Customised birthweight models: do they increase identification of at-risk infants?

Abstract

Aim: The study aims to describe the cohort of women and babies who are classified as small-for-gestational age (SGA) at term by both an Australian customised birthweight model (CBM) and a commonly used population-based standard, and to investigate and compare the utility of these models in identifying babies at risk of experiencing adverse outcomes

Methods: Routinely collected data on 54 890 singleton-term births at the Mater Mothers' Hospitals, Brisbane, with birthweight less than 4000 g between January 1997 and December 2008, was extracted. Each birth was classified as SGA (<10th centile) or not SGA by either and/or both methods: population-based standards (SGApop ) and CBM (SGAcust ). Babies classified as SGApop , SGAcust or SGAboth were compared with those not classified as SGA by both methods using relative risk and 95% confidence interval, and those only classified as SGAcust were compared with those only classified as SGApop . Maternal demographics, maternal risk factors for fetal growth restriction, pregnancy and labour complications and adverse neonatal outcomes are reported.

Results: A total of 4768 (8.7%) births were classified as SGApop , while 6479 (11.8%) were SGAcust of whom 4138 (63.9%) were also classified as SGApop . Maternal risk factors such as smoking and hypertension were statistically higher for the SGAcust group when compared with SGApop . For the majority of adverse neonatal outcomes, a trend was noted to increased identification using the CBM.

Conclusion: The CBM provides a modest improvement when compared to a population-based standard to identity term infants at birth who are at risk of adverse neonatal outcomes.