3.8 Article

Prevalence of Congenital Anomalies in Neonates and Associated Risk Factors in a Tertiary Care Hospital in Eastern India

期刊

JOURNAL OF CLINICAL NEONATOLOGY
卷 2, 期 3, 页码 131-134

出版社

WOLTERS KLUWER MEDKNOW PUBLICATIONS
DOI: 10.4103/2249-4847.119998

关键词

Congenital anomaly; prematurity; prevalence; risk factors; types

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background: Congenital anomalies are a major cause of stillbirths and neonatal mortality. The pattern and prevalence of congenital anomalies may vary over time or with geographical location. Aims and Objectives: The aim of this study is to determine the proportion and types of congenital anomalies in live newborns and to study maternal and perinatal risk factors. Materials and Methods: This cross-sectional descriptive study was carried out in the neonatal care unit of R. G. Kar Medical College and Hospital during the period of September 2011 to August 2012. All the live born babies born in this hospital during this period were included. The newborns were examined for the presence of congenital anomalies and mothers were interviewed for socio-demographic variables. Results: During the study period, 12,896 babies were born, of which 286 had congenital malformations, making the prevalence 2.22%. Most of the women (55.7%) belonged to the age group between 21 and 30 years. Congenital anomalies were seen more commonly (3.3%) in the multiparas in comparison with primiparas (1.8%). The predominant system involved was Musculo-skeletal system (33.2%) followed by gastro-intestinal (GI) system (15%). Talipes (17.1%) was the most common one in musculoskeletal group and likewise cleft lip and cleft palate in GI system. Congenital anomalies were more likely to be associated with low birth weight, prematurity, multiparity, consanguinity and cesarean delivery. Conclusion: Public awareness about preventable risk factors is to be created and early prenatal diagnosis and management of common anomalies is strongly recommended.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

3.8
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据