Objectives: Use of clinical assessment of nutritional status (CAN) score to assess the prevalence of fetal malnutrition and its proportion among Appropriate for gestational age(AGA)& small for gestational age(SGA).

Study Design: Prospective observational hospital based study

Setting: Tertiary care hospital, Kamla Nehru Hospital, an associated hospital of Indira Gandhi Medical College Shimla.

Methods: Out of one thousand twelve live births during the study period 529 newborns which were fulfilling the required criteria were enrolled in the study. All the enrolled newborns were assessed for weight, length, OFC, MAC, MAC/OFC and Ponderal index. The data also comprised of demographic and social factors viz. maternal age, socioeconomic status, dietary habits, maternal education, occupation, parity, residence, altitude and antenatal care. Clinical assessment of nutritional status using CAN score suggested by Metcoffand its proportion was assessed in AGA and SGA using appropriate statistics.

Results: The study population had mean birth weight of 2822.80±447.64, mean length 48.0319±2.1963, mean OFC 33.6866±1.3510, mean MAC 8.8866±0.8349, MAC/OFC 0.2636±2.039 E-02 and mean CANSCORE 25.8110±4.2299.The study showed 29% LBW babies. Fetal malnutrition was seen in both small for gestational age (SGA) and appropriate for gestational age (AGA).

Conclusion: Fetal malnutrition was much more in small for gestational age but present in both groups i.e. AGA and SGA.

Keywords: Newborn, SGA, AGA, Neonatal anthropometry, CAN Score, Fetal malnutrition.

1. Scott KE, Usher R. Fetal malnutrition: Its incidence causes and effects. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1966; 94: 951-963.
2. Hill RM, Verniaud WM, Deter RL, Tennyson LM, Rettig GM, Zion TE et al. The effect of intrauterine malnutrition on the term infant: A 14-year prospective study. Acta Paediatr Scand 1984; 73: 482-487.
3. Metcoff J, Clinical assessment of nutritional status at birth: Fetal malnutrition and SGA are not synonymous. Pediatr Clin North Am 1994; 41 : 875-891.
4. Ballard JL, Khoury JC, Wedig K, Wang L, Eiler-Walsman BL, Lipp R. New Ballard score, expanded to include extremely prem-ature infants. J Pediatr 1991; 119: 417-423.
5. Singhal PK, Paul VK, Deorari AK, Singh M, Sundaram KR. Changing trends in intrauterine growth c Indian Peditr 1991; 28 : 281- 283.
6. Ghai OP, Gupta P, Paul VK. CDC Growth charts: United states. Ghai Essential Pediatrics. 6th ed. OP Ghai, New Delhi; 2004:7-43.
7. Mohan M, Shiv Prasad SR, Chellani HK, Kapani V. Intrauterine growth curves in North Indian babies: Weight, length, head circumference and Ponderal index. Indian Pediatr 1990; 27: 43-51.
8. Kumar P. Social Classification-Need for constant updating. Indian Journal of Comm-unity Medicine Vol. XVIII No2,1993.
9. Deodhar J, Jarad R .Study of the prevalence of and high risk factors for fetal malnutrition in term newborns. Ann Trop Paediatr 1999; 19: 273-277.
10. Mehta S, Tandon A, Dua T, Kumari S, Singh SK. Clinical assessment of nutritional status at birth. Indian Pediatr 1998; 35: 423-428.

Dr Arvind Sood

Department of Pediatrics

Indira Gandhi Medical College Shimla, Himachal Pradesh, India

Email: This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.