×
Home Current Archive Editorial board
News Contact
Review paper

Secular trend of anthropometric parameters of newborns in municipalities of Tuzla Canton (1976 – 2007)

By
Amela Begić ,
Amela Begić
Contact Amela Begić

Biology Department, School of Natural Sciences and Mathematics, University of Tuzla, Tuzla, Bosnia and Herzegovina

Jasminka H. Halilović ,
Jasminka H. Halilović

Biology Department, School of Natural Sciences and Mathematics, University of Tuzla, Tuzla, Bosnia and Herzegovina

Lejla Mešalić ,
Lejla Mešalić

School of Medicine, University of Tuzla, Tuzla, Bosnia and Herzegovina

Sabina H.Halilović
Sabina H.Halilović

Biology Department, School of Natural Sciences and Mathematics, University of Tuzla, Tuzla, Bosnia and Herzegovina

Abstract

Aim
To determine the acceleration of birth weight and birth length of newborns in the municipalities of Tuzla Canton in the last four decades. Tuzla Canton (TC) as an administrative territorial unit of the FBiH includes 13 municipalities.
Methods
In this retrospective study data from the Protocol Book of Gynecology and Obstetrics Clinic, University Clinical Center,
from 1976 to 2007 were used. The sample of live-born infants by municipalities was divided into four sub-samples: a subsample of infants born in 1976, 1987, 1997 and 2007. During the monitored years there were 19,312 live births in Tuzla Canton (TC), but the study included 17,907 newborns of both sexes. Statistical data processing was performed using standard methods, descriptive and inference statistics.
Results
Ascertained results of the secular trend for birth weight showed that this parameter had positive values in seven municipalities, but in six municipalities it was negative. The highest values of increasing birth length of newborns, which were statistically significant, were found in the municipalities of Srebrenik and this increase was 0.06 cm per year.
Conclusion
Different values of the secular trend in the monitored TC are result of different socio-economic and ecological conditions in these municipalities, as well as of violent mass population migration that occurred as a result of
the war in BiH in the period from 1992 to 1995.

