46 How big is your head? Measuring head circumference in a surgical NICU

Porteous, Zoe; Hannam, Simon; Davey, Nicola

doi:10.1136/archdischild-2023-gosh.46

Cited by 1 publication

(1 citation statement)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Only 3% of infants presenting to Accident and Emergency had their head circumference measured within 1 year in an Australian hospital [ 6 ]. A study from a UK hospital found that HC measurement was performed sporadically in only 1 of 7 infants [ 7 ]. In summary, HC assessment is frequently missed due to difficulties measuring with a tape measure and the errors associated with this method.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Measurement of Head Circumference Using a Smartphone: Feasibility Cohort Study

Yordanov,

Akhter,

Quan Teh

et al. 2024

JMIR Form Res

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background Accurate head circumference (HC) measurement is essential when assessing neonates and infants. Tape measure HC measurements are prone to errors, particularly when performed by parents/guardians, due to individual differences in head shape, hair style and texture, subject cooperation, and examiner techniques, including tape measure placement and tautness. There is, therefore, the need for a more reliable method. Objective The primary objective of this study was to evaluate the validity, reliability, and consistency of HC app measurement compared to the current standard of practice, serving as a proof-of-concept for use by health care professionals. Methods We recruited infants attending the neurosurgery clinic, and parents/guardians were approached and consented to participate in the study. Along with the standard head circumference measurement, measurements were taken with the head circumference app (HC app) developed in-house, and we also collected baseline medical history and characteristics. For the statistical analysis, we used RStudio (version 4.1.1). In summary, we analyzed covariance and intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) to compare the measurement's within-rater and interrater reliability. The F test was used to analyze the variance between measurements and the Bland-Altman agreement, t test, and correlation coefficients were used to compare the tape measurement to the measures taken by the HC app. We also used nonvalidated questionnaires to explore parental or guardians’ experiences, assess their views on app utility, and collect feedback. Results The total number of recruited patients was 37. Comparison between the app measurements and the measurements with a tape measure showed poor reliability (ICC=0.177) and wide within-app variations (ICC=0.341). The agreement between the measurements done by parents/guardians and the tape measurements done by the researcher was good (ICC=0.901). Parental/guardian feedback was overall very positive, with most of the parents/guardians reporting that the app was easy to use (n=31, 84%) and that they are happy to use the app in an unsupervised setting, provided that they are assured of the measurement quality. Conclusions We developed this project as a proof-of-concept study, and as such, the app has shown great potential to be used both in a clinical setting and by parents/guardians in their own homes.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%