初产足月儿与经产足月儿宫内生长水平差异的研究

黄小云, 刘惠龙, 雷敏, 连朝辉, 麦慧芬

中国当代儿科杂志 ›› 2018, Vol. 20 ›› Issue (3) : 184-188.

PDF(922 KB)
HTML
PDF(922 KB)
HTML
中国当代儿科杂志 ›› 2018, Vol. 20 ›› Issue (3) : 184-188. DOI: 10.7499/j.issn.1008-8830.2018.03.004
论著·临床研究

初产足月儿与经产足月儿宫内生长水平差异的研究

  • 黄小云1, 刘惠龙2, 雷敏1, 连朝辉3, 麦慧芬1
作者信息 +

Differences in intrauterine growth levels between full-term neonates born to primiparous or multiparous women

  • HUANG Xiao-Yun1, LIU Hui-Long2, LEI Min1, LIAN Chao-Hui3, MAI Hui-Fen1
Author information +
文章历史 +

摘要

目的 制定不同胎龄初产足月儿与经产足月儿宫内生长百分位曲线,研究分娩产次对宫内生长潜力的影响。方法 采用整群取样法于2013年4月至2015年9月对深圳市两家医院出生的胎龄37~41周单胎足月儿进行体格生长现场测量。曲线拟合应用Lambda-Mu-Sigma(LMS)法。结果 获得了14 529例胎龄37~41周初产、经产足月儿各胎龄出生体重、身长、头围、胸围、顶臀长均值,并制定了其10th、25th、50th、75th、90th百分位曲线。经产足月儿上述5项指标的百分位曲线的形态和增长趋势与初产足月儿一致,但37~41周各胎龄经产足月儿上述5项指标的均值及百分位曲线值均高于初产足月儿。除胎龄41周组初产与经产组顶臀长比较差异无统计学意义外,其余各胎龄组5项指标均值比较差异均有统计学意义(P < 0.05)。结论 胎龄37~41周经产足月儿各胎龄体重、身长、头围、胸围、顶臀长5项指标宫内生长水平均高于初产足月儿,提示分娩产次是宫内生长潜力重要的影响因素。

Abstract

Objective To establish the intrauterine growth percentile curves of full-term neonates with different gestational ages (GAs) born to primiparous or multiparous women, and to investigate the influence of parity on intrauterine growth potential. Methods Cross-sectional cluster sampling was performed from April 2013 to September 2015 to measure physical growth in full-term singleton infants with a GA of 37-41 weeks in two hospitals in Shenzhen, China. The Lambda-Mu-Sigma method was used for curve fitting. Results The mean values of birth weight, body length, head circumference, chest circumference, and crown-rump length were obtained in 14 529 full-term infants. The 10th, 25th, 50th, 75th, and 90th percentile curves of the five indices were established. The full-term infants born to multiparous women had similar patterns and growth trends of the five percentile curves of the above five indices to those born to primiparous women, while the full-term infants with a GA of 37-41 weeks born to multiparous women had higher mean values and percentile curve values of the above five indices than those born to primiparous women. In the group with a GA of 41 weeks, there was no significant difference in the crown-rump length between the infants born to primiparous women and those born to multiparous women, but there were significant differences in the means of the above five indices in all the other GA groups between the two group infants (P < 0.05). Conclusions Full-term infants with a GA of 37-41 weeks born to multiparous women have higher intrauterine growth levels of birth weight, body length, head circumference, chest circumference, and crown-rump length than those born to primiparous women, suggesting that parity is an important influencing factor for intrauterine growth potential.

关键词

宫内生长曲线 / 产次 / 初产足月儿 / 经产足月儿

Key words

Intrauterine growth curve / Parity / Full-term infant born to primiparous women / Full-term infant born to multiparous women

引用本文

导出引用
黄小云, 刘惠龙, 雷敏, 连朝辉, 麦慧芬. 初产足月儿与经产足月儿宫内生长水平差异的研究[J]. 中国当代儿科杂志. 2018, 20(3): 184-188 https://doi.org/10.7499/j.issn.1008-8830.2018.03.004
HUANG Xiao-Yun, LIU Hui-Long, LEI Min, LIAN Chao-Hui, MAI Hui-Fen. Differences in intrauterine growth levels between full-term neonates born to primiparous or multiparous women[J]. Chinese Journal of Contemporary Pediatrics. 2018, 20(3): 184-188 https://doi.org/10.7499/j.issn.1008-8830.2018.03.004

参考文献

[1] Aryal DR, Gurung R, Misra S, et al. Intrauterine growth curves for singleton live babies in Paropakar Maternity and Women's Hospital in Nepal[J]. J Nepal Health Res Counc, 2012, 10(21):160-166.
[2] Olsen IE, Groveman SA, Lawson ML, et al. New intrauterine growth curves based on United States data[J]. Pediatrics, 2010, 125(2):e214-e224.
[3] Kandraju H, Agrawal S, Geetha K, et al. Gestational age-specific centile charts for anthropometry at birth for South Indian infants[J]. Indian Pediatr, 2012, 49(3):199-202.
[4] Kurtoglu S, Hatipoglu N, Mazicioglu MM, et al. Body weight, length and head circumference at birth in a cohort of Turkish newborns[J]. J Clin Res Pediatr Endocrinol, 2012, 4(3):132-139.
[5] 朱丽, 张蓉, 张淑莲, 等. 中国不同胎龄新生儿出生体重曲线研究[J].中华儿科杂志, 2015, 53(2):97-103.
[6] Overpeck MD, Hediger ML, Zhang J. Birth weight for gestational age of Mexican American infants born in the United States[J]. Obstet Gynecol, 1999, 93(6):943-947.
[7] Al-Shehri MA, Abolfotouh MA, Nwoye LO, et al. Construction of intrauterine growth curves in a high altitude area of Saudi Arabia[J]. Saudi Med J, 2005, 26(11):1723-1727.
[8] Thomas P, Peabody J, Turnier V, et al. A new look at intrauterine growth and the impact of race, altitude, and gender[J]. Pediatrics, 2000, 106(2):E21.
[9] Kryst L. Intergenerational changes in birth parameters in Kraków (Poland) in the context of socio-economic transformation from 1985-2010[J]. Ann Hum Biol, 2014, 41(1):40-45.
[10] 深圳市统计局. 深圳统计学年鉴-2016[M]. 北京:中国统计出版社, 2016(第26期):53-55.
[11] 黄小云, 刘惠龙, 雷敏, 等. 深圳16887例胎龄27~42周新生儿宫内生长体重、身长、头围、胸围、顶臀长曲线[J]. 中国当代儿科杂志, 2017, 19(8):877-886.
[12] Cole TJ, Green PJ. Smoothing reference centile curves:the LMS method and penalized likelihood[J]. Stat Med, 1992, 11(10):1305-1319.
[13] 刘惠龙, 黄小云. 2005年深圳初生儿体格发育均值与产次的关系研究[J]. 中国妇幼保健, 2007, 22(17):2411-2413.

基金

深圳市宝安区科技创新局科技项目(2013057)。


PDF(922 KB)
HTML

Accesses

Citation

Detail

段落导航
相关文章

/