Early Identification of Preterm Neonates at Birth With a Tablet App for the Simplified Gestational Age Score (T-SGAS) When Ultrasound Gestational Age Dating Is Unavailable: Protocol for a Validation Study

Archana B Patel, Kunal Kurhe, Amber Prakash, Savita Bhargav, Suchita Parepalli, Elizabeth V Fogleman, Janet L Moore, Dennis D Wallace, Hemant Kulkarni, Patricia L Hibberd, Archana B Patel, Kunal Kurhe, Amber Prakash, Savita Bhargav, Suchita Parepalli, Elizabeth V Fogleman, Janet L Moore, Dennis D Wallace, Hemant Kulkarni, Patricia L Hibberd

Abstract

Background: Although rates of preterm birth continue to increase globally, identification of preterm from low birth weight infants remains a challenge. The burden of low birth weight vs preterm is greatest in resource-limited settings, where gestational age (GA) prior to delivery is frequently not known because ultrasound in early pregnancy is not available and estimates of the date of the mother's last menstrual period (LMP) may not be reliable. An alternative option is to assess GA at birth to optimize referral and care of preterm newborns. We previously developed and pilot-tested a system to measure the simplified gestational age score (SGAS) based on 4 easily observable neonatal characteristics.

Objective: The objective of this study is to adapt the scoring system as a tablet app (potentially scalable approach) to assess feasibility of use and to validate whether the scoring system accurately predicts prematurity by itself, over and above birth weight in a large sample of newborns.

Methods: The study is based in Nagpur, India, at the Research Unit of the National Institute of Child Health and Human Development's Global Network for Women's and Children's Health Research. The Android tablet app for the SGAS (T-SGAS) displays de-identified photographs of skin, breasts, and genitalia across a range of GAs and line drawings of infant posture. Each item is associated with a score. The user is trained to choose the photograph or line drawing that most closely matches the newborn being evaluated, and the app determines the neonate's GA category (preterm or term) from the cumulative score. The validation study will be conducted in 3 second level care facilities (most deliveries in India occur in hospitals, and women known to be at risk of preterm birth are referred to second level care facilities). Within 24 hours of delivery, women and their babies who are stable will be enrolled in the study. Two auxiliary nurse midwives (ANMs) blinded to prior GA assessments will use the T-SGAS to estimate the GA status of the newborn. An independent data collector will abstract the GA from the ultrasound recorded in the hospital chart and record the date of the mother's LMP. Eligibility for analysis is determined by the ultrasound and LMP data being collected within 1 week of each other to have a rigorous assessment of true GA.

Results: Publication of the results of the study is anticipated in 2019.

Conclusions: Until GA dating by ultrasound is universally available and easy to use in resource-limited settings, and where there are restrictions on ultrasound use due to their use for sex determination and abortion of female fetuses, this study will determine whether the T-SGAS app can accurately assess GA in risk categories at birth.

Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT02408783; https://ichgcp.net/clinical-trials-registry/NCT02408783 (Archived by Webcite at http://www.webcitation.org/75S2kmr3T).

International registered report identifier (irrid): DERR1-10.2196/11913.

Keywords: gestational age assessment; last menstrual period; mHealth; newborn; prematurity; ultrasound.

Conflict of interest statement

Conflicts of Interest: None declared.

©Archana B Patel, Kunal Kurhe, Amber Prakash, Savita Bhargav, Suchita Parepalli, Elizabeth V Fogleman, Janet L Moore, Dennis D Wallace, Hemant Kulkarni, Patricia L Hibberd. Originally published in JMIR Research Protocols (http://www.researchprotocols.org), 12.03.2019.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Photographs of the neonatal characteristics for the tablet app for the simplified gestational age scoring system (T-SGAS).
Figure 2
Figure 2
Tablet screens showing use of the tablet app for the simplified gestational age scoring system (T-SGAS).
Figure 3
Figure 3
Overview of the T-SGAS study. ANM: auxiliary nurse midwife, GA: gestational age, T-SGAS: tablet app for the simplified gestational age scoring system, LMP: last menstrual period.

