![]() Newsletter Winter
2004- Neurological Outcomes of Pregnancy The report was developed by an ACOG task force formed in 1999 and was co-authored by the AAP. This group was comprised of a multi-specialty panel of medical experts representing maternal-fetal medicine, pediatrics, neuroepidemiology, radiology, and pathology. Their conclusions support and update an earlier statement in 1999 by an International Cerebral Palsy Task Force. The report has received the endorsement of major organizations including the National Institute of Child Health and Human Development of the National Institutes of Health, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and the March of Dimes Birth Defects Foundation.2 Clinical conditions: NE/CP Cerebral palsy (CP) is a chronic developmental disability of the central nervous system characterized by aberrant control of movement and posture, generally appearing early in life. CP is not a progressive neurologic disease. Despite significant reductions in maternal and neonatal morbidity/ mortality, the incidence of CP has changed little. It occurs equally in infants of normal birthweight and premature infants. CP prevalence is identical in both developed and underdeveloped countries. Research supports that spastic quadriplegia, especially with an associated movement disorder, is the only type of cerebral palsy associated with an acute interruption of blood supply. Purely dyskinetic or ataxic cerebral palsy, especially where there is an associated learning difficulty, commonly has a genetic origin and is not caused by intrapartum or peripartum asphyxia. 3 Both CP and NE are associated with significant mortality rates and long-term morbidity. Both have been critical components in obstetric litigation. Both were thought to be related to hypoxemia during labor and delivery, but those theories have been challenged and disputed. In the past, factors used to define perinatal asphyxia, such as meconium-stained amniotic fluid and low Apgar scores, were neither sensitive nor specific to the disease process resulting in neurologic damage. Studies have shown that the use of nonreassuring fetal heart rate patterns to predict subsequent cerebral palsy had a 99% false-positive rate, causing large number of infants to be inappropriately diagnosed "perinatal asphyxia. 3 These factors were often assumed to be adequate evidence of birth as binations of these factors. Essential Criteria
Criteria that collectively suggest intrapartum timing (within close proximity to labor and delivery, eg, 0-48 hours) but are nonspecific to asphyxial insults may include:
Litigation trends Time is also an essential factor in litigation involving these cases. In general, lengthy periods of time are irrespective of outcome. Successful litigants continue to sue more quickly, (on average two years) however their claims involved significant time periods till resolution. The average wait time to receive compensation was reported as eight years. 5 One study compared compensation for medical and income losses between claimants in the Florida no-fault program (Neurological Injury Compensation Act [NICA]) and those who filed tort claims. They found that families of children with CP were overcompensated for the injury when tort claims were filed, whereas NICA recipients were under-compensated. The difference between tort and NICA compensation levels was attributable to payment for income loss. Those who did not receive tort or NICA compensation lost nearly $75,000 in the first 5 years following the birth.6 Future impact on litigation
In a recent survey of ACOG members, many practicing obstetricians had "significant misperceptions" about NE and CP. Greater than 65% of responding physicians answered less than half of the NE/CP questions correctly, and only 6% were aware that antepartum risk factors were reported most frequently in cases of NE epidemiologic studies.7 Risk management groups identify that 50-55% of the total claim costs (indemnity and defense) for OB/GYN's are attributable to either prenatal or intrapartum conduct. The majority of this portion of the costs is attributable to the allegation of neonatal brain injury.8 Loss prevention specialists are strongly urging medical providers to document well the presence or absence of the essential criteria and the intrapartum timing listed above. In addition they encourage medical providers to never state or imply the use of terms such as asphyxia, birth trauma, hypoxic events without using these criteria and consulting with the delivering physician. Life Care Planning Issues Tools such as the 5-level Gross Motor Function Classification System have been shown to successfully and accurately predict the eventual level of gross motor function in children with CP and NE.10 This assessment identifies distinct motor development curves that describe important and significant differences in the rates and limits of gross motor development. This will provide life care planners, clinicians and parents with a means to plan interventions and to judge progress over time. Additional tools that can be used to measure ongoing progress are the Touwen Examination, the Movement ABC and the WPPSI-R. These neuropsychological tests were administered to children at ages 5-6 years old, that had been identified as having NE at birth. In this study 34 children were deemed normal at 2 years of age but school testing subsequently showed minor neurological dysfunction and/or perceptual-motor difficulties in approximately 20%.11 In addition it is recommended children have periodic brain MRI for continued surveillance. In the study listed above children with neurological impairments and perceptual-motor difficulties had mild or moderate basal ganglia or more marked white matter lesions seen on MRI of the brain in the vast majority of cases. Conclusions References 2. Nelson KB; The epidemiology of cerebral palsy in term infants; Mental Retardation Developmental Disabilities Review. 2002;8(3):146-50 3. http://www.acog.org/from_home/ Misc/neonatalEncephalopathy.cfm 4. Greenwood C; Cerebral palsy and clinical negligence litigation: a cohort study; British Journal Obstetrics & Gynaecology; 01Jan2003; 110(1): 6-11 5. Symon AG; The significance of time factors in cerebral palsy litigation; Midwifery; 01Mar2002; 18(1): 35-42 6. Whetten-Goldstein K; Compensation for birth-related injury: no-fault programs compared with tort system; Archives Pediatric Adolescent Medicine; 01Jan1999; 153(1): 41-8 7. Hankins GD, Erickson K, Zinberg S, Schulkin J; Neonatal encephalopathy and cerebral palsy: a knowledge survey of Fellows of The American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists; Obstetrics and Gynecology; 2003;101:11-17 8. http://callcopic.com/publications/ copiscope/cs_113_may_2003.pdf 9. Eyman RK, Strauss DJ, and Grossman HJ; Survival of children with severe developmental disability; Bailliere's Clinical Pediatrics, pp.543- 556; Harcourt Brace & Co. Ltd.; 1996. 10. Rosenbaum PL; Prognosis for gross motor function in cerebral palsy: creation of motor development curves; JAMA (Journal of American Medical Association); 18-Sep 2002; 288(11): 1357-63 11. Barnett A; Neurological and perceptual-motor outcome at 5 - 6 years of age in children with neonatal encephalopathy: relationship with neonatal brain MRI; Neuropediatrics; 01Oct-2002; 33(5): 242-8 |