Archives of Disease in Childhood - Fetal and Neonatal Edition 2008;93:F212-F216
ORIGINAL ARTICLES
Geographically based investigation of the influence of very-preterm births on routine mortality statistics from the UK and Australia
1 Department of Health Sciences, University of Leicester, Leicester, UK
2 NSW Centre for Perinatal Health Services Research, NSW Pregnancy and Newborn Services Network, University of Sydney, Australia
3 Department of Neonatology, Westmead Hospital, Wentworthville, New South Wales, Australia
Correspondence to:
Professor D J Field, Neonatal Unit, Leicester Royal Infirmary, Infirmary Square, Leicester LE1 5WW, UK; david.field{at}uhl-tr.nhs.uk
Background: Comparisons of national perinatal and neonatal mortality often neglect the underlying causes.
Objective: To assess effects of very-preterm births in the UK and Australia.
Setting: Two geographically defined populations: the former Trent Health Region of the UK and New South Wales (NSW)/the Australian Capital Territory (ACT), Australia.
Method: All births 22+0 to 31+6 weeks in 2000, 2001 and 2002 were identified by established surveys of perinatal care. Rates of birth and death were compared.
Results: The population of NSW/ACT was 35% higher and there were 66% more births than in Trent (273 495 vs 164 824). The proportion of liveborn infants between 22 and 31 weeks gestation was about 25% higher in Trent (NSW/ACT 2945, rate per 1000 live births 10.82 (95% CI 10.43 to 11.22); Trent 2208, rate per 1000 live births 13.47 (95% CI 12.92 to 14.05)). The proportion of these infants admitted to a neonatal unit was also higher in Trent (91.2% vs 94.4%; OR 1.63 (95% CI 1.30 to 2.05)). Unadjusted mortality in infants admitted to a neonatal unit was similar: NSW/ACT 332/2686 (12.4%); Trent 284/2085 (13.6%); unadjusted OR 1.12 (95% CI 0.94 to 1.33; p = 0.21).
Conclusions: The higher rates of very premature birth and more ready admission to neonatal intensive care for infants in the UK may help to explain why perinatal and neonatal mortality are higher there than in Australia. Efforts to understand why the rate of premature birth in the UK is so high should be a national priority.
CiteULike 
Complore 
Connotea 
Del.icio.us 
Digg 
Reddit 
Technorati What's this?
Relevant Article
- Fantoms
- Ben Stenson
Arch. Dis. Child. Fetal Neonatal Ed. 2008 93: F173.[Extract] [Full Text] [PDF]
- Full Text
- Full Text (PDF)
-
All Versions of this Article:
adc.2007.119271v1
93/3/F212 most recent - Submit a response
- Alert me when this article is cited
- Alert me when eLetters are posted
- Alert me if a correction is posted
- Citation Map
Services
- Email this link to a friend
- Similar articles in ADC Online
- Similar articles in PubMed
- Add article to my folders
- Download to citation manager
- Request Permissions
Citing Articles
Google Scholar
PubMed
Topic Collections
-
Epidemiologic studies
-
Child health
-
Neonatal and paediatric intensive care
-
Neonatal health
- Neonatal intensive care
- Relevant Article
Bookmark with
Register for free content
The full back archive is now available for all BMJ Journals. Institutional subscribers may access the entire archive as part of their subscription. Personal subscribers will also have access to all content when logged in. Non-subscribers who register have free access to all articles published before 2006 right back to volume 1 issue 1. Register here to access the free archive of all BMJ Journals.
Don't forget to sign up for content alerts so you keep up to date with all the articles as they are published.
