Cumulative prevalence of biological and social risk factors at birth in a city in São Paulo.
Aline Adryane Morishigue Bássiga da Cruz, Lucas Cardoso Dos Santos, Michelle Cristine de Oliveira Minharro and 1 others
PMID 35322850WHAT IT FOUND
Among 4,480 newborns in a São Paulo city, 21.1% were at risk, mostly from ICU admission, prematurity or low birth weight.
Social risks were much rarer. Birth risk profiles can guide neonatal monitoring.
Key findings
01Of 4,480 newborns, 947 (21.1%) were classified as at-risk newborns.
02Recorded biological risks included intensive care admission (11%), birth before 37 weeks (9.9%) and weight below 2,500 g (8.7%).
03The biological risk rate was 7.39 times higher than the social risk rate.
STILL TO COME
How it was doneWhat they foundWhat it means for RNs
Read the rest of this summary
You get three full summaries a month, free, and we do not ask for a card. Search, the TL;DRs and your library stay unlimited either way.
What it does not show
The study used existing surveillance records, so it could only report what had already been filled in. Maternal age over 35, family income and type of delivery could not be assessed. The results describe one medium-sized city in São Paulo and may not apply elsewhere. It measured recorded risk factors at birth, not newborn outcomes, mortality, or the effect of care. Some newborns had a notifiable disease without the disease specified in the form.
The easy way to misread this
Do not read the higher biological risk rate as proof that social factors do not matter. This study only describes recorded risk factors at birth; it did not test newborn outcomes or any intervention.