Point of care ultrasound screening, performed by midwives, outperforms standard selective screening for hip dysplasia. A diagnostic accuracy study

IF 2.6 3区 医学 Q1 NURSING
Hans-Christen Husum , Rikke Damkjær Maimburg , Michel Bach Hellfritzsch , Bjarne Møller-Madsen , Mads Henriksen , Natallia Lapitskaya , Søren Kold , Ole Rahbek
{"title":"Point of care ultrasound screening, performed by midwives, outperforms standard selective screening for hip dysplasia. A diagnostic accuracy study","authors":"Hans-Christen Husum ,&nbsp;Rikke Damkjær Maimburg ,&nbsp;Michel Bach Hellfritzsch ,&nbsp;Bjarne Møller-Madsen ,&nbsp;Mads Henriksen ,&nbsp;Natallia Lapitskaya ,&nbsp;Søren Kold ,&nbsp;Ole Rahbek","doi":"10.1016/j.midw.2025.104459","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Background and purpose</h3><div>To investigate the accuracy of pubo-femoral distance (PFD) ultrasound (US) performed by midwives as a referral criterion for diagnostic Graf hip US, compared to standard screening for developmental dysplasia of the hip (DDH) in newborns.</div></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><div>PFD US screening was performed along standard screening for DDH in a prospective cohort. The accuracy of PFD US was compared to the standard referral criteria for diagnostic hip US in terms of sensitivity, specificity and positive predictive value in detecting abnormal hips, as well as proportion of abnormal hips found and referral rates.</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>We included 2735 newborns of which 488 received a diagnostic hip US. Mean age at diagnostic US was 35.5 days (±12.8). 317 newborns (11.7 %) were referred by Danish standard screening criteria and 206 newborns (7.6 %) were referred by the PFD criterion.</div><div>Sensitivities/specificities for detecting ≥Graf type IIc hips were: 50 %/68 % for risk factors, 30 %/94 % for clinical examination, 60 %/62 % for risk factors + clinical examination, and 80 %/89 % for PFD US using a cut-off of 6.2 mm. Difference in sensitivity between PFD and standard screening criteria did not reach statistical significance, but specificity and PPV did.</div><div>The number of detected ≥ Graf type IIc hips were 6 and 9 for standard screening and PFD screening respectively.</div></div><div><h3>Interpretation</h3><div>Early point-of-care PFD US screening for DDH has significantly higher accuracy in classifying abnormal hips, when compared to standard screening. PFD US increases the detection rate of dysplastic hips (≥ Graf IIc) by 60 % while reducing referral rates.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":18495,"journal":{"name":"Midwifery","volume":"147 ","pages":"Article 104459"},"PeriodicalIF":2.6000,"publicationDate":"2025-05-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Midwifery","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0266613825001779","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"NURSING","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background and purpose

To investigate the accuracy of pubo-femoral distance (PFD) ultrasound (US) performed by midwives as a referral criterion for diagnostic Graf hip US, compared to standard screening for developmental dysplasia of the hip (DDH) in newborns.

Methods

PFD US screening was performed along standard screening for DDH in a prospective cohort. The accuracy of PFD US was compared to the standard referral criteria for diagnostic hip US in terms of sensitivity, specificity and positive predictive value in detecting abnormal hips, as well as proportion of abnormal hips found and referral rates.

Results

We included 2735 newborns of which 488 received a diagnostic hip US. Mean age at diagnostic US was 35.5 days (±12.8). 317 newborns (11.7 %) were referred by Danish standard screening criteria and 206 newborns (7.6 %) were referred by the PFD criterion.
Sensitivities/specificities for detecting ≥Graf type IIc hips were: 50 %/68 % for risk factors, 30 %/94 % for clinical examination, 60 %/62 % for risk factors + clinical examination, and 80 %/89 % for PFD US using a cut-off of 6.2 mm. Difference in sensitivity between PFD and standard screening criteria did not reach statistical significance, but specificity and PPV did.
The number of detected ≥ Graf type IIc hips were 6 and 9 for standard screening and PFD screening respectively.

Interpretation

Early point-of-care PFD US screening for DDH has significantly higher accuracy in classifying abnormal hips, when compared to standard screening. PFD US increases the detection rate of dysplastic hips (≥ Graf IIc) by 60 % while reducing referral rates.
由助产士执行的护理点超声筛查优于髋关节发育不良的标准选择性筛查。诊断准确性研究
背景与目的探讨助产士进行的耻骨-股骨距离超声(PFD)作为诊断Graf - hip US的转诊标准的准确性,并与新生儿髋关节发育不良(DDH)的标准筛查进行比较。方法在前瞻性队列中,spfd US筛查与DDH标准筛查同时进行。比较PFD超声与诊断髋关节超声的标准转诊标准在检测异常髋关节的敏感性、特异性、阳性预测值、发现异常髋关节的比例和转诊率等方面的准确性。结果纳入2735例新生儿,其中488例接受诊断性髋关节超声检查。诊断时的平均年龄为35.5天(±12.8)。317例新生儿(11.7%)符合丹麦标准筛查标准,206例新生儿(7.6%)符合PFD标准。检测≥Graf型IIc髋关节的敏感性/特异性为:危险因素为50% / 68%,临床检查为30% / 94%,危险因素+临床检查为60% / 62%,PFD US为80% / 89%(截止范围为6.2 mm)。PFD与标准筛选标准的敏感性差异无统计学意义,但特异性与PPV差异有统计学意义。标准筛查和PFD筛查检出≥Graf型IIc髋关节分别为6例和9例。解释:与标准筛查相比,早期护理点PFD US筛查DDH在分类异常髋关节方面具有显着更高的准确性。PFD US使髋关节发育不良(≥Graf IIc)的检出率提高了60%,同时降低了转诊率。
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
Midwifery
Midwifery 医学-护理
CiteScore
4.50
自引率
7.40%
发文量
221
审稿时长
13.4 weeks
期刊介绍: Midwifery publishes the latest peer reviewed international research to inform the safety, quality, outcomes and experiences of pregnancy, birth and maternity care for childbearing women, their babies and families. The journal’s publications support midwives and maternity care providers to explore and develop their knowledge, skills and attitudes informed by best available evidence. Midwifery provides an international, interdisciplinary forum for the publication, dissemination and discussion of advances in evidence, controversies and current research, and promotes continuing education through publication of systematic and other scholarly reviews and updates. Midwifery articles cover the cultural, clinical, psycho-social, sociological, epidemiological, education, managerial, workforce, organizational and technological areas of practice in preconception, maternal and infant care. The journal welcomes the highest quality scholarly research that employs rigorous methodology. Midwifery is a leading international journal in midwifery and maternal health with a current impact factor of 1.861 (© Thomson Reuters Journal Citation Reports 2016) and employs a double-blind peer review process.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信