Shortcomings in Infant Iron Deficiency Screening Methods

Author:

Biondich Paul G.123,Downs Stephen M.123,Carroll Aaron E.123,Laskey Antoinette L.123,Liu Gilbert C.123,Rosenman Marc123,Wang Jane13,Swigonski Nancy L.123

Affiliation:

1. Children's Health Services Research, Indianapolis, Indiana

2. Department of Pediatrics, Indiana University School of Medicine, Indianapolis, Indiana

3. Regenstrief Institute, Indianapolis, Indiana

Abstract

BACKGROUND. Screening for iron deficiency anemia is a well-established practice in pediatrics, but numerous challenges surrounding current recommendations raise questions about the effectiveness of this strategy. OBJECTIVE. To evaluate iron deficiency anemia screening approaches, by assessing rates of follow-up testing and resolution among patients meeting screening criteria in a primary care setting. METHODS. A retrospective cohort study was performed. We extracted electronic medical record data on complete blood counts for infants who received primary care in our clinics in the past 10 years. We calculated rates of positive screening results with 9 different measurement criteria and determined rates of follow-up testing and of documented correction of iron deficiency among those who screened positive. RESULTS. Our cohort consisted of 4984 children who were screened at 9 to 15 months of age, between 1994 and 2004. There was a wide distribution of positive detection rates (range: 1.5–14.5%) among the 9 screening criteria. Follow-up testing rates were low. No more than 25% of infants who screened positive by any criterion underwent a repeat complete blood count within 6 months. Moreover, no more than 11.6% (range: 4.4–11.6%) had documented correction of their laboratory abnormalities. CONCLUSIONS. Significant shortcomings exist in current iron deficiency anemia screening practices. A widely agreed-on, specific, and inexpensive screening criterion, with increased emphasis on systems-based approaches to iron deficiency screening, is needed.

Publisher

American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP)

Subject

Pediatrics, Perinatology and Child Health

Cited by 25 articles. 订阅此论文施引文献 订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3