A Modified Algorithm for Critical Congenital Heart Disease Screening Using Pulse Oximetry

被引:37
|
作者
Diller, Christina L. [1 ,2 ]
Kelleman, Michael S. [1 ]
Kupke, Kenneth G. [3 ]
Quary, Sharon C. [3 ]
Kochilas, Lazaros K. [1 ,2 ]
Oster, Matthew E. [1 ,2 ]
机构
[1] Emory Univ, Sch Med, Dept Pediat, Atlanta, GA USA
[2] Childrens Healthcare Atlanta, Atlanta, GA USA
[3] Northside Hosp, Atlanta, GA USA
基金
美国国家卫生研究院;
关键词
QUALITY IMPROVEMENT; DEFECTS; IMPLEMENTATION; MINNESOTA; NEWBORNS; INFANTS; GEORGIA; DEATHS;
D O I
10.1542/peds.2017-4065
中图分类号
R72 [儿科学];
学科分类号
100202 ;
摘要
OBJECTIVES: Determine the performance of the American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP) critical congenital heart disease (CCHD) newborn screening algorithm and the impact of an alternative algorithm. METHODS: Screening was performed on term infants without a known CCHD diagnosis at or near 24 hours of age at a tertiary birth hospital by using the AAP algorithm from 2013 to 2016. Retrospective review from the birth hospital and the area's sole pediatric cardiac center identified true-and false-positives and true-and false-negatives. A simulation study modeled the results of a modified screening algorithm with a single repeat pulse oximetry test instead of 2. RESULTS: Screening results were collected on 77 148 newborns. By using the current AAP algorithm, 77 114 (99.96%) infants passed screening, 18 infants failed for an initial saturation of < 90%, and 16 failed after not attaining a passing pulse oximetry level after 3 tests. There was 1 true-positive (total anomalous pulmonary venous return), 33 false-positives, and 6 false-negatives, yielding an overall specificity of 99.96%, a sensitivity of 14.3%, and a false-positive rate of 0.043%. Among false-positives, 10 (31.3%) had significant non-CCHD disease. Simulating the modified algorithm, sensitivity remained at 14.3%, and the false-positive rate increased to 0.054%. CONCLUSIONS: Although CCHD screening in a tertiary care birth hospital may not detect many new cases of CCHD, it can detect other important diseases in newborns. Modifying the screening algorithm to 1 repeat pulse oximetry test instead of 2 may detect additional infants with significant disease without a substantial increase in the false-positive rate.
引用
收藏
页数:7
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [41] Pulse Oximetry Screening for Critical Congenital Heart Defects in Newborns
    Barreto, Tyler
    AMERICAN FAMILY PHYSICIAN, 2019, 99 (07) : 421 - 422
  • [42] Pulse oximetry screening for critical congenital heart defects Reply
    Thangaratinam, S.
    Khan, K. S.
    Ewer, A. K.
    LANCET, 2012, 380 (9850): : 1306 - 1306
  • [43] Newborn pulse oximetry screening for critical congenital heart defects
    Sophie Jullien
    BMC Pediatrics, 21
  • [45] Commentary on "Pulse Oximetry Screening for Critical Congenital Heart Defects"
    Oddie, Sam
    McGuire, William
    NEONATOLOGY, 2020, 117 (01) : 4 - 7
  • [46] Screening For Critical Congenital Heart Disease Using Pulse-Oximetry, The First Egyptian Multicentre Study
    Eltahlawi, Mohammad
    Elghamrawy, Alaa
    Elsayed, Maiy Hamdy
    Hafez, Mona
    Elmesiry, Asmaa
    Bayomy, Mohamed
    Adel, Hani
    Elfayoumy, Mahmoud
    Hafez, Sahbaa
    Morsy, Said
    Elhady, Mahmoud
    Nashy, Baher
    Abo Elela, Mohamed
    CARDIOLOGY IN THE YOUNG, 2025,
  • [47] Screening for Critical Congenital Heart Disease in Newborns Using Pulse Oximetry Evaluation of Nurses' Knowledge and Adherence
    Ryan, Donna J.
    Mikula, Elizabeth Bradshaw
    Germana, Sarah
    Silva, Susan G.
    Derouin, Anne
    ADVANCES IN NEONATAL CARE, 2014, 14 (02) : 119 - 128
  • [48] Pulse oximetry screening for critical congenital heart disease in neonatal intensive care units
    G K Suresh
    Journal of Perinatology, 2013, 33 : 586 - 588
  • [49] 336 Pulse Oximetry Screening for Detection of Critical Congenital Heart Disease in the United Kingdom
    A Shastri
    R Roy
    P Clarke
    Pediatric Research, 2010, 68 : 173 - 173
  • [50] Pulse oximetry screening for critical congenital heart disease in the neonatal intensive care unit
    Goetz E.M.
    Magnuson K.M.
    Eickhoff J.C.
    Porte M.A.
    Hokanson J.S.
    Journal of Perinatology, 2016, 36 (1) : 52 - 56