BIAS IN STUDIES OF PRETERM AND POSTTERM DELIVERY DUE TO ULTRASOUND ASSESSMENT OF GESTATIONAL-AGE

被引：94

作者：

HENRIKSEN, TB

WILCOX, AJ

HEDEGAARD, M

SECHER, NJ

机构：

[1] Danish Epidemiology Science Centre, Institute of Epidemiology and Social Medicine, Aarhus University, Aarhus

[2] Perinatal Epidemiological Research Unit, Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Aarhus University Hospital, Aarhus

[3] Epidemiology Branch, National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences, Research Triangle Park, NC

来源：

EPIDEMIOLOGY | 1995年 / 6卷 / 05期

关键词：

BIAS; GESTATIONAL AGE; ULTRASONIC DIAGNOSIS; INFANT; GENDER; MATERNAL SMOKING; PREGNANCY DURATION;

D O I：

10.1097/00001648-199509000-00012

中图分类号：

R1 [预防医学、卫生学];

学科分类号：

1004 ; 120402 ;

摘要：

Ultrasound measurement of fetal dimensions is widely used for estimating gestational age. A little-discussed limitation of this method is that variations in fetal size at a given stage of pregnancy are converted to differences in gestational age. Factors that affect pregnancy duration often affect fetal size also. We explore how the effect of such factors may be biased when gestational age is determined by ultrasound. We selected 3,606 women with singleton pregnancies (1989-1991) who had an early ultrasound measurement of fetal biparietal diameter (BPD) and a good quality history of last menstrual period (LMP). Using the two measures of gestational age, we estimated risk of preterm and postterm delivery for female babies vs males and for smoking women vs nonsmoking women. There was a 13% excess of preterm delivery among female babies when gestational age was determined by ultrasound, but no excess when gestational age was defined by LMP. For postterm delivery, female babies had a 19% lower risk with ultrasound-defined age, but no deficit with LMP-defined age. We found a similar bias with ultrasound in the analysis of maternal smoking. Thus, factors that reduce fetal size inflate the risk of preterm delivery and deflate the risk of postterm delivery when gestational age is based on ultrasound measurement of the fetus. This bias can distort the relative risk of preterm or postterm delivery by 10-20%.

引用

页码：533 / 537

页数：5

共 34 条

[1] Wilcox M., Gardosi J., Mongelli M., Ray C., Johnson I., Birth weight from pregnancies dated by ultrasonography in a multicultural British population, Br Med J, 307, pp. 588-591, (1993)
[2] Grennert L., Persson P.H., Gennser G., Benefits of ultrasonic screening of a pregnant population, Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand Suppl, pp. 5-14, (1978)
[3] Persson P.H., Grennert L., Gennser G., Gullberg B., Normal range curves for the intrauterine growth of the biparietal diameter, Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand, pp. 15-20, (1978)
[4] Campbell S., Newman G.B., Growth of the fetal biparietal diameter during normal pregnancy, Br J Obstet Gynaecol, 84, pp. 165-174, (1971)
[5] Altman D.G., Chitty L.S., Charts of fetal size. 1. Methodology, Br J Obstet Gynaecol, 101, pp. 29-34, (1994)
[6] Chitty L.S., Altman D.G., Henderson A., Campbell S., Charts of fetal size. 2. Head measurements, Br J Obstet Gynaecol, 101, pp. 35-43, (1994)
[7] Sabbagha R.E., Barton F.B., Barton B.A., Sonar biparietal diameter. I. Analysis of percentile growth differences in two normal populations using same methodology, Am J Obstet Gynecol, 126, pp. 479-484, (1976)
[8] Rabelink I.A.A., Degen J.E.M., Kessels M.E.W., Nienhuis S.J., Ruissen C.J., Hoogland H.J., Variation in early fetal growth, Eur J Obstet Gynecol, 53, pp. 39-43, (1994)
[9] Parker A.J., Davies P., Mayho A.M., Newton J.R., The ultrasound estimation of sex-related variations of intrauterine growth, Am J Obstet Gynecol, 149, pp. 665-669, (1984)
[10] Bennett M.J., Little G., Dewhurst J., Chamberlain G., Predictive value of ultrasound measurement in early pregnancy: A randomized controlled trial, Br J Obstet Gynaecol, 89, pp. 338-341, (1982)

← 1 2 3 4 →