shtml
4. Biswas AB, Sengupta B, Manna A, Mondal NC, Palodhi PK, Sarkar S. Comparative usefulness of arm thigh and calf circumference for screening low birth weight infants. J Trop Pediat. 1994; 40 (5): 312-3. doi: 10. 1093/tropej/40.5.312
5. Sharma JN, Sharma BS, Gupta ML, Saxena S, Sharma U. Mid-arm circumference at birth as a predictor of low birth weight babies and early neonatal mortality. Ind Pediat. 1986;23(11):915-9
6. Huque F, Hussain Z. Detection of low birth-weight new born babies by anthropometric measurements in Bangladesh. Ind J Pediat. 1991;58(2):223-31.
7.Bhargava SK, Ramji S, Kumar A, Mohan M, Marwah J, Sachdev HP. Mid-arm and chest circumferences at birth as predictors of low birth weight and neonatal mortality in the community. Br MedJ (Clin Res Ed). 1985; 291 (6509): 1617-9.doi: 10.1136/bmj. 291. 6509. 1617
8. Gozal D, Ndombo PK, Minkande JZ, Kago I, Tetanye E, Mbede J. Anthropometric measurements in a newborn population in West Africa: a reliable and simple tool for the identification of infants at risk for early postnatal morbidity. J Pediat. 1991; 118 (5):800-5. DOI: https: //doi. org/ 10.1016/ S0022-3476 (05)80049-6
9. Hossain MM, Habib M, DuPont HL. Association between birth weight and birth arm circumference of neonates in rural Egypt. Indian J Pediatr. 1994; 61(1): 81-7.
10. Barman CR. Neonatal screening by mid-arm circumference. Indian J Pediatr. 1994;61(1):89-91
Copyright (c) 2019 Author (s). Published by Siddharth Health Research and Social Welfare Society
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
OAI - Open Archives Initiative
