Key result
Echocardiographic screening detected a higher prevalence of rheumatic heart disease compared to clinical examination.
Why the study?
Does echocardiographic screening detect a higher prevalence of rheumatic heart disease compared to clinical examination in school children in India?
Cross-Sectional (n=6,270)
Does echocardiographic screening detect a higher prevalence of rheumatic heart disease compared to clinical examination in school children in India?
Echocardiographic screening detects a several-fold higher prevalence of subclinical rheumatic heart disease compared to clinical examination in high-risk pediatric populations, with most cases remaining non-progressive in the medium term.
Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Echocardiographic screening detects more subclinical RHD than clinical exam; leaves open whether routine use improves outcomes in high-risk children.
OBJECTIVE: To study the prevalence and medium term outcome of subclinical rheumatic heart disease (RHD) in India. DESIGN: Cross sectional echocardiographic screening study. SETTING: School children aged 5-15 years living in rural areas of north India. PATIENTS: A cross sectional echocardiographic screening study was carried out among 6270 randomly selected school children aged 5-15 years (10.8 ± 2.6 years; 52.7% male). Of all the abnormal cases, 100 children (78%) were restudied at a mean follow-up of 15.4 ± 6.6 months. INTERVENTION: Echocardiographic screening. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE: Echocardiography-Doppler criteria based prevalence of RHD. RESULTS: Clinical examination detected mitral regurgitation in five patients and the estimated prevalence of clinical RHD was 0.8/1000 school children. Echocardiography-Doppler diagnosed RHD in 128 cases, giving a prevalence of 20.4/1000 school children (95% CI 16.9 to 23.9/1000 children). On multivariate analysis, older age (OR 1.93, 95% CI 1.29 to 2.88; p = 0.001), female sex (OR 1.84, 95% CI 1.25 to 2.72; p = 0.002) and government funded school student, which is a surrogate measure of lower socioeconomic status (OR 1.55, 95% CI 1.02 to 2.34; p = 0.039) were found to be independent predictors of RHD. On follow up, the severity of subclinical RHD was non-progressive in 68 children (68%) while it worsened in four (4%) and regressed in 28 children (28%). CONCLUSIONS: The prevalence of RHD is several fold higher using echocardiographic screening compared with clinical examination. The prevalence is higher among girls and children of lower socioeconomic status. In the majority of cases, subclinical RHD appears to be non-progressive on medium term follow up. Routine echocardiographic screening may be indicated in populations at high risk of RHD.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Saxena et al. (2011) conducted a cross-sectional in subclinical rheumatic heart disease (RHD) (n=6,270). Echocardiographic screening vs. Clinical examination was evaluated on Echocardiography-Doppler criteria based prevalence of RHD. Echocardiographic screening detected a higher prevalence of rheumatic heart disease compared to clinical examination.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: