Advertisement
Original article| Volume 86, ISSUE 11, P2199-2203, November 2005

Download started.

Ok

Predictive Model for Congenital Muscular Torticollis: Analysis of 1021 Infants With Sonography

      Abstract

      Chen M-M, Chang H-C, Hsieh C-F, Yen M-F, Chen TH. Predictive model for congenital muscular torticollis: analysis of 1021 infants with sonography.

      Objective

      To construct a predictive model to foretell congenital muscular torticollis (CMT) on the basis of clinical correlates.

      Design

      Correlation study.

      Setting

      Regional hospital.

      Participants

      A consecutive series of 1021 newborn infants.

      Interventions

      Not applicable.

      Main Outcome Measure

      Participants underwent portable ultrasonography to diagnose CMT. Significant clinical correlates were identified to construct a predictive model using the logistic regression model.

      Results

      Forty of 1021 infants were diagnosed with CMT using ultrasonography, yielding an overall incidence of 3.92%. Birth body length (odds ratio [OR]=1.38; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.49–2.38), facial asymmetry (OR=21.75; 95% CI, 6.6–71.7), plagiocephaly (OR=22.3; 95% CI, 7.01–70.95), perineal trauma during delivery (OR=4.26; 95% CI, 1.25–14.52), and primiparity (OR=6.32; 95% CI, 2.34–17.04) were significant correlates. A predictive logistic regression model with the incorporation of these 4 correlates was developed. We used cross-validation with a receiver operating characteristic curve to validate the predictive model.

      Conclusions

      Our study successfully developed a quantitative predictive model for estimating the risk of CMT on the basis of clinical correlates only. This model has good discriminative ability for classifying CMT and non-