BackgroundWe aimed to describe newborn body composition and identify which anthropometric ratio (weight/length; BMI; or ponderal index, PI) best predicts fat mass (FM) and fat-free mass (FFM).MethodsAir-displacement plethysmography (PEA POD) was used to estimate FM, FFM, and body fat percentage (BF%). Associations between FFM, FM, and BF% and weight/length, BMI, and PI were evaluated in 1,019 newborns using multivariate regression analysis. Charts for FM, FFM, and BF% were generated using a prescriptive subsample (n=247). Standards for the best-predicting anthropometric ratio were calculated utilizing the same population used for the INTERGROWTH-21st Newborn Size Standards (n=20,479).ResultsFFM and FM increased consistently during late pregnancy. Differential FM, BF%, and FFM patterns were observed for those born preterm (34+0−36+6 weeks’ gestation) and with impaired intrauterine growth. Weight/length by gestational age (GA) was a better predictor of FFM and FM (adjusted R2=0.92 and 0.71, respectively) than BMI or PI, independent of sex, GA, and timing of measurement. Results were almost identical when only preterm newborns were studied. We present sex-specific centiles for weight/length ratio for GA.ConclusionsWeight/length best predicts newborn FFM and FM. There are differential FM, FFM, and BF% patterns by sex, GA, and size at birth.

BackgroundThe World Health Organization recommends that human growth should be monitored with the use of international standards. However, in obstetric practice, we continue to monitor fetal growth using numerous local charts or equations that are based on different populations for each body structure. Consistent with World Health Organization recommendations, the INTERGROWTH-21st Project has produced the first set of international standards to date pregnancies; to monitor fetal growth, estimated fetal weight, Doppler measures, and brain structures; to measure uterine growth, maternal nutrition, newborn infant size, and body composition; and to assess the postnatal growth of preterm babies. All these standards are based on the same healthy pregnancy cohort. Recognizing the importance of demonstrating that, postnatally, this cohort still adhered to the World Health Organization prescriptive approach, we followed their growth and development to the key milestone of 2 years of age.ObjectiveThe purpose of this study was to determine whether the babies in the INTERGROWTH-21st Project maintained optimal growth and development in childhood.Study DesignIn the Infant Follow-up Study of the INTERGROWTH-21st Project, we evaluated postnatal growth, nutrition, morbidity, and motor development up to 2 years of age in the children who contributed data to the construction of the international fetal growth, newborn infant size and body composition at birth, and preterm postnatal growth standards. Clinical care, feeding practices, anthropometric measures, and assessment of morbidity were standardized across study sites and documented at 1 and 2 years of age. Weight, length, and head circumference age- and sex-specific z-scores and percentiles and motor development milestones were estimated with the use of the World Health Organization Child Growth Standards and World Health Organization milestone distributions, respectively. For the preterm infants, corrected age was used. Variance components analysis was used to estimate the percentage variability among individuals within a study site compared with that among study sites.ResultsThere were 3711 eligible singleton live births; 3042 children (82%) were evaluated at 2 years of age. There were no substantive differences between the included group and the lost-to-follow up group. Infant mortality rate was 3 per 1000; neonatal mortality rate was 1.6 per 1000. At the 2-year visit, the children included in the INTERGROWTH-21st Fetal Growth Standards were at the 49th percentile for length, 50th percentile for head circumference, and 58th percentile for weight of the World Health Organization Child Growth Standards. Similar results were seen for the preterm subgroup that was included in the INTERGROWTH-21st Preterm Postnatal Growth Standards. The cohort overlapped between the 3rd and 97th percentiles of the World Health Organization motor development milestones. We estimated that the variance among study sites explains only 5.5% of the total variability in the length of the children between...

