Search

Background: Very preterm (< 32 wk of gestation) infants are at increased risk of eating difficulties compared with their term-born peers. Little is known about the impact of late and moderately preterm (LMPT; 32-36 wk of gestation) birth on eating difficulties in early childhood. Objectives: The aims were to assess the prevalence of eating difficulties in infants born LMPT at 2 y corrected age and to explore the impact of neonatal and neurodevelopmental factors. Design: A geographic population-based cohort of 1130 LMPT and 1255 term-born controls was recruited at birth. The parents of 651 (59%) LMPT and 771 (62%) term-born infants completed questionnaires at 2 y corrected age to assess neurodevelopmental outcomes. Parents also completed a validated questionnaire to assess eating behaviors in 4 domains: refusal/picky eating, oral motor problems, oral hypersensitivity, and eating behavior problems. Infants with scores >90th percentile were classified with eating difficulties in each domain. Neonatal data were collected at discharge, and socio-demographic information was collected via maternal interview. Poisson regression was used to assess between-group differences in eating difficulties and to explore associations with neonatal factors and neurodevelopmental outcomes at 2 y of age. Results: In unadjusted analyses, LMPT infants were at increased risk of refusal/picky eating (RR: 1.53; 95% CI: 1.03, 2.25) and oral motor problems (RR: 1.62; 95% CI: 1.06, 2.47). Prolonged nasogastric feeding >2 wk (RR: 1.87; 95% CI: 1.07, 3.25), behavior problems (RR: 2.95; 95% CI: 1.93, 4.52), and delayed social competence (RR: 2.28; 95% CI: 1.49, 3.48) were independently associated with eating difficulties in multivariable analyses. After adjustment for these factors, there was no excess of eating difficulties in LMPT infants. Conclusions: Infants born LMPT are at increased risk of oral motor and picky eating problems at 2 y corrected age. However, these are mediated by other neurobehavioral sequelae in this population. This trial was registered on the UK Clinical Research Network Portfolio at http://public.ukcrn.org.uk/search/ as UKCRN Study ID 7441. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Projections of health and social care need are highly sensitive to assumptions about cohort trends in health and disability. We use a repeated population-based cross-sectional study from the Cambridgeshire centre of the UK Medical Research Council Cognitive Function and Ageing Study to investigate trends in the health of the young-old UK population Methods: Non-overlapping cohorts of men and women aged 65-69 years in 1991/2 (n = 689) and 1996/7 (n = 687) were compared on: self-reported diseases and conditions; self-rated health; mobility limitation; disability by logistic regression and four-year survival by Cox Proportional Hazards Regression models, with adjustments for differences in socio-economic and lifestyle factors. Results: Survival was similar between cohorts (HR: 0.91, 95% CI: 0.62 to 1.32). There was a significant increase in the number of conditions reported between cohorts, with more participants reporting 3 or more conditions in the new cohort (14.2% vs. 10.1%). When individual conditions were considered, there was a 10% increase in the reporting of arthritis and a significant increase in the reporting of chronic airways obstruction (OR: 1.36, 95% CI: 1.04 to 1.78). Conclusion: This study provides evidence of rising levels of ill-health, as measured by the prevalence of self-reported chronic conditions, in the newer cohorts of the young-old. Though changes in diagnosis or reporting of disease cannot, as yet, be excluded, to better understand whether our findings reflect real increases in ill-health, investment should be made into improved population-based databases, linking self-report and objective measures of health and function, and including those in long-term care. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objectives: To investigate inequalities in stillbirth rates by ethnicity to facilitate development of initiatives to target those at highest risk., Design: Population-based perinatal mortality surveillance linked to national birth and death registration (Mothers and Babies: Reducing Risk through Audits and Confidential Enquiries across the UK)., Setting: UK., Participants: 4 391 569 singleton births at ≥24 +0 weeks gestation between 2014 and 2019., Main Outcome Measures: Stillbirth rate difference per 1000 total births by ethnicity., Results: Adjusted absolute differences in stillbirth rates were higher for babies of black African (3.83, 95% CI 3.35 to 4.32), black Caribbean (3.60, 95% CI 2.65 to 4.55) and Pakistani (2.99, 95% CI 2.58 to 3.40) ethnicities compared with white ethnicities. Higher proportions of babies of Bangladeshi (42%), black African (39%), other black (39%) and black Caribbean (37%) ethnicities were from most deprived areas, which were associated with an additional risk of 1.50 stillbirths per 1000 births (95% CI 1.32 to 1.67). Exploring primary cause of death, higher stillbirth rates due to congenital anomalies were observed in babies of Pakistani, Bangladeshi and black African ethnicities (range 0.63-1.05 per 1000 births) and more placental causes in black ethnicities (range 1.97 to 2.24 per 1000 births). For the whole population, over 40% of stillbirths were of unknown cause; however, this was particularly high for babies of other Asian (60%), Bangladeshi (58%) and Indian (52%) ethnicities., Conclusions: Stillbirth rates declined in the UK, but substantial excess risk of stillbirth persists among babies of black and Asian ethnicities. The combined disadvantage for black, Pakistani and Bangladeshi ethnicities who are more likely to live in most deprived areas is associated with considerably higher rates. Key causes of death were congenital anomalies and placental causes. Improved strategies for investigation of stillbirth causes are needed to reduce unexplained deaths so that interventions can be targeted to reduce stillbirths., Competing Interests: Competing interests: None declared., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2022. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)