Orofacial clefts in Costa Rica, 1996–2021: Analysis of surveillance data

IF 1.6 4区医学 Q4 DEVELOPMENTAL BIOLOGY

Birth Defects Research Pub Date : 2024-08-02 DOI:10.1002/bdr2.2387

María de la Paz Barboza-Argüello, Adriana Benavides-Lara

{"title":"Orofacial clefts in Costa Rica, 1996–2021: Analysis of surveillance data","authors":"María de la Paz Barboza-Argüello, Adriana Benavides-Lara","doi":"10.1002/bdr2.2387","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div>\n \n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Background</h3>\n \n <p>Orofacial clefts (OFCs) are among the most common birth defects (BD). In 2008, a series of improvements began in the Costa Rican Birth Defect Register Center (CREC). We aim to explore trends between 1996 and 2021.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Methods</h3>\n \n <p>A trend analysis of OFCs from 1996 to 2021 and a descriptive analysis of OFCs from 2010 to 2021 were performed based on data from the CREC, the national BD surveillance system. Prevalence at birth was calculated according to the type: cleft palate (CP), cleft lip with or without CP (CL ± P), and presentation (isolated, multiple non-syndromic, or syndromes). We used joinpoint regression to identify if a significant change in trend occurred; the average annual percent change (AAPC) was determined. Marginal means and prevalence ratios by subperiod (1996–2009 as referent and 2010–2021) were estimated using Poisson regression and compared using Wald's chi-square tests (<i>α</i> ≤.05).</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Results</h3>\n \n <p>We found a significant AAPC for OFCs prevalence of +1.4: +0.6 for isolated, +2.9 for multiple non-syndromic, and +7.7 for syndromes (<i>p</i> < .05). When comparing the OFC's prevalence of the subperiod 2010–2021 (11.86 per 10,000) with 1996–2009 (9.36 per 10,000) the prevalence ratio was 1.3 (<i>p</i> < .01): 1.1 (<i>p</i> < .05) for isolated, 1.6 (<i>p</i> < .01) for multiple non-syndromic, and 3.3 (<i>p</i> < .01) for syndromes. The prevalence of OFCs from 2010 to 2021 was 9.1 for CL ± P and 2.8 for CP. Seventy-one percent of the OFCs were isolated, 22% multiple non-syndromic, and 7% syndromes.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Conclusion</h3>\n \n <p>The trend in OFCs' prevalence is toward increasing, mainly due to improvements in the surveillance system.</p>\n </section>\n </div>","PeriodicalId":9121,"journal":{"name":"Birth Defects Research","volume":"116 8","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.6000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Birth Defects Research","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/bdr2.2387","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"DEVELOPMENTAL BIOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background

Orofacial clefts (OFCs) are among the most common birth defects (BD). In 2008, a series of improvements began in the Costa Rican Birth Defect Register Center (CREC). We aim to explore trends between 1996 and 2021.

Methods

A trend analysis of OFCs from 1996 to 2021 and a descriptive analysis of OFCs from 2010 to 2021 were performed based on data from the CREC, the national BD surveillance system. Prevalence at birth was calculated according to the type: cleft palate (CP), cleft lip with or without CP (CL ± P), and presentation (isolated, multiple non-syndromic, or syndromes). We used joinpoint regression to identify if a significant change in trend occurred; the average annual percent change (AAPC) was determined. Marginal means and prevalence ratios by subperiod (1996–2009 as referent and 2010–2021) were estimated using Poisson regression and compared using Wald's chi-square tests (α ≤.05).

Results

We found a significant AAPC for OFCs prevalence of +1.4: +0.6 for isolated, +2.9 for multiple non-syndromic, and +7.7 for syndromes (p < .05). When comparing the OFC's prevalence of the subperiod 2010–2021 (11.86 per 10,000) with 1996–2009 (9.36 per 10,000) the prevalence ratio was 1.3 (p < .01): 1.1 (p < .05) for isolated, 1.6 (p < .01) for multiple non-syndromic, and 3.3 (p < .01) for syndromes. The prevalence of OFCs from 2010 to 2021 was 9.1 for CL ± P and 2.8 for CP. Seventy-one percent of the OFCs were isolated, 22% multiple non-syndromic, and 7% syndromes.

Conclusion

The trend in OFCs' prevalence is toward increasing, mainly due to improvements in the surveillance system.

查看原文本刊更多论文

1996-2021 年哥斯达黎加的口腔颌面裂：监测数据分析。

背景：口面裂（OFCs）是最常见的出生缺陷（BD）之一。2008 年，哥斯达黎加出生缺陷登记中心（CREC）开始进行一系列改进。我们旨在探讨 1996 年至 2021 年间的趋势：方法：根据国家 BD 监测系统 CREC 的数据，对 1996 年至 2021 年的 OFCs 进行了趋势分析，并对 2010 年至 2021 年的 OFCs 进行了描述性分析。出生时的患病率按以下类型计算：腭裂（CP）、唇裂伴或不伴CP（CL±P），以及表现形式（孤立、多发性非综合征或综合征）。我们使用连接点回归法来确定趋势是否发生了显著变化；确定了年均百分比变化 (AAPC)。我们使用泊松回归法估算了各子期（1996-2009 年为参照期，2010-2021 年为参照期）的边际均值和流行率，并使用沃尔德卡方检验（α ≤.05）进行了比较：结果：我们发现 AAPC 对 OFCs 患病率的显着影响为：+1.4：孤立型+0.6，多发性非综合征+2.9，综合征+7.7（p 结论：OFCs 的发病率呈明显的 AAPC+1.4：孤立型+0.6，多发性非综合征+2.9，综合征+7.7：OFC 发病率呈上升趋势，这主要归功于监测系统的改进。

本文章由计算机程序翻译，如有差异，请以英文原文为准。

求助全文

约1分钟内获得全文求助全文

来源期刊

Birth Defects Research Medicine-Embryology

CiteScore

3.60

自引率

9.50%

发文量

153

期刊介绍： The journal Birth Defects Research publishes original research and reviews in areas related to the etiology of adverse developmental and reproductive outcome. In particular the journal is devoted to the publication of original scientific research that contributes to the understanding of the biology of embryonic development and the prenatal causative factors and mechanisms leading to adverse pregnancy outcomes, namely structural and functional birth defects, pregnancy loss, postnatal functional defects in the human population, and to the identification of prenatal factors and biological mechanisms that reduce these risks. Adverse reproductive and developmental outcomes may have genetic, environmental, nutritional or epigenetic causes. Accordingly, the journal Birth Defects Research takes an integrated, multidisciplinary approach in its organization and publication strategy. The journal Birth Defects Research contains separate sections for clinical and molecular teratology, developmental and reproductive toxicology, and reviews in developmental biology to acknowledge and accommodate the integrative nature of research in this field. Each section has a dedicated editor who is a leader in his/her field and who has full editorial authority in his/her area.