24 research outputs found

    Gender differences in respiratory symptoms in 19-year-old adults born preterm

    Get PDF
    Objective: To study the prevalence of respiratory and atopic symptoms in (young) adults born prematurely, differences between those who did and did not develop Bronchopulmonary Disease (BPD) at neonatal age and differences in respiratory health between males and females. Methods: Design: Prospective cohort study. Setting: Nation wide follow-up study, the Netherlands. Participants: 690 adults (19 year old) born with a gestational age below 32 completed weeks and/or with a birth weight less than 1500g. Controls were Dutch participants of the European Community Respiratory Health Survey (ECRHS). Main outcome measures: Presence of wheeze, shortness of breath, asthma, hay fever and eczema using the ECRHS-questionnaire

    Development and evaluation of a follow up assessment of preterm infants at 5 years of age

    Get PDF
    Background: Long term follow up shows a high frequency of developmental disturbances in preterm survivors of neonatal intensive care formerly considered non-disabled. Aims: To develop and validate an assessment tool that can help paediatricians to identify before 6 years of age which survivors have developmental disturbances that may interfere with normal education and normal life. Methods: A total of 431 very premature infants, mean gestational age 30.2 weeks, mean birth weight 1276 g, were studied at age 5 years. Children with severe handicaps were excluded. The percentage of children with a correctly identified developmental disturbance in the domains cognition, speech and language development, neuromotor development, and behaviour were determined. Results: The follow up instrument classified 67% as optimal and 33% as at risk or abnormal. Of the children classified as at risk or abnormal, 60% had not been identified at earlier follow up assessments. The combined set of standardised tests identified a further 30% with mild motor, cognitive, or behavioural disturbances. The paediatrician's assessment had a specificity of 88% (95% CI 83–93%), a sensitivity of 48% (95% CI 42–58%), a positive predictive value of 85% (95% CI 78–91%), and a negative predictive value of 55% (95% CI 49–61%). Conclusions: Even after standardised and thorough assessment, paediatricians may overlook impairments for cognitive, motor, and behavioural development. Long term follow up studies that do not include detailed standardised tests for multiple domains, especially fine motor domain, may underestimate developmental problems
    corecore