Advertisement

Prenatal and intrapartum high-risk screening

I. Prediction of the high-risk neonate
  • Calvin J. Hobel
    Correspondence
    Reprint requests: C. J. Hobel, M.D., 1000 W. Carson St., Torrance, California 90509
    Affiliations
    Division of Perinatal Medicine, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology and Pediatrics, Harbor General Hospital Torrance, California, USA

    University of California, Los Angeles

    School of Medicine Torrance, California, USA
    Search for articles by this author
  • Marcia A. Hyvarinen
    Affiliations
    Division of Perinatal Medicine, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology and Pediatrics, Harbor General Hospital Torrance, California, USA

    University of California, Los Angeles

    School of Medicine Torrance, California, USA
    Search for articles by this author
  • Donald M. Okada
    Affiliations
    Division of Perinatal Medicine, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology and Pediatrics, Harbor General Hospital Torrance, California, USA

    University of California, Los Angeles

    School of Medicine Torrance, California, USA
    Search for articles by this author
  • William Oh
    Affiliations
    Division of Perinatal Medicine, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology and Pediatrics, Harbor General Hospital Torrance, California, USA

    University of California, Los Angeles

    School of Medicine Torrance, California, USA
    Search for articles by this author
      This paper is only available as a PDF. To read, Please Download here.

      Abstract

      A high-risk pregnancy screening system based on a prospective analysis of prenatal, intrapartum, and neonatal factors in 738 pregnancies can predict perinatal morbidity and mortality. Factors were assigned with weighted values according to their assumed risk. Total scores for the prenatal, intrapartum, and neonatal period were dichotomized to simplify the scoring system by forming a low-risk group (scores < 10) and a high-risk group (scores ≥ 10). Three hundred and forty patients (46 per cent) were low risk during both the prenatal and intrapartum period (low/low risk group). In this group the incidence of high-risk neonates and the perinatal mortality rate was extremely low. There was no significant increase in neonatal morbidity or perinatal mortality in 135 patients (18 per cent) who were identified as high risk during the prenatal period but low risk during the intrapartum period (high/low risk group). However, in 144 patients (20 per cent) at risk only during the intrapartum period (low/high risk group) or in 119 patients (16 per cent) at risk during both prenatal and intrapartum periods (high/high risk group) there was a significant increase in the number of high-risk neonates and perinatal mortality. By a stepwise multiple regression analysis, actual intrapartum scores are most predictive of neonatal risk (days in hospital) followed by actual prenatal scores. Identifying a population as to their risk status for both the prenatal and intrapartum period has added depth to the understanding of the continuum of risk which exists within the framework of the perinatal period.
      To read this article in full you will need to make a payment

      Purchase one-time access:

      Academic & Personal: 24 hour online accessCorporate R&D Professionals: 24 hour online access
      One-time access price info
      • For academic or personal research use, select 'Academic and Personal'
      • For corporate R&D use, select 'Corporate R&D Professionals'

      Subscribe:

      Subscribe to American Journal of Obstetrics & Gynecology
      Already a print subscriber? Claim online access
      Already an online subscriber? Sign in
      Institutional Access: Sign in to ScienceDirect

      References

        • Berendes H.W.
        The Structure and Scope of the Collaborative Project on Cerebral Palsy, Mental Retardation, and Other Neurological and Sensory Disorders of Infancy and Childhood.
        (Chap. 5)in: Chipman S.S. Lilienfeld A.M. Greenberg B.G. Donnelly J.F. Research Methodology and Needs in Perinatal Studies. Charles C Thomas, Publisher, Springfield, Illinois1966: 118
        • Butler N.R.
        • Bonham D.G.
        Perinatal Mortality, The First Report of the British Perinatal Mortality Survey.
        E. & S. Livingstone, Ltd, Edinburgh1963
        • Butler N.R.
        • Alberman E.D.
        Perinatal Problems, The Second Report of the 1958 British Perinatal Mortality Survey.
        E. & S. Livingstone, Ltd, Edinburgh1969
        • Donnelly J.F.
        • Flowers C.E.
        • Creadick R.N.
        • Greenberg B.G.
        • Wells H.B.
        Am. J. Obstet. Gynecol. 1957; 74: 1245
        • Wells H.B.
        • Greenberg B.G.
        • Donnelly J.F.
        Am. J. Pub. Health. 1958; 48: 1583
        • Prechtl H.F.R.
        Br. Med. J. 1967; 4: 763
        • Nesbitt Jr., R.E.L.
        • Aubry R.H.
        Am. J. Obstet. Gynecol. 1969; 103: 972
        • Effer S.B.
        Can. Med. Assoc. J. 1969; 101: 55
        • Goodwin J.W.
        • Dunne J.T.
        • Thomas B.W.
        Can. Med. Assoc. J. 1969; 101: 458
        • Lindon R.L.
        Cereb. Palsy Bull. 1961; 3: 481
        • Rogers M.G.H.
        Med. Officer. 1967; 118: 253
        • Wigglesworth R.
        Develop. Med. Child. Neurol. 1968; 10: 678
        • Lilienfeld A.M.
        • Pasamanick B.
        Am. J. Obstet. Gynecol. 1955; 70: 93