Socioeconomic Status Influences Functional Severity of Untreated Cerebral Palsy in Nepal: A Prospective Analysis and Systematic Review.
Adolescent
Adolescent Development
Age Factors
Cerebral Palsy
/ diagnosis
Child
Child Development
Child, Preschool
Cross-Sectional Studies
Developing Countries
Disability Evaluation
Female
Health Status Disparities
Healthcare Disparities
Humans
Infant
Male
Motor Activity
Nepal
/ epidemiology
Prognosis
Prospective Studies
Risk Factors
Severity of Illness Index
Socioeconomic Factors
Journal
Clinical orthopaedics and related research
ISSN: 1528-1132
Titre abrégé: Clin Orthop Relat Res
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 0075674
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
01 2019
01 2019
Historique:
pubmed:
5
9
2018
medline:
23
10
2019
entrez:
5
9
2018
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
Cerebral palsy (CP) comprises a heterogeneous group of disorders whose clinical manifestations and epidemiologic characteristics vary across socioeconomic and geographic contexts. The functional severity of untreated CP in low-income countries has been insufficiently studied; a better understanding of how these children present for care in resource-constrained environments is important because it will better characterize the natural history of CP, guide clinical decision-making, and aid in the prognostication of children with untreated CP. The purposes of this study were (1) to determine the etiologies, motor subtypes, topographic distributions, and functional classifications of a large cohort of Nepali children with untreated CP presenting to a large pediatric rehabilitation center in Nepal; and (2) to compare the Gross Motor Function Classification System (GMFCS), the Manual Ability Classification System (MACS), and the Communication Function Classification System (CFCS) scores of a subset of patients with spastic CP in the Nepali cohort with control subjects from high-income countries. A cross-sectional study was conducted at the Hospital and Rehabilitation Centre for Disabled Children in Nepal. Two hundred six consecutive Nepali children (76 girls; median age 4.0 years [interquartile range {IQR}, 2.5-9.0 years]) were evaluated to determine the demographic, clinical, and functional characteristics of a cohort of Nepali children with untreated CP. A systematic review of the Medline and Cochrane databases was then performed to obtain reference classification scores from high-income countries. Cross-sectional, noninterventional studies reporting at least one functional classification system with a sample size of at least 50 participants were included. Only studies of patients with spastic CP were included to allow for compatible comparisons with a subset of our study sample with spastic CP. A random-effects analysis was used to pool functional scores from participants in the included studies. Among the 206 children in our sample, 102 had spastic CP (35 girls; median age 5.5 years [IQR, 3.5-9.0 years]). Functional scores from these children were compared with pooled scores obtained from the systematic review by assessing the proportions of children in each sample with GMFCS, MACS, and CFCS score categories of I or II versus III to V. Children with spastic hemiplegia from high-income countries were more likely to have a GMFCS score of I or II (96% [95% confidence interval {CI}, 92%-99%] versus 78% [95% CI, 62%-89%]) and a MACS score of I or II (83% [95% CI, 77%-88%] versus 50% [95% CI, 32%-68%]) relative to those from Nepal, but they were less likely to have a CFCS score of I or II (67% [95% CI, 51%-80%] versus 97% [95% CI, 87%-99%]). No differences were seen in children with spastic diplegia or quadriplegia. Children in Nepal with hemiplegic CP display less difficulty in communicating and social engagement (CFCS) despite more-severe upper- and lower-extremity impairments in gross motor function (GMFCS) and manual ability (MACS) than do children with hemiplegic CP from high-income countries. Targeted interventions, including perhaps simple orthopaedic interventions to treat soft-tissue contractures, may therefore provide more-substantial improvements in function and quality of life to Nepali children than could be achieved for the same deployment of resources in more-affluent settings. Level II, prognostic study.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
Cerebral palsy (CP) comprises a heterogeneous group of disorders whose clinical manifestations and epidemiologic characteristics vary across socioeconomic and geographic contexts. The functional severity of untreated CP in low-income countries has been insufficiently studied; a better understanding of how these children present for care in resource-constrained environments is important because it will better characterize the natural history of CP, guide clinical decision-making, and aid in the prognostication of children with untreated CP.
QUESTIONS/PURPOSES
The purposes of this study were (1) to determine the etiologies, motor subtypes, topographic distributions, and functional classifications of a large cohort of Nepali children with untreated CP presenting to a large pediatric rehabilitation center in Nepal; and (2) to compare the Gross Motor Function Classification System (GMFCS), the Manual Ability Classification System (MACS), and the Communication Function Classification System (CFCS) scores of a subset of patients with spastic CP in the Nepali cohort with control subjects from high-income countries.
