| 1. |
- Högberg, Ulf, 1949-, et al.
(författare)
-
Difficult birth is the main contributor to birthrelated fracture and accidents to other neonatal fractures
- 2020
-
Ingår i: Acta Paediatrica. - : John Wiley & Sons. - 0803-5253 .- 1651-2227. ; 109:10, s. 2040-2048
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- AIM: Specific birthrelated fractures have been studied; underestimates might be a problem. We aimed to assess all fractures diagnosed as birthrelated as well as other neonatal fractures.METHODS: A population-based study on all infants born in Sweden 1997-2014; data was retrieved from the Swedish Health Registers (10th version of International Classification of Diseases. Outcome measures were birthrelated fractures (ICD-10 P-codes) and other neonatal fractures (ICD-10 S-codes).RESULTS: The overall fracture incidence was 2.9 per 1,000 live birth (N=5,336); 92.6% had P-codes and 7.4% (S-codes). Some birthrelated fractures were diagnosed beyond the neonatal period. Other neonatal fractures could have been birthrelated. Clavicle fracture, (88.8%) was associated with adverse maternal- and infant anthropometrics and birth complications. The few neonates with rib fractures all had concomitant clavicle fracture. For skull fractures, a minor part was birthrelated, most were associated with accidents. Half of the long bone fractures were associated with accidents. Birthrelated femur fractures were associated with bone fragility risk factors. Five infants with abuse diagnoses had fractures: skull (4), long bone (2), and rib (1).CONCLUSION: Birthrelated and other neonatal fractures are rarely diagnosed. Difficult birth is the main contributor to birthrelated fracture, and accidents to other neonatal fractures.
|
|
| 2. |
|
|
| 3. |
- Högberg, Ulf, 1949-, et al.
(författare)
-
Epidemiology of subdural haemorrhage during infancy : A population-based register study
- 2018
-
Ingår i: PLOS ONE. - : Public Library of Science (PLoS). - 1932-6203. ; 13:10
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Objectives To analyse subdural haemorrhage (SDH) during infancy in Sweden by incidence, SDH category, diagnostic distribution, age, co-morbidity, mortality, and maternal and perinatal risk factors; and its association with accidents and diagnosis of abuse. Methods A Swedish population-based register study comprising infants born between 1997 and 2014, 0-1 years of age, diagnosed with SDH-diagnoses according to the (International Classification of Diseases, 10th version (ICD10), retrieved from the National Patient Register and linked to the Medical Birth Register and the Death Cause Register. Outcome measures were: 1) Incidence and distribution, 2) co-morbidity, 3) fall accidents by SDH category, 4) risk factors for all SDHs in the two age groups, 0-6 and 7-365 days, and for ICD10 SDH subgroups: S06.5 (traumatic SDH), I62.0 (acute nontraumatic), SDH and abuse diagnosis. Results Incidence of SDH was 16.5 per 100 000 infants (n = 306). Median age was 2.5 months. For infants older than one week, the median age was 3.5 months. Case fatality was 6.5%. Male sex was overrepresented for all SDH subgroups. Accidental falls were reported in 1/3 of the cases. One-fourth occurred within 0-6 days, having a perinatal risk profile. For infants aged 7-365 days, acute nontraumatic SDH was associated with multiple birth, preterm birth, and small-for-gestational age. Fourteen percent also had an abuse diagnosis, having increased odds of being born preterm, and being small-for-gestational age. Conclusions The incidence was in the range previously reported. SDH among newborns was associated with difficult birth and neonatal morbidity. Acute nontraumatic SDH and SDH with abuse diagnosis had similar perinatal risk profiles. The increased odds for acute nontraumatic SDH in twins, preterm births, neonatal convulsions or small-for-gestational age indicate a perinatal vulnerability for SDH beyond 1st week of life. The association between prematurity/small-for-gestational age and abuse diagnosis is intriguing and not easily understood.
|
|
| 4. |
- Högberg, Ulf, 1949-, et al.
(författare)
-
Preventable harm and child maltreatment diagnosis (eLetter)
- 2019
-
Ingår i: The BMJ. - : BMJ Publishing Group Ltd. - 1756-1833. ; 366
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Objective: To systematically quantify the prevalence, severity, and nature of preventable patient harm across a range of medical settings globally.Design: Systematic review and meta-analysis.Data sources: Medline, PubMed, PsycINFO, Cinahl and Embase, WHOLIS, Google Scholar, and SIGLE from January 2000 to January 2019. The reference lists of eligible studies and other relevant systematic reviews were also searched.Review methods: Observational studies reporting preventable patient harm in medical care. The core outcomes were the prevalence, severity, and types of preventable patient harm reported as percentages and their 95% confidence intervals. Data extraction and critical appraisal were undertaken by two reviewers working independently. Random effects meta-analysis was employed followed by univariable and multivariable meta regression. Heterogeneity was quantified by using the I2 statistic, and publication bias was evaluated.Results: Of the 7313 records identified, 70 studies involving 337 025 patients were included in the meta-analysis. The pooled prevalence for preventable patient harm was 6% (95% confidence interval 5% to 7%). A pooled proportion of 12% (9% to 15%) of preventable patient harm was severe or led to death. Incidents related to drugs (25%, 95% confidence interval 16% to 34%) and other treatments (24%, 21% to 30%) accounted for the largest proportion of preventable patient harm. Compared with general hospitals (where most evidence originated), preventable patient harm was more prevalent in advanced specialties (intensive care or surgery; regression coefficient b=0.07, 95% confidence interval 0.04 to 0.10).Conclusions: Around one in 20 patients are exposed to preventable harm in medical care. Although a focus on preventable patient harm has been encouraged by the international patient safety policy agenda, there are limited quality improvement practices specifically targeting incidents of preventable patient harm rather than overall patient harm (preventable and non-preventable). Developing and implementing evidence-based mitigation strategies specifically targeting preventable patient harm could lead to major service quality improvements in medical care which could also be more cost effective.
|
|
