Anthropometric measurements can identify small for gestational age newborns: a cohort study in rural Tanzania

Cecilie Bøge Paulsen, Birgitte Bruun Nielsen, Omari Abdul Msemo, Sofie Lykke Møller, Josephine Roth Ekmann, Thor Grundtvig Theander, Ib Christian Bygbjerg, John Peter Andrea Lusingu, Daniel Thomas Remias Minja, Christentze Schmiegelow, Cecilie Bøge Paulsen, Birgitte Bruun Nielsen, Omari Abdul Msemo, Sofie Lykke Møller, Josephine Roth Ekmann, Thor Grundtvig Theander, Ib Christian Bygbjerg, John Peter Andrea Lusingu, Daniel Thomas Remias Minja, Christentze Schmiegelow

Abstract

Background: Small-for-gestational-age (SGA) is associated with increased neonatal mortality and morbidity. In low and middle income countries an accurate gestational age is often not known, making the identification of SGA newborns difficult. Measuring foot length, chest circumference and mid upper arm circumference (MUAC) of the newborn have previously been shown to be reasonable methods for detecting low birth weight (< 2500 g) and prematurity (gestational age < 37 weeks). The aim of this study was to investigate if the three anthropometric measurements could also correctly identify SGA newborns.

Methods: In the current study from a rural area of northeastern Tanzania, 376 live newborns had foot length, chest circumference, and MUAC measured within 24 h of birth. Gestational age was estimated by transabdominal ultrasound in early pregnancy and SGA was diagnosed using a sex-specific weight reference chart previously developed in the study area. Receiver operating characteristic curves were generated for each of the anthropometric measurements and the area under the curve (AUC) compared. Operational cutoffs for foot length, chest circumference, and MUAC were defined while balancing as high as possible sensitivity and specificity for identifying SGA. Positive and negative predictive values (PPV and NPV) were then calculated.

Results: Of the 376 newborns, 68 (18.4%) were SGA. The AUC for detecting SGA was 0.78 for foot length, 0.88 for chest circumference, and 0.85 for MUAC. Operational cut-offs to detect SGA newborns were defined as ≤7.7 cm for foot length, ≤31.6 cm for chest circumference and ≤ 10.1 cm for MUAC. Foot length had 74% sensitivity, 69% specificity, PPV of 0.35 and NPV of 0.92 for identifying SGA. Chest circumference had 79% sensitivity, 81% specificity, PPV of 0.49 and NPV of 0.95 for identifying SGA. Finally, MUAC had 76% sensitivity, 77% specificity, PPV of 0.43 and NPV of 0.94 for identifying SGA.

Conclusion: In a setting with limited availability of an accurate gestational age, all three methods had a high NPV and could be used to rule out the newborn as being SGA. Overall, chest circumference was the best method to identify SGA newborns, whereas foot length and MUAC had lower detection ability.

Trial registration: Clinicaltrials.gov ( NCT02191683 ). Registered 2 July 2014.

Keywords: Africa; Chest circumference; Foot length; Gestational age; Mid upper arm circumference; Positive and negative predictive value; Small for gestational age.

Conflict of interest statement

Authors’ information

Not applicable

Ethics approval and consent to participate

Ethical approval was granted by the Medical Research Coordinating Committee of the National Institute for Medical Research in Tanzania (reference number NIMR/HQ/R.8a/Vol. IX/1717). All study participants gave written informed consent (or thumbprints from illiterate women) before enrolment. All study participants were given unique identification numbers to ensure anonymity, and only authorized personnel had access to the data. All project activities were conducted in accordance with Good Clinical Practice and the Declaration of Helsinki. Participants were assisted by the project in obtaining the best local medical care available if a disease was diagnosed during the study period.

Consent for publication

Permission to publish has been granted by the National Institute for Medical Research in Tanzania.

Competing interests

The authors declare that they have no competing interests.

