Upper Arm Measurements of Healthy Neonates Comparing Ultrasonography and Anthropometric Methods

Objective: To compare measurements of the upper arm cross-sectional areas (total arm area,arm muscle area, and arm fat area of healthy neonates) as calculated using anthropometry with the values obtained by ultrasonography. Materials and methods: This study was performed on 60 consecutively born healthy neonates: gestational age (mean6SD) 39.661.2 weeks, birth weight 3287.16307.7 g, 27 males (45%) and 33 females (55%). Mid-arm circumference and tricipital skinfold thickness measurements were taken on the left upper mid-arm according to the conventional anthropometric method to calculate total arm area, arm muscle area and arm fat area. The ultrasound evaluation was performed at the same arm location using a Toshiba sonolayer SSA-250AÒ, which allows the calculation of the total arm area, arm muscle area and arm fat area by the number of pixels enclosed in the plotted areas. Statistical analysis: whenever appropriate, parametric and non-parametric tests were used in order to compare measurements of paired samples and of groups of samples. Results: No significant differences between males and females were found in any evaluated measurements, estimated either by anthropometry or by ultrasound. Also the median of total arm area did not differ significantly with either method (P50.337). Although there is evidence of concordance of the total arm area measurements (r50.68, 95% CI: 0.55–0.77) the two methods of measurement differed for arm muscle area and arm fat area. The estimated median of measurements by ultrasound for arm muscle area were significantly lower than those estimated by the anthropometric method, which differed by as much as 111% (P,0.001). The estimated median ultrasound measurement of the arm fat was higher than the anthropometric arm fat area by as much as 31% (P,0.001). Conclusion: Compared with ultrasound measurements using skinfold measurements and mid-arm circumference without further correction may lead to overestimation of the cross-sectional area of muscle and underestimation of the cross-sectional fat area. The correlation between the two methods could be interpreted as an indication for further search of correction factors in the equations.

Women's Attachment as a Predictor of Pain During Labour and Post-Delivery: a Prospective Observational Study

INTRODUCTION: Labour is considered to be one of the most painful and significant experiences in a woman's life. The aim of this study was to examine whether women's attachment style is a predictor of the pain experienced throughout labour and post-delivery. MATERIAL AND METHODS:Thirty-two pregnant women were assessed during the third trimester of pregnancy and during labour. Adult attachment was assessed with the Adult Attachment Scale ' Revised. The perceived intensity of labour pain was measured using a visual analogue scale for pain in the early stage of labour, throughout labour and post-delivery. RESULTS:Women with an insecure attachment style reported more pain at 3 cm of cervical dilatation (p < 0.05), before the administration of analgesia (p < 0.01) and post-delivery (p < 0.05) than those securely attached. In multivariate models, attachment style was a significant predictor of labour pain at 3 cm of cervical dilatation and before the first administration of analgesia but not of the perceived pain post-delivery. DISCUSSION: These findings confirm that labour pain is influenced by relevant psychological factors and suggest that a woman's attachment style may be a risk factor for greater pain during labour. CONCLUSION:Future studies in the context of obstetric pain may consider the attachment style as an indicator of individual differences in the pain response during labour. This may have important implications in anaesthesiology and to promote a relevant shift in institutional practices and therapeutic procedures.