References

    1. Beck S, Wojdyla D, Say L, Betran AP, Merialdi M, Requejo JH, Rubens C, Menon R, Van LPFA. The worldwide incidence of preterm birth: a systematic review of maternal mortality and morbidity. Bull World Health Organ. 2010 Jan;88(1):31–8. doi: 10.2471/BLT.08.062554.
    1. Mahumud RA, Sultana M, Sarker AR. Distribution and Determinants of Low Birth Weight in Developing Countries. J Prev Med Public Health. 2017 Jan;50(1):18–28. doi: 10.3961/jpmph.16.087. doi: 10.3961/jpmph.16.087.
    1. Tellapragada C, Eshwara VK, Bhat P, Acharya S, Kamath A, Bhat S, Rao C, Nayak S, Mukhopadhyay C. Risk Factors for Preterm Birth and Low Birth Weight Among Pregnant Indian Women: A Hospital-based Prospective Study. J Prev Med Public Health. 2016 May;49(3):165–75. doi: 10.3961/jpmph.16.022. doi: 10.3961/jpmph.16.022.
    1. Sebayang SK, Dibley MJ, Kelly PJ, Shankar AV, Shankar AH, SUMMIT Study Group Determinants of low birthweight, small-for-gestational-age and preterm birth in Lombok, Indonesia: analyses of the birthweight cohort of the SUMMIT trial. Trop Med Int Health. 2012 Aug;17(8):938–50. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-3156.2012.03039.x. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-3156.2012.03039.x.
    1. Belizán JM, Hofmeyr J, Buekens P, Salaria N. Preterm birth, an unresolved issue. Reprod Health. 2013 Nov 15;10(1):58. doi: 10.1186/1742-4755-10-58.
    1. Butt K, Lim K, Diagnostic Imaging Committee Determination of gestational age by ultrasound. J Obstet Gynaecol Can. 2014 Feb;36(2):171–181. doi: 10.1016/S1701-2163(15)30664-2.
    1. Salomon LJ, Alfirevic Z, Bilardo CM, Chalouhi GE, Ghi T, Kagan KO, Lau TK, Papageorghiou AT, Raine-Fenning NJ, Stirnemann J, Suresh S, Tabor A, Timor-Tritsch IE, Toi A, Yeo G. ISUOG practice guidelines: performance of first-trimester fetal ultrasound scan. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2013 Jan;41(1):102–13. doi: 10.1002/uog.12342. doi: 10.1002/uog.12342.
    1. WHO recommendations on interventions to improve preterm birth outcomes. Geneva: World Health Organization; 2015. [2019-01-15].
    1. Ballard JL, Khoury JC, Wedig K, Wang L, Eilers-Walsman BL, Lipp R. New Ballard Score, expanded to include extremely premature infants. J Pediatr. 1991 Sep;119(3):417–23.
    1. Dubowitz LM, Dubowitz V, Goldberg C. Clinical assessment of gestational age in the newborn infant. J Pediatr. 1970 Jul;77(1):1–10.
    1. Singh M, Razdan K, Ghai OP. Modified scoring system for clinical assessment of gestational age in the newborn. Indian Pediatr. 1975 Apr;12(4):311–6.
    1. Lee AC, Panchal P, Folger L, Whelan H, Whelan R, Rosner B, Blencowe H, Lawn JE. Diagnostic Accuracy of Neonatal Assessment for Gestational Age Determination: A Systematic Review. Pediatrics. 2017 Dec;140(6) doi: 10.1542/peds.2017-1423.
    1. Patel AB, Lothe A, Belekar N, Thakur H. Development and initial validation of a simplified gestational age score in low birth weight newborns in India. Indian J Child Health. 2018 Jan 14;5(1):15–19.
