María de la Paz Barboza-Argüello, Adriana Benavides-Lara
{"title":"1996-2021 年哥斯达黎加的口腔颌面裂：监测数据分析。","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":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.6000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"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\":null,\"pages\":null},\"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}","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}
Orofacial clefts in Costa Rica, 1996–2021: Analysis of surveillance data
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.
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.
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：
京公网安备 11010802042870号
