Growth monitoring for short stature: update of a systematic review and economic model

Centre for Reviews and Dissemination, University of York, York, UK.
Health technology assessment (Winchester, England) 02/2011; 15(11):iii-iv, 1-64. DOI: 10.3310/hta15110
Source: PubMed


The aim of the project was to compare different screening rules and/or referral cut-offs for the identification of children with disorders of short stature. We undertook an update of a previous systematic review and economic model that addressed the same question.
Sources searched included MEDLINE, EMBASE, Science Citation Index, Social Science Citation Index, Conference Proceedings Citation Index - Science/Social Science & Humanities, Cochrane Library 2009 Issue 4, Office of Health Economics Health Economic Evaluations Database, and the NHS Economic Evaluation Database.
The review was conducted as an update to our previous assessment in 2007. Searching covered January 2005 to November 2009 with no language or publication restrictions. Two reviewers examined full papers for relevance. Data extraction was conducted by one reviewer and independently checked by a second. In addition, searches were conducted to identify quality of life or utility papers to inform the economic evaluation. We developed a probabilistic decision analytic model to estimate the costs and quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) gains from the perspective of the UK NHS and personal social services. The model was a cohort model, assuming a homogeneous population of 5-year-olds at baseline.
One study was included in the systematic review. The study was not UK based, but had been identified in the brief as relevant to the UK setting. The study's authors examined the performance of a number of rules to determine sensitivity and specificity of referral for short stature in four patient groups and three reference groups in the Netherlands. They derived an algorithm for referral based on the optimal rules. No new studies were located that provided appropriate quality of life or utilities data for the economic model. The model was based on the previous assessment which was updated to better reflect current UK clinical practice. We compared two alternative monitoring strategies, one of which was based on the study identified in our systematic review (Grote strategy); the other was based on UK consensus (UK strategy). We identified that the UK strategy was the least effective and least costly, with a mean gain of 0.001 QALYs at a mean cost of £21. The Grote strategy was both more expensive and more effective, with a mean cost of £68 and a mean QALY gain of 0.042. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio was £1144 per QALY gained.
This assessment contributes further knowledge, but does not provide definitive answers on how to deliver growth monitoring. In particular, we were unable to ascertain current practice in the UK for growth screening. Further, we were unable to evaluate through the use of identified studies and modelling an optimal referral cut-off and age at which to screen. We identified a number of research questions that would further inform referral strategies, which in summary would involve further primary and secondary data collection.
The National Institute for Health Research Health Technology Assessment programme.

Download full-text


Available from: Lisa Stirk, Oct 04, 2015
46 Reads
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Context:Screening criteria for abnormal growth in children are traditionally based on height-for-age, height distance from target height (TH), and change in growth rate. However, there is no consensus on the optimal screening limits.Objective:Our objective was to first develop new population-based and age-specific cutoffs for these three screening parameters and, second, to validate their performance in screening by using Turner syndrome (TS) as a model.Design, Patients, and Main Outcome Measure:Reference values for the height distance from TH and growth rate were defined in a total of 14,189 healthy girls aged 0-18 yr with 147,469 height measurements. The best formula for TH calculation was TH sd score = 0.79 × mid-parental height sd score - 0.15. We also calculated age-specific limits for the distance from TH and limits for growth rate that were freely scalable between age range 0-12 yr. Longitudinal growth data of a cohort including 124 TS girls were evaluated with receiver operating characteristic analysis against the reference population.Results:The screening accuracy for TS was excellent when we combined all three screening parameters. Sensitivity was 97% and specificity 96% for all TS girls and 100% and 95% for 45,XO TS girls, respectively. The detection rate was 68% for all and 76% for 45,XO TS girls with 99% specificity by the age of 2 yr.Conclusion:These new population-based screening rules for TS are sensitive and specific, but their use is complex, and therefore their efficient use requires computerization.
    The Journal of Clinical Endocrinology and Metabolism 09/2012; 97(11). DOI:10.1210/jc.2012-1739 · 6.21 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Background/aims: Children with neurofibromatosis type 1 (NF1) tend to be macrocephalic and short. Our aim was to define the incidence and diagnostic accuracy of elevated head circumference-to-height ratio (HCHR) in children with NF1 and to assess if elevated HCHR would facilitate early diagnosis of NF1. Methods: Retrospective analysis of growth and health data of 80 NF1 patients aged 0-7 years was performed. The incidence and diagnostic accuracy of elevated HCHR for NF1 was analyzed using receiver operating characteristic curves. Results: The median age when the first elevated (≥2.0 SDS) HCHR value was detected was 0.3 years (range 0.0-5.3). At the median age of diagnosis (3.6 years), 53.8% of NF1 children exhibited elevated HCHR. The diagnostic accuracy of HCHR alone was 0.78 (95% CI 0.72-0.84), but in comparison with the seven National Institutes of Health diagnostic criteria for NF1, elevated HCHR was the second most prevalent feature. Conclusion: Elevated HCHR is an early and frequent feature in NF1 children. Taking HCHR into account would facilitate the early detection of NF1.
    Hormone Research in Paediatrics 02/2013; 79(2):97-102. DOI:10.1159/000347119 · 1.57 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Background: Previous studies have demonstrated differences between national and the WHO reference curves in children older than 5 years. Moreover, reference curves for body proportions (sitting height, subischial leg length and their ratio) based on state-of-the-art statistics are not available. Aim: To develop reference curves for height and body proportions for use in Austria and compare the curves with WHO reference curves. To estimate and statistically investigate extreme percentiles. Subjects and methods: A sample of ∼14 500 children between 4-19 years of age was drawn via schooling institutions, stratified by provinces according to age- and sex-specific population proportions. GAMLSS models were used for a flexible estimation of percentile curves. Results and conclusions: After the age of 5 years national reference curves are more suitable than the WHO reference curves for clinical use in Austria. These height curves are very similar to the German reference curves published recently. Therefore, these reference curves for criteria of body proportions are recommended for use in other populations. Further validation studies are needed to establish whether the recently recommended -2.5 and -3.0 SD for height are a sensitive and specific cut-off in the diagnostic work-up for children with a suspected growth disorder using this new Austrian height chart.
    Annals of Human Biology 04/2013; 40(4). DOI:10.3109/03014460.2013.776110 · 1.27 Impact Factor
Show more