Skip to main content
Top
Published in: BMC Pediatrics 1/2015

Open Access 01-12-2015 | Research article

Neonatal assessment in the delivery room – Trial to Evaluate a Specified Type of Apgar (TEST-Apgar)

Authors: Mario Rüdiger, Nicole Braun, Jacob Aranda, Marta Aguar, Renate Bergert, Alica Bystricka, Gabriel Dimitriou, Khaled El-Atawi, Sascha Ifflaender, Philipp Jung, Katarina Matasova, Violeta Ojinaga, Zita Petruskeviciene, Claudia Roll, Jens Schwindt, Burkhard Simma, Nanette Staal, Gloria Valencia, Maria Gabriela Vasconcellos, Maie Veinla, Máximo Vento, Benedikt Weber, Anke Wendt, Sule Yigit, Heinz Zotter, Helmut Küster, The TEST-Apgar study-group

Published in: BMC Pediatrics | Issue 1/2015

Login to get access

Abstract

Background

Since an objective description is essential to determine infant’s postnatal condition and efficacy of interventions, two scores were suggested in the past but weren’t tested yet: The Specified-Apgar uses the 5 items of the conventional Apgar score; however describes the condition regardless of gestational age (GA) or resuscitative interventions. The Expanded-Apgar measures interventions needed to achieve this condition. We hypothesized that the combination of both (Combined-Apgar) describes postnatal condition of preterm infants better than either of the scores alone.

Methods

Scores were assessed in preterm infants below 32 completed weeks of gestation. Data were prospectively collected in 20 NICU in 12 countries. Prediction of poor outcome (death, severe/moderate BPD, IVH, CPL and ROP) was used as a surrogate parameter to compare the scores. To compare predictive value the AUC for the ROC was calculated.

Results

Of 2150 eligible newborns, data on 1855 infants with a mean GA of 286/7 ± 23/7 weeks were analyzed. At 1 minute, the Combined-Apgar was significantly better in predicting poor outcome than the Specified- or Expanded-Apgar alone. Of infants with a very low score at 5 or 10 minutes 81% or 100% had a poor outcome, respectively. In these infants the relative risk (RR) for perinatal mortality was 24.93 (13.16-47.20) and 31.34 (15.91-61.71), respectively.

Conclusion

The Combined-Apgar allows a more appropriate description of infant’s condition under conditions of modern neonatal care. It should be used as a tool for better comparison of group of infants and postnatal interventions.