    1. Lee AC, Mullany LC, Ladhani K, Uddin J, Mitra D, Ahmed P, Christian P, Labrique A, DasGupta SK, Lokken RP, Quaiyum M, Baqui AH, Projahnmo Study Group Validity of Newborn Clinical Assessment to Determine Gestational Age in Bangladesh. Pediatrics. 2016 Dec;138(1) doi: 10.1542/peds.2015-3303.
    1. Sondaal Stephanie Felicie Victoria, Browne Joyce Linda, Amoakoh-Coleman Mary, Borgstein Alexander, Miltenburg Andrea Solnes, Verwijs Mirjam, Klipstein-Grobusch Kerstin. Assessing the Effect of mHealth Interventions in Improving Maternal and Neonatal Care in Low- and Middle-Income Countries: A Systematic Review. PLoS One. 2016;11(5):e0154664. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0154664.
    1. McBride B, Nguyen LT, Wiljer D, Vu NC, Nguyen CK, O'Neil J. Development of a Maternal, Newborn and Child mHealth Intervention in Thai Nguyen Province, Vietnam: Protocol for the mMom Project. JMIR Res Protoc. 2018 Jan 11;7(1):e6. doi: 10.2196/resprot.7912.
    1. Mwendwa P. Assessing the fit of RapidSMS for maternal and new-born health: perspectives of community health workers in rural Rwanda. Development in Practice. 2015 Dec 15;26(1):38–51. doi: 10.1080/09614524.2016.1112769. doi: 10.1080/09614524.2016.1112769.
    1. Lund S, Nielsen BB, Hemed M, Boas IM, Said A, Said K, Makungu MH, Rasch V. Mobile phones improve antenatal care attendance in Zanzibar: a cluster randomized controlled trial. BMC Pregnancy Childbirth. 2014 Jan 17;14:29. doi: 10.1186/1471-2393-14-29.
    1. Committee on Obstetric Practice. American Institute of Ultrasound in Medicine. Society for Maternal-Fetal Medicine Committee Opinion No 700: Methods for Estimating the Due Date. Obstet Gynecol. 2017 Dec;129(5):e150–e154. doi: 10.1097/AOG.0000000000002046.
    1. Bermingham ML, Handel IG, Glass EJ, Woolliams JA, de Clare Bronsvoort BM, McBride SH, Skuce RA, Allen AR, McDowell SWJ, Bishop SC. Hui and Walter's latent-class model extended to estimate diagnostic test properties from surveillance data: a latent model for latent data. Sci Rep. 2015 Jul 07;5:11861. doi: 10.1038/srep11861. doi: 10.1038/srep11861.
    1. Walter SD, Riddell CA, Rabachini T, Villa LL, Franco EL. Accuracy of p53 codon 72 polymorphism status determined by multiple laboratory methods: a latent class model analysis. PLoS One. 2013;8(2):e56430. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0056430.
    1. Walter SD, Franco EL. Use of latent class models to accommodate inter-laboratory variation in assessing genetic polymorphisms associated with disease risk. BMC Genet. 2008 Aug 08;9:51. doi: 10.1186/1471-2156-9-51.
    1. Walter SD, Frommer DJ, Cook RJ. The estimation of sensitivity and specificity in colorectal cancer screening methods. Cancer Detect Prev. 1991;15(6):465–9.
    1. Pencina MJ, Fine JP, D'Agostino RB. Discrimination slope and integrated discrimination improvement - properties, relationships and impact of calibration. Stat Med. 2017 Dec 10;36(28):4482–4490. doi: 10.1002/sim.7139.
    1. Liu M, Kapadia AS, Etzel CJ. Evaluating a New Risk Marker's Predictive Contribution in Survival Models. J Stat Theory Pract. 2010 Dec 01;4(4):845–855.

Source: PubMed

Sponzoři a spolupracovníci

Zdravotní podmínky

Drogové intervence

3
Předplatit