Publisher’s Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Figures

Fig. 1
Fig. 1
Flow chart of the study population
Fig. 2
Fig. 2
Association between foot length, chest circumference and MUAC vs. birth weight and gestational age at delivery
Fig. 3
Fig. 3
ROC curves for detecting SGA, low birth weight and prematurity, respectively using the three anthropometric measurements

References

    1. World Health Organization . Global strategy for Womens’s, Children’s and Adolescents’ health (2016–2030), 2018 monitoring report: current status and strategic priorities. 2018.
    1. World Health Organization . United Republic of Tanzania statistics summary (2002 - present) 2018.
    1. Sharma D, Farahbakhsh N, Shastri S, Sharma P. Intrauterine growth restriction - part 2. J Matern Fetal Neonatal Med. 2016;29(24):4037–4048. doi: 10.3109/14767058.2016.1154525.
    1. Zhang J, Merialdi M, Platt LD, Kramer MS. Defining normal and abnormal fetal growth: promises and challenges. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2010;202(6):522–528. doi: 10.1016/j.ajog.2009.10.889.
    1. Kramer MS. The epidemiology of adverse pregnancy outcomes: an overview. J Nutr. 2003;133(5 Suppl 2):1592s–1596s. doi: 10.1093/jn/133.5.1592S.
    1. Lee AC, Katz J, Blencowe H, Cousens S, Kozuki N, Vogel JP, et al. National and regional estimates of term and preterm babies born small for gestational age in 138 low-income and middle-income countries in 2010. Lancet Glob Health. 2013;1(1):e26–e36. doi: 10.1016/S2214-109X(13)70006-8.
    1. Katz J, Lee AC, Kozuki N, Lawn JE, Cousens S, Blencowe H, et al. Mortality risk in preterm and small-for-gestational-age infants in low-income and middle-income countries: a pooled country analysis. Lancet (London, England) 2013;382(9890):417–425. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(13)60993-9.
    1. Lee AC, Kozuki N, Cousens S, Stevens GA, Blencowe H, Silveira MF, et al. Estimates of burden and consequences of infants born small for gestational age in low and middle income countries with INTERGROWTH-21(st) standard: analysis of CHERG datasets. BMJ (Clin Res Ed) 2017;358:j3677. doi: 10.1136/bmj.j3677.
    1. Nabiwemba E, Marchant T, Namazzi G, Kadobera D, Waiswa P. Identifying high-risk babies born in the community using foot length measurement at birth in Uganda. Child Care Health Dev. 2013;39(1):20–26. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2214.2012.01383.x.
    1. Elizabeth NL, Christopher OG, Patrick K. Determining an anthropometric surrogate measure for identifying low birth weight babies in Uganda: a hospital-based cross sectional study. BMC Pediatr. 2013;13:54. doi: 10.1186/1471-2431-13-54.
    1. Kc A, Nelin V, Vitrakoti R, Aryal S, Malqvist M. Validation of the foot length measure as an alternative tool to identify low birth weight and preterm babies in a low-resource setting like Nepal: a cross-sectional study. BMC Pediatr. 2015;15:43. doi: 10.1186/s12887-015-0361-4.
    1. Marchant T, Willey B, Katz J, Clarke S, Kariuki S, ter Kuile F, et al. Neonatal mortality risk associated with preterm birth in East Africa, adjusted by weight for gestational age: individual participant level meta-analysis. PLoS Med. 2012;9(8):e1001292. doi: 10.1371/journal.pmed.1001292.
    1. Marchant T, Jaribu J, Penfold S, Tanner M, Armstrong Schellenberg J. Measuring newborn foot length to identify small babies in need of extra care: a cross sectional hospital based study with community follow-up in Tanzania. BMC Public Health. 2010;10:624. doi: 10.1186/1471-2458-10-624.