Trial registration

clinicaltrials.gov Protocol Registration System (NCT00623038). Registered 14 February 2008.
Appendix
Available only for authorised users
Literature
1.
go back to reference Apgar V. A proposal for a new method of evaluation of the newborn infant. Curr Res Anaesth Anal. 1953;32:260–7. Apgar V. A proposal for a new method of evaluation of the newborn infant. Curr Res Anaesth Anal. 1953;32:260–7.
2.
go back to reference Rüdiger M, Küster H, Herting E, Berger A, Müller C, Urlesberger B, et al. Variations of Apgar Score of very low birth weight infants in different neonatal intensive care units. Acta Paediatr. 2009;98(8):1433–6.CrossRefPubMed Rüdiger M, Küster H, Herting E, Berger A, Müller C, Urlesberger B, et al. Variations of Apgar Score of very low birth weight infants in different neonatal intensive care units. Acta Paediatr. 2009;98(8):1433–6.CrossRefPubMed
3.
go back to reference Lopriore E, von Burk F, Walther FJ, de Beaufort AJ. Correct use of the Apgar score for resuscitated and intubated newborn babies: questionnaire study. Br Med J. 2004;329(143):144. Lopriore E, von Burk F, Walther FJ, de Beaufort AJ. Correct use of the Apgar score for resuscitated and intubated newborn babies: questionnaire study. Br Med J. 2004;329(143):144.
4.
go back to reference O’Donnell CPF, Kamlin COF, Davis PG, Carlin JB, Morley CJ. Interobserver variability of the 5 minute apgar score. J Pediatr. 2006;149:486–9.CrossRefPubMed O’Donnell CPF, Kamlin COF, Davis PG, Carlin JB, Morley CJ. Interobserver variability of the 5 minute apgar score. J Pediatr. 2006;149:486–9.CrossRefPubMed
5.
go back to reference Rüdiger M, Wauer RR, Schmidt K, Küster H. The Apgar Score [Letter to the Editor]. Pediatrics. 2006;118(3):1314–5.CrossRefPubMed Rüdiger M, Wauer RR, Schmidt K, Küster H. The Apgar Score [Letter to the Editor]. Pediatrics. 2006;118(3):1314–5.CrossRefPubMed
6.
go back to reference American Academy of Pediatrics. Committee on Fetus and Newborn, American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists, Committee on Obstetric Practice: The Apgar Score. Pediatrics. 2006;117:1444–7.CrossRef American Academy of Pediatrics. Committee on Fetus and Newborn, American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists, Committee on Obstetric Practice: The Apgar Score. Pediatrics. 2006;117:1444–7.CrossRef
7.
8.
go back to reference DeLong R, DeLong D, Clarke-Pearson D. Comparing the areas under two or more correlated receiver operating characteristics curves: A nonparametric approach. Biometrics. 1988;44:837–45.CrossRefPubMed DeLong R, DeLong D, Clarke-Pearson D. Comparing the areas under two or more correlated receiver operating characteristics curves: A nonparametric approach. Biometrics. 1988;44:837–45.CrossRefPubMed
9.
go back to reference Apgar V, James LS. Further observations on the newborn scoring system. Am J Dis Child. 1962;104:419–28.PubMed Apgar V, James LS. Further observations on the newborn scoring system. Am J Dis Child. 1962;104:419–28.PubMed
11.
go back to reference Runge M. Die Krankheiten der ersten Lebenstage. zweite, umgearbeitete und vermehrte Auflage. 1893. Suttgart, Verlag von Ferdinand Enke. Runge M. Die Krankheiten der ersten Lebenstage. zweite, umgearbeitete und vermehrte Auflage. 1893. Suttgart, Verlag von Ferdinand Enke.
12.
go back to reference Soranus E. Gynecology. Translated by O. Temkin. Baltimore: The John Hopkins Press; 1956. Soranus E. Gynecology. Translated by O. Temkin. Baltimore: The John Hopkins Press; 1956.
13.
go back to reference Bharti B, Bharti S. A review of the Apgar score indicated that contextualization was required within the contemporary perinatal and neonatal care framework in different settings. J Clin Epidemiol. 2005;58:121–9.CrossRefPubMed Bharti B, Bharti S. A review of the Apgar score indicated that contextualization was required within the contemporary perinatal and neonatal care framework in different settings. J Clin Epidemiol. 2005;58:121–9.CrossRefPubMed
14.