METHODS
A cross-sectional study was conducted at the Hospital and Rehabilitation Centre for Disabled Children in Nepal. Two hundred six consecutive Nepali children (76 girls; median age 4.0 years [interquartile range {IQR}, 2.5-9.0 years]) were evaluated to determine the demographic, clinical, and functional characteristics of a cohort of Nepali children with untreated CP. A systematic review of the Medline and Cochrane databases was then performed to obtain reference classification scores from high-income countries. Cross-sectional, noninterventional studies reporting at least one functional classification system with a sample size of at least 50 participants were included. Only studies of patients with spastic CP were included to allow for compatible comparisons with a subset of our study sample with spastic CP. A random-effects analysis was used to pool functional scores from participants in the included studies. Among the 206 children in our sample, 102 had spastic CP (35 girls; median age 5.5 years [IQR, 3.5-9.0 years]). Functional scores from these children were compared with pooled scores obtained from the systematic review by assessing the proportions of children in each sample with GMFCS, MACS, and CFCS score categories of I or II versus III to V.
RESULTS
Children with spastic hemiplegia from high-income countries were more likely to have a GMFCS score of I or II (96% [95% confidence interval {CI}, 92%-99%] versus 78% [95% CI, 62%-89%]) and a MACS score of I or II (83% [95% CI, 77%-88%] versus 50% [95% CI, 32%-68%]) relative to those from Nepal, but they were less likely to have a CFCS score of I or II (67% [95% CI, 51%-80%] versus 97% [95% CI, 87%-99%]). No differences were seen in children with spastic diplegia or quadriplegia.
CONCLUSIONS
Children in Nepal with hemiplegic CP display less difficulty in communicating and social engagement (CFCS) despite more-severe upper- and lower-extremity impairments in gross motor function (GMFCS) and manual ability (MACS) than do children with hemiplegic CP from high-income countries. Targeted interventions, including perhaps simple orthopaedic interventions to treat soft-tissue contractures, may therefore provide more-substantial improvements in function and quality of life to Nepali children than could be achieved for the same deployment of resources in more-affluent settings.
LEVEL OF EVIDENCE
Level II, prognostic study.
Identifiants
pubmed: 30179955
doi: 10.1097/CORR.0000000000000476
pmc: PMC6345316
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Systematic Review
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
10-21Commentaires et corrections
Type : ErratumIn
Abstract corrected
Références
Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2007 Jul;88(7):871-6
pubmed: 17601467
Dev Med Child Neurol. 2006 Jul;48(7):549-54
pubmed: 16780622
Dev Med Child Neurol. 2013 Apr;55(4):378-84
pubmed: 23356539
Dev Med Child Neurol. 2012 Aug;54(8):737-42
pubmed: 22715907
J Pediatr Orthop. 2004 Sep-Oct;24(5):514-20
pubmed: 15308901
Pediatrics. 2014 Dec;134(6):e1594-602
pubmed: 25422013
Am J Phys Med Rehabil. 2009 Jun;88(6):473-83
pubmed: 19325454
BMC Musculoskelet Disord. 2007 Jun 21;8:50
pubmed: 17584944
J Nepal Health Res Counc. 2015 Jan-Apr;13(29):31-7
pubmed: 26411710
Dev Med Child Neurol. 2011 Aug;53(8):704-10
pubmed: 21707596
Eur J Paediatr Neurol. 2011 Jan;15(1):53-8
pubmed: 20542713
Dev Med Child Neurol. 2004 Sep;46(9):580-9
pubmed: 15344517
Lancet. 2014 Apr 5;383(9924):1240-9
pubmed: 24268104
Dev Med Child Neurol. 2000 Dec;42(12):816-24
pubmed: 11132255
Ann Trop Paediatr. 2010;30(3):181-96
pubmed: 20828451
Dev Med Child Neurol. 2007 Oct;49(10):751-6
pubmed: 17880644
Niger J Med. 2009 Apr-Jun;18(2):186-9
pubmed: 19630327
Aust J Physiother. 2003;49(1):7-12
pubmed: 12600249
Semin Pediatr Neurol. 2014 Mar;21(1):30-5
pubmed: 24655402
Am J Prev Med. 2000 Jan;18(1 Suppl):44-74
pubmed: 10806979
J Paediatr Child Health. 2005 Sep-Oct;41(9-10):479-83
pubmed: 16150063
BMC Res Notes. 2015 Apr 23;8:166
pubmed: 25902796
Dev Med Child Neurol. 1997 Apr;39(4):214-23
pubmed: 9183258
Dev Med Child Neurol. 2005 Aug;47(8):571-6
pubmed: 16108461
Dev Med Child Neurol. 2012 Sep;54(9):815-21
pubmed: 22809361
Dev Med Child Neurol. 2017 Apr;59(4):402-406
pubmed: 27896812
Pediatr Neurol. 2016 Jun;59:23-9
pubmed: 27114082