References

1.
Nikolić-Dovat V. Somatski razvoj i razvoj djeteta. Novi Sad: Institut za zdravstvenu zaštitu majke i djeteta. 1978. p. 19–25.
2.
Darmanović B, Ivanović B, Vujadinović V. Somatski status novorođenčadi Titograda. Glasnik ADJ. 1971. p. 65–76.
3.
Ivanović M. Dinamika fizičkog razvoja učenika Titograda. Institut za biološka istraživanja Beograd. Titograd: Biološki zavod. 1970. p. 8–23.
4.
Ivanović M. Ontogenetski razvoj i antropološke karakteristike omladine Crne Gore. Titograd. CANU. 1985. p. 13–52.
5.
Ananth C, Wen S. Trends in fetal growth in the United States and Canada among singleton gestations. Semin Perinatol. 1985. p. 260–7.
6.
Bonellie S, Raab G. Why are babies getting heavier? Comparison of Scottish births from 1980 to 1992. BMJ. 1997. p. 1205.
7.
Bralić I, Rodin U, Vrdoljak J, Plavec D, Čapkun V. Secular birth weight changes in liveborn infants before, during, and after 1991-1995 homeland War in Croatia. Croat Med J. 2006. p. 452–8.
8.
Chike-Obi U, Richard J, Coutinho R, Wu S. Birth weight has increased over a generation. Am J Epidemiol. 1996. p. 563–9.
9.
Chowdhury S, Ammari F, Burden C, Gregory R. Secular trend in birth weight in native White and immigrant South Asian populations in Leicester, UK: possible implications for incidence of type 2 diabetes in the future. Practical Diabetes Int. 2000. p. 104–8.
10.
De-Kun L, Hanyu N, Schwartz M, Daling R. Secular change in birthweight among Southeast Asian immigrants to the United States. Am J Public Health. 1990. p. 685–8.
11.
Enquoselassie F, Minyilshewa A. Changes in birthweight of hospital-delivered neonates in Addis Ababa. Ethiop J Health Dev. 2000. p. 169–76.
12.
Schack-Nielsen L, Mølgaard C, Sørensen I, Greisen G, Michaelsen K. Secular change in size at birth from 1973 to 2003: national data from Denmark. Obesity. 2006. p. 1257–63.
13.
Skjaerven R, Gjessing H, Bakketeig L. Birth weight by gestational age in Norway. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand. 2000. p. 440–9.
14.
Odlind V, Haglund B, Pakkanen M, Otterblad O. Deliveries, mothers and newborn infants in Sweden, 1973-2000. Trends in obstetrics as reported to the Swedish Medical Birth Register. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand. 2003. p. 516–28.
15.
Wen S, Kramer M, Platt R, Demissie K, Joseph K, Liu S, et al. Secular trends of fetal growth in Canada, 1981 to 1997. Paediatr Perinat Epidemiol. 2003. p. 347–54.
16.
Weiner J, Lourie J. Human Biology; a guide to field methods, International biological programme. Oxford and Edinburg: Blackwell scientific publications. 1969.
17.
Hadžiselimović R, Lelo S, Bioantropološki. 2000.
18.
Hadžihalilović J, Halilović H, Brahimaj S, Begić F, Tupkušić A, Mešalić R, et al. Secular changes of anthropometric parameters in newborns from Gračanica area in the period from 1998 to. Med Arh. 2008. p. 267–70.
19.
Statistički godišnjak/Ljetopis Federacije Bosne i Hercegovine. Sarajevo: Federalni zavod za statistiku. 2008.
20.
Elmén H, Hôglund D, Karlberg P, Niklasson A. N1lsson W. Birth weight for gestational age as a health indicator. Birth weight and mortality measures at the local area level. European Journal Of Public Health. 1996. p. 137–41.
21.
Spencer N, Logan S, Gill L. Trends and social patterning of birthweight in Sheffield, 1985-94. Arch Dis Child Fetal Neonatal Ed. 1999. p. 138–40.
22.
Tutkuviene J, Jakimaviciene E, Drazdiene N, Blaziene I, Drasutiene G. Changes in body size of newborns in Lithuania. Coll Antropol. 1974. p. 69–77.
23.
Gladys G, Mariotoni A, Barros F. Birth weight and maternal characteristics at the Maternity of Campinas along 25 years. J Pediatr (Rio J). 2000. p. 55–64.
24.
Tretyak A, Godina E, Zadorozhnaya L. Secular trends of sizes at birth in Russian infants born between 1987 and 2002. J Physiol Anthropol Appl Human Sci. 2005. p. 403–6.
25.
Silva AA, Barbieri M, Gomes U, Bettiol H. Trends in low birth weight: a comparison of two birth cohorts separated by a 15-year interval in Ribeirão Preto, Brazil. Bulletin of the World Health Organization. 1998. p. 73–84.
26.
Begić A, Halilović J. The Acceleration of birth weight and birth length of hypotrophic and hypertrophic newborns from Tuzla Canton from 1976 to. Coll Antropol. 2007. p. 353–62.
27.
Fok T, So H, Wong E, Ng P, Chang A, Lau J, et al. Neonatal Measurements Working Group. Updated gestational age specific birth weight, crown-heel length, and head circumference of Chinese newborns. Arch Dis Child Fetal Neonatal. 2003. p. 229–36.
28.
Sekularni trend antropoloških parametara novorođenčadi u općinama Tuzlanskog kantona. 1976.
29.
Begić1 A, Jasminka H, Halilović1. Lejla Mešalić 2 , Sabina H. Halilović1 1Prirodno-matematički fakultet, Odsjek za biologiju, 2 Medicinski fakultet; Univerzitet u Tuzli, Tuzla, Bosna i Hercegovina SAŽETAK Cilj Utvrditi akceleraciju porođajne mase i dužine tijela novorođenčadi po općinama Tuzlanskog kantona u posljednje četiri decenije. Tuzlanski kanton (TK), kao administrativno-teritorijalna jedinica u FBiH.
30.
Tokom promatranih godina u Tuzlanskom kantonu (TK) bilo je 19.312 živorođenih, ali je u istraživanje uključeno 17.907 novorođenčadi oba spola. Statistička obrada podataka izvršena je standardnim postupcima deskriptivne i inferentne statistike. Rezultati Konstatovane vrijednosti sekularnog trenda za porođajnu masu pokazuju da je taj parametar u sedam općina imao pozitivne vrijednosti, dok je u šest općina bio negativan. Najveće vrijednosti povećanja porođajne dužine tijela novorođenčeta, koje su bile statistički značajne. 1976.
31.
Zaključak Različite vrijednosti sekularnog trenda u promatranim općinama TK-a rezultat su različitih socioekonomskih i ekoloških uvjeta u tim općinama, kao i nasilnih migracija stanovništva koje su se dešavale kao posljedica rata u BiH u razdoblju od 1992. do 1995. godine. Ključne riječi: akceleracija, porođajna dužina.

Citation

Authors retain copyright. This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License. Creative Commons License

 

Article metrics

Google scholar: See link

The statements, opinions and data contained in the journal are solely those of the individual authors and contributors and not of the publisher and the editor(s). We stay neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.