A range of adverse outcomes is associated with insufficient and excessive maternal weight gain in pregnancy, but there is no consensus regarding what constitutes optimal gestational weight gain (GWG). Differences in the methodological quality of GWG studies may explain the varying chart recommendations. The goal of this systematic review was to evaluate the methodological quality of studies that aimed to create GWG charts by scoring them against a set of predefined, independently agreed-upon criteria. These criteria were divided into 3 domains: study design (12 criteria), statistical methods (7 criteria), and reporting methods (4 criteria). The criteria were broken down further into items, and studies were assigned a quality score (QS) based on these criteria. For each item, studies were scored as either high (score = 0) or low (score = 1) risk of bias; a high QS correlated with a low risk of bias. The maximum possible QS was 34. The systematic search identified 12 eligible studies involving 2,268,556 women from 9 countries; their QSs ranged from 9 (26%) to 29 (85%) (median, 18; 53%). The most common sources for bias were found in study designs (i.e., not prospective); assessments of prepregnancy weight and gestational age; descriptions of weighing protocols; sample size calculations; and the multiple measurements taken at each visit. There is wide variation in the methodological quality of GWG studies constructing charts. High-quality studies are needed to guide future clinical recommendations. We recommend the following main requirements for future studies: prospective design, reliable evaluation of prepregnancy weight and gestational age, detailed description of measurement procedures and protocols, description of sample-size calculation, and the creation of smooth centile charts or z scores.

Background: The INTERGROWTH-21st Project aimed to produce international, prescriptive, postnatal growth standards for preterm infants born to healthy, well-nourished mothers receiving adequate antenatal care. There is little information available regarding optimal postnatal growth among uncomplicated preterm newborns. We describe how the preterm infants contributing to the standards followed evidence-based feeding recommendations.

No abstract

Please cite this paper as: Roseman F, Knight H, Giuliani F, Lloyd S, Di Nicola P, Laister A, Roseman S, Kennedy K, Burnham O, Patel B, Puglia F, Blakey I, Cheikh Ismail L, for the International Fetal and Newborn Growth Consortium for the 21st Century (INTERGROWTH‐21st). Implementation of the INTERGROWTH‐21st Project in the UK. BJOG 2013; 120 (Suppl. 2): 117–122. There are approximately 10 000 births per year in the county of Oxfordshire in the UK, which is one of the two European sites for the International Fetal and Newborn Growth Consortium for the 21st Century (INTERGROWTH‐21st) Project. The samples for both components of the project – the Fetal Growth Longitudinal Study (FGLS) and Newborn Cross‐Sectional Study (NCSS) – were drawn from the John Radcliffe Hospital, a major university hospital with a large regional role that covers more than 75% of deliveries in the county. Special activities to encourage participation in this population included the formation of a research coalition to streamline recruitment in the Maternity Unit and the distribution of study information leaflets to women using the hospital’s antenatal care service. This was a demanding project and several challenges were overcome to reach recruitment targets and to maintain high standards of data quality. Amongst the major challenges for FGLS at this study site was the level of ineligibility because of maternal age, smoking and body mass index (BMI) ≥ 30. The major challenge for the NCSS field teams was to ensure that all anthropometric data were collected before the early discharge of uncomplicated deliveries, often within 6 hours of birth. It is evident from our experience in implementing this project that, when large‐scale clinical studies are meticulously planned and avoid major disruption to routine clinical care, they are well received by hospital staff and can contribute to the improvement of the overall standard of clinical care.

BackgroundCrown-heel length (CHL) measurement is influenced by technique, training, experience and subject cooperation. We investigated whether extending one or both of an infant’s legs affects the precision of CHL taken using an infantometer. The influence of staff training and infant cooperation were also examined.MethodsCHL was measured in children (aged 2), infants (aged 1) and newborns, by extending one or both legs. The subject’s level of cooperation was recorded. Mean differences were compared using Student’s t-test; intra- and inter-observer variability were assessed using Bland-Altman plots with 95 % limits of agreement. Intra- and inter-observer technical errors of measurement (TEMs) were also calculated.ResultsMeasuring CHL in newborns using only one leg resulted in significantly longer measurements. Across all groups, there was less inter-observer variability using both legs; 95 % limits of agreement were lower and TEMs smaller. Larger measurement differences were seen if children were uncooperative.ConclusionsThis study supports measuring CHL with both legs extended. The two-leg technique reduces variability and increases precision by allowing the measurer to control better the position and movements of the infant’s body.

No abstract