go back to reference American Academy of Pediatrics. Use and abuse of the Apgar Score. Pediatrics. 1986;78(6):1148–9. American Academy of Pediatrics. Use and abuse of the Apgar Score. Pediatrics. 1986;78(6):1148–9.
15.
go back to reference Pinheiro JMB. The Apgar cycle: a new view of a familiar scoring system. Arch Dis Child Fetal Neonatal Ed. 2009;94:F70–2.CrossRefPubMed Pinheiro JMB. The Apgar cycle: a new view of a familiar scoring system. Arch Dis Child Fetal Neonatal Ed. 2009;94:F70–2.CrossRefPubMed
16.
go back to reference Crawford JS, Davies P, Pearson JF. Significance of the individual components of the Apgar score. Br J Anaesth. 1973;45:148–58.CrossRefPubMed Crawford JS, Davies P, Pearson JF. Significance of the individual components of the Apgar score. Br J Anaesth. 1973;45:148–58.CrossRefPubMed
17.
go back to reference O’Donnell CPF, Kamlin COF, Davis PG, Carlin JB, Morley CJ. Clinical assessment of infant colour at delivery. Arch Dis Child Fetal Neonatal Ed. 2007;92:465–7.CrossRef O’Donnell CPF, Kamlin COF, Davis PG, Carlin JB, Morley CJ. Clinical assessment of infant colour at delivery. Arch Dis Child Fetal Neonatal Ed. 2007;92:465–7.CrossRef
18.
go back to reference Casey BM, McIntire DD, Leveno KJ. The continuing value of the apgar score for the assessment of newborn infants. N Engl J Med. 2001;344(7):467–71.CrossRefPubMed Casey BM, McIntire DD, Leveno KJ. The continuing value of the apgar score for the assessment of newborn infants. N Engl J Med. 2001;344(7):467–71.CrossRefPubMed
19.
go back to reference Schmidt B, Kirpalani H, Rosenbaum P, Cadman D. Strength and limitations of the Apgar score: A critical appraisal. J Clin Epidemiol. 1988;41(9):843–50.CrossRefPubMed Schmidt B, Kirpalani H, Rosenbaum P, Cadman D. Strength and limitations of the Apgar score: A critical appraisal. J Clin Epidemiol. 1988;41(9):843–50.CrossRefPubMed
20.
go back to reference McIntire DD, Bloom SL, Casey BM, Leveno KJ. Birth weight in relation to morbidity and mortality among newborn infants. N Engl J Med. 1999;340:1234–8.CrossRefPubMed McIntire DD, Bloom SL, Casey BM, Leveno KJ. Birth weight in relation to morbidity and mortality among newborn infants. N Engl J Med. 1999;340:1234–8.CrossRefPubMed
21.
go back to reference Saria S, Rajani AK, Gould J, Koller D, Penn AA. Integration of early physiological responses predicts later illness severity in preterm infants. Sci Transl Med. 2010;2(48):48ra65.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Saria S, Rajani AK, Gould J, Koller D, Penn AA. Integration of early physiological responses predicts later illness severity in preterm infants. Sci Transl Med. 2010;2(48):48ra65.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
22.
23.
go back to reference Gluckman PD, Wyatt JS, Azzopardi D, Ballard R, Edwards AD, Ferriero DM, et al. Selective head cooling with mild systemic hypothermia after neonatal encephalopathy: multicentre randomised trial. Lancet. 2005;365:663–70.CrossRefPubMed Gluckman PD, Wyatt JS, Azzopardi D, Ballard R, Edwards AD, Ferriero DM, et al. Selective head cooling with mild systemic hypothermia after neonatal encephalopathy: multicentre randomised trial. Lancet. 2005;365:663–70.CrossRefPubMed
Metadata
Title
Neonatal assessment in the delivery room – Trial to Evaluate a Specified Type of Apgar (TEST-Apgar)
Authors
Mario Rüdiger
Nicole Braun
Jacob Aranda
Marta Aguar
Renate Bergert
Alica Bystricka
Gabriel Dimitriou
Khaled El-Atawi
Sascha Ifflaender
Philipp Jung
Katarina Matasova
Violeta Ojinaga
Zita Petruskeviciene
Claudia Roll
Jens Schwindt
Burkhard Simma
Nanette Staal
Gloria Valencia
Maria Gabriela Vasconcellos
Maie Veinla
Máximo Vento
Benedikt Weber
Anke Wendt
Sule Yigit
Heinz Zotter
Helmut Küster
The TEST-Apgar study-group
Publication date
01-12-2015
Publisher
BioMed Central
Published in
BMC Pediatrics / Issue 1/2015
Electronic ISSN: 1471-2431
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1186/s12887-015-0334-7

Other articles of this Issue 1/2015

BMC Pediatrics 1/2015 Go to the issue