Download PDF
Am J Perinatol
DOI: 10.1055/a-2057-7385
Original Article

Predictive Ability of Conventional and Combined Apgar Scores versus Neonatal Resuscitation and Adaptation Score in Early Neonatal Assessment

Dina A. Midan
1   Pediatrics Department, Faculty of Medicine, Menoufia University, Menoufia, Egypt
,
Fady M. El-Gendy
1   Pediatrics Department, Faculty of Medicine, Menoufia University, Menoufia, Egypt
,
Wael A. Bahbah
1   Pediatrics Department, Faculty of Medicine, Menoufia University, Menoufia, Egypt
,
Hadeer Y. Alamah
1   Pediatrics Department, Faculty of Medicine, Menoufia University, Menoufia, Egypt
,
Rania S. Elzayat 
1   Pediatrics Department, Faculty of Medicine, Menoufia University, Menoufia, Egypt
› Author Affiliations
› Further Information
    Permissions and Reprints

Abstract

Objective The aim of this study was to assess the Neonatal Resuscitation and Adaptation Score (NRAS) value compared with the conventional and combined Apgar scores in predicting neonatal morbidity and mortality.

Study Design A prospective cohort study was conducted on 289 neonates delivered at the Menoufia University Hospital. Trained physicians measured conventional Apgar score, combined Apgar score, and NRAS for the neonates at 1 and 5 minutes after delivery in the delivery room. Admitted neonates were followed during their stay to detect any adverse outcomes.

Results Morbidities such as the need for neonatal intensive care unit admission, mechanical ventilation, surfactant and inotropes administration, need for extensive phototherapy, intravenous immunoglobulin or exchange transfusion, anemia, metabolic acidosis, abnormal liver and kidney function tests, coagulopathies, hypoglycemia, development of seizures in the first 72 hours of life, and positive changes in cranial ultrasound were significantly higher in neonates who lie within low or moderate NRAS than conventional and combined Apgar scores (p < 0.05). As predictors of mortality, the low and moderate values of the NRAS had higher positive predictive values at 1 (73.91 and 30.61%) and 5 minutes (88.89 and 50.94%) than the conventional Apgar scores at 1 (49.18 and 20.53%), 5 minutes (81.25 and 41.27%) and the combined Apgar scores at 1 (35.63 and 12.45%) and 5 minutes (53.1 and 41.33%).

Conclusion Our study suggests that the NRAS is better than conventional and combined Apgar scores in predicting neonatal morbidity and mortality. Furthermore, a depressed 5-minute NRAS is more predictive of mortality than 1-minute score.

Key Points

  • NRAS is better than conventional and combined Apgar scores in predicting neonatal morbidity.

  • NRAS is more predictive of mortality than conventional and combined Apgar scores.

  • A depressed 5-minute NRAS is more predictive of mortality than 1-minute score.

Keywords

NRAS - Apgar score - neonates - mortality - morbidity - diagnostic accuracy

Supplementary Material



Publication History

Received: 13 November 2022

Accepted: 14 March 2023

Accepted Manuscript online:
18 March 2023

Article published online:
18 April 2023

© 2023. Thieme. All rights reserved.

Thieme Medical Publishers, Inc.
333 Seventh Avenue, 18th Floor, New York, NY 10001, USA

 

