Original ArticleSelf and Parent Perspectives on Health-Related Quality of Life of Adolescents Born Very Preterm
Section snippets
Methods
The Bavarian Longitudinal Study has been described in detail elsewhere.8 All infants born alive in a geographically defined area in Southern Bavaria (Germany) during 1985 and 1986 and who required admission to children's hospitals within the first 10 days after birth comprised the target population. Ethical approval for this study was granted by the Ethical Review Board of the University of Munich Children's Hospital, and informed consent was obtained from the parents.
Out of 7505 children
Results
Compared with FT peers, VLBW/VP I and II adolescents were more often multiple births, small for gestational age, had moderate to severe disability, and lived in families with higher adversities (Table III). Relative to the VLBW/VP I subset, the VLBW/VP II subset had a lower mean birth weight (P = .052) and was more likely to be born to younger mothers (P = .016). In terms of objective functioning at 8.5 years of age, VLBW/VP I children performed significantly worse than their FT peers on
Discussion
This study explored health statuses and HRQL for VLBW/VP and FT adolescents in relation to early indicators of objective functioning and source of information (parent vs adolescent reported). We found differences between FT and VLBW/VP subsets independent of source of information (adolescent vs parent report). We also found that source of information matters for some aspects of health status but not others; objective function indicators at 8.5 years of age predict VLBW/VP adolescents' HRQL at
References (30)
- et al.
Specific language difficulties and school achievement in children born at 25 weeks of gestation or less
J Pediatr
(2008) - et al.
Measuring health status using the Health Utilities Index: Agreement between raters and between modalities of administration
J Clin Epidemiol
(2001) - et al.
Follow-up of preterm children: important to document dropouts
Lancet
(1995) - et al.
An overview of morality and sequelae of preterm birth from infancy to adulthood
Lancet
(2003) - et al.
Quality of life. Assessment, analysis and interpretation
(2000) - et al.
Quality of life measures in health care. I: applications and issues in assessment
BMJ
(1992) - et al.
Quality of life in preschool children born preterm
Dev Med Child Neurol
(2001) - et al.
Self-reported health status and health-related quality of life of teenagers who were born before 29 weeks' gestational age
Pediatrics
(2007) - et al.
Health and school performance of teenagers born before 29 weeks gestation
Arch Dis Child Fetal Neonatal Ed
(2003) - et al.
Can parents rate their child's health-related quality of life? Results of a systematic review
Qual Life Res
(2001)
Crying and feeding problems in infancy and cognitive outcome in preschool children born at risk: a prospective population study
J Dev Behav Pediatr
Die Entwicklung gefaehrdet geborener Kinder bis zum fuenften Lebensjahr. Die Arvo Ylppoe Neugeborenen-Nachfolgestudie in Suedbayern und Suedfinnland. [The development of at-risk children until the fifth year of life. The Arvo Ylppö Longitudinal Study in South Bavaria and South Finland]
K-ABC: Kaufman Assessment Battery for Children. Deutschsprachige Fassung
Deutschsprachige Konsensus-Versionen der Child Behavior Checklist (CBCL 4-18), der Teacher Report Form (TRF) und der Youth Self Report Form (YSR)
Kindheit und Entwicklung
The changing panorama of cerebral palsy. Sweden iv
Acta Paediatr Scand
Cited by (36)
Health-Related Quality of Life from Adolescence to Adulthood Following Extremely Preterm Birth
2021, Journal of PediatricsCitation Excerpt :Utilities were categorized into 4 levels of disability to evaluate stability from 11 to 19 years (no disability 1.00; mild disability 0.89-0.99; moderate 0.70-0.88; severe <0.70),8 and a 3-category variable was then computed (worsening, stable, or improving). In addition, function within each attribute was recorded as suboptimal if any level of functional impairment (level 2 or above) was reported.20,21 The number of single attributes that were suboptimal was then calculated.
Mind the (inter-rater) gap. An investigation of self-reported versus proxy-reported assessments in the derivation of childhood utility values for economic evaluation: A systematic review
2019, Social Science and MedicineCitation Excerpt :Comparing modes of administration, face-to-face administration yielded similar utility values between child-parent dyads, whilst for postal surveys and telephone interviews parent proxies generated higher utility values for their children relative to child self-reports (Verrips et al., 2001). In one recent study, adolescents (>12 years) who were born preterm and/or at low birth weight generated significantly lower HUI3 multi-attribute utility values for their health states than proxy-reports by their parents (Wolke et al., 2013). Using a direct valuation approach, Saigal et al. (1999) demonstrated that parents overestimated utility values for vignettes of four hypothetical health states compared to child valuations, whereas health professionals underestimated utility values for two hypothetical severe health states, but overestimated for two less severe health states (Saigal et al., 1999).
Origins and Predictors of Friendships in 6- to 8-Year-Old Children Born at Neonatal Risk
2018, Journal of PediatricsCitation Excerpt :In contrast, parents may perceive greater vulnerability in their child leading to overestimations of problems.72 However, previous studies showed that parents' judgments were better explained by objective measures of children's earlier functioning than child reports indicating a more realistic perspective of parents.73 This study also has limitations.
Racial and ethnic differences in preterm birth: A complex, multifactorial problem
2017, Seminars in PerinatologyLong-Term Stability of Language Performance in Very Preterm, Moderate-Late Preterm, and Term Children
2017, Journal of PediatricsCitation Excerpt :A random sample of children born at >31 weeks' gestation was drawn according to the following stratification variables: sex, family socioeconomic status (SES; low, moderate, high), and degree of neonatal risk (very low, low, moderate, high3). For this study, we removed 17 children who were not German speakers, 142 who were twins or higher-order multiple births (excluded because they have unique reasons for being preterm and have been found to have different language development than singletons21), 6 with language data at only one or no assessments, and 78 with physical or developmental disabilities or unknown status (ie, blindness, deafness, or cerebral palsy levels 3-4 [unable to move unaided]).22,23 Because the focus of this report is to compare children who were born preterm with healthy full-term children, we also removed 556 children who were born at term but were hospitalized at birth with early medical problems and 12 children in the healthy control sample who were born preterm but cared for on normal obstetric wards.
Supported by the German Federal Ministry of Education and Science (PKE24, JUG14, 01EP9504, and 01ER0801) and the 13-year assessment by the German Research Foundation (SCHN 315/15-1). The authors declare no conflicts of interest.