    1. Thi HN, Khanh DK, Thu Hle T, Thomas EG, Lee KJ, Russell FM. Foot length, chest circumference, and mid upper arm circumference are good predictors of low birth weight and prematurity in ethnic minority newborns in Vietnam: a hospital-based observational study. PLoS One. 2015;10(11):e0142420. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0142420.
    1. Otupiri E, Wobil P, Nguah SB, Hindin MJ. Anthropometric measurements: options for identifying low birth weight newborns in Kumasi, Ghana. PLoS One. 2014;9(9):e106712. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0106712.
    1. Goto E. Meta-analysis: identification of low birthweight by other anthropometric measurements at birth in developing countries. J Epidemiol. 2011;21(5):354–362. doi: 10.2188/jea.JE20100182.
    1. Schmiegelow C, Scheike T, Oesterholt M, Minja D, Pehrson C, Magistrado P, et al. Development of a fetal weight chart using serial trans-abdominal ultrasound in an east African population: a longitudinal observational study. PLoS One. 2012;7(9):e44773. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0044773.
    1. Hadlock FP, Shah YP, Kanon DJ, Lindsey JV. Fetal crown-rump length: reevaluation of relation to menstrual age (5-18 weeks) with high-resolution real-time US. Radiology. 1992;182(2):501–505. doi: 10.1148/radiology.182.2.1732970.
    1. Chitty LS, Altman DG, Henderson A, Campbell S. Charts of fetal size: 2. Head measurements. Br J Obstet Gynaecol. 1994;101(1):35–43. doi: 10.1111/j.1471-0528.1994.tb13007.x.
    1. (NHANES) NHaNES . Anthropometry Procedures Manual. 2007.
    1. The International Fetal and Newborn Growth Consortium UoO . International fetal and newborn growth standards for the 21st century, Anthropometry handbook. 2012.
    1. Mullany LC, Darmstadt GL, Khatry SK, Leclerq SC, Tielsch JM. Relationship between the surrogate anthropometric measures, foot length and chest circumference and birth weight among newborns of Sarlahi, Nepal. Eur J Clin Nutr. 2007;61(1):40–46. doi: 10.1038/sj.ejcn.1602504.
    1. World Health Organization . Born too soon: the global action report on preterm birth. 2012.
    1. Chaves MV, Ximenes CV, Borba SK, Figueiroa JN, Alves JG. Foot length in newborns small for gestational age. Trop Dr. 2016;46(3):156–159.
    1. Rustagi N, Prasuna JG, Taneja DK. Anthropometric surrogates for screening of low birth weight newborns: a community-based study. Asia Pac J Public Health. 2012;24(2):343–351. doi: 10.1177/1010539510384717.
    1. Unger H, Thriemer K, Ley B, Tinto H, Traore M, Valea I, et al. The assessment of gestational age: a comparison of different methods from a malaria pregnancy cohort in sub-Saharan Africa. BMC Pregnancy Childbirth. 2019;19(1):12. doi: 10.1186/s12884-018-2128-z.
    1. Moore KA, Simpson JA, Thomas KH, Rijken MJ, White LJ, Dwell SL, et al. Estimating gestational age in late presenters to antenatal Care in a Resource-Limited Setting on the Thai-Myanmar border. PLoS One. 2015;10(6):e0131025. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0131025.
    1. Buck Louis GM, Grewal J, Albert PS, Sciscione A, Wing DA, Grobman WA, et al. Racial/ethnic standards for fetal growth: the NICHD fetal growth studies. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2015;213(4):449.e1–449e41. doi: 10.1016/j.ajog.2015.08.032.
    1. Kiserud T, Piaggio G, Carroli G, Widmer M, Carvalho J, Neerup Jensen L, et al. The World Health Organization fetal growth charts: a multinational longitudinal study of ultrasound biometric measurements and estimated fetal weight. PLoS Med. 2017;14(1):e1002220. doi: 10.1371/journal.pmed.1002220.

Source: PubMed

3
Abonnieren