  • References

  • 1 Hainstock LM, Raval GR. Neonatal Resuscitation. Pediatr Rev 2020; 41 (03) 155-158
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 2 Weiner GM, Zaichkin J. eds. Textbook of Neonatal Resuscitation. American Academy of Pediatrics; 2021
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 3 Wyckoff MH, Aziz K, Escobedo MB. et al. Part 13: neonatal resuscitation. Circulation 2015; 132 (18, Suppl 2): S543-S560
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 4 Chong DS, Karlberg J. Refining the Apgar score cut-off point for newborns at risk. Acta Paediatr 2004; 93 (01) 53-59
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 5 Simon LV, Hashmi MF, Bragg BN. Apgar Score. In: StatPearls. Treasure Island (FL): StatPearls Publishing LLC; 2022
    Google Scholar
  • 6 Apgar V. A proposal for a new method of evaluation of the newborn infant. Originally published in July 1953, volume 32, pages 250–259. Anesth Analg 2015; 120 (05) 1056-1059
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 7 Li F, Wu T, Lei X, Zhang H, Mao M, Zhang J. The Apgar score and infant mortality. PLoS One 2013; 8 (07) e69072
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 8 Nelson KB, Ellenberg JH. Apgar scores as predictors of chronic neurologic disability. Pediatrics 1981; 68 (01) 36-44
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 9 Committee on Obstetric Practice, ACOG, American Academy of Pediatrics, Committee on Fetus and Newborn, ACOG. ACOG Committee Opinion. Number 333, May 2006 (replaces No. 174, July 1996): the Apgar score. Obstet Gynecol 2006; 107 (05) 1209-1212
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 10 Rüdiger M, Aguar M. Newborn assessment in the delivery room. Neoreviews 2012; 13 (06) e336-e342
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 11 Dalili H, Sheikh M, Hardani AK, Nili F, Shariat M, Nayeri F. Comparison of the combined versus conventional Apgar scores in predicting adverse neonatal outcomes. PLoS One 2016; 11 (02) e0149464
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 12 Jurdi SR, Jayaram A, Sima AP, Hendricks Muñoz KD. Evaluation of a comprehensive delivery room Neonatal Resuscitation and Adaptation Score (NRAS) compared to the Apgar Score: a pilot study. Glob Pediatr Health 2015; 2: X15598293
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 13 Futagi Y, Toribe Y, Suzuki Y. The grasp reflex and Moro reflex in infants: hierarchy of primitive reflex responses. Int J Pediatr 2012; 2012: 191562
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 14 Witcher TJ, Jurdi S, Kumar V. et al. Neonatal Resuscitation and Adaptation Score vs Apgar: newborn assessment and predictive ability. J Perinatol 2018; 38 (11) 1476-1482
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 15 Liu L, Oza S, Hogan D. et al. Global, regional, and national causes of under-5 mortality in 2000-15: an updated systematic analysis with implications for the sustainable development goals. Lancet 2016; 388 (10063): 3027-3035
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 16 Blencowe H, Cousens S, Oestergaard MZ. et al. National, regional, and worldwide estimates of preterm birth rates in the year 2010 with time trends since 1990 for selected countries: a systematic analysis and implications. Lancet 2012; 379 (9832): 2162-2172
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 17 Committee Opinion No. Committee opinion no. 644: the Apgar Score. Obstet Gynecol 2015; 126 (04) e52-e55
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 18 Dalili H, Nili F, Sheikh M, Hardani AK, Shariat M, Nayeri F. Comparison of the four proposed Apgar scoring systems in the assessment of birth asphyxia and adverse early neurologic outcomes. PLoS One 2015; 10 (03) e0122116
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 19 Executive summary: neonatal encephalopathy and neurologic outcome, second edition. Report of the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists' Task Force on Neonatal Encephalopathy. Obstet Gynecol 2014; 123 (04) 896-901
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 20 Afsharkhas L, Khalessi N, Karimi Panah M. Intraventricular hemorrhage in term neonates: sources, severity and outcome. Iran J Child Neurol 2015; 9 (03) 34-39
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 21 Rüdiger M, Küster H, Herting E. et al. Variations of Apgar score of very low birth weight infants in different neonatal intensive care units. Acta Paediatrica (Oslo, Norway: 1992) 2009; 98 (09) 1433-1436
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 22 Elglil AMA, Ibrahim A, Shihab NS, Mashad AERME. Study of the Neonatal Resuscitation and Adaptation Score (NRAS) compared to the Apgar score in neonatal resuscitation. J Adv Med Res 2020; 32 (24) 100-110
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 23 Chamorro Villota E, Posso Pasquel D, Agama Cuenca F, Espinoza De Los Monteros R. Noninferiority assessment of the “neonatal resuscitation and adaptation score” versus the Apgar score: original research. Revista Ecuatoriana 2021; 22 (03) 21-28
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 24 Trevethan R. Sensitivity, specificity, and predictive values: foundations, pliabilities, and pitfalls in research and practice. Front Public Health 2017; 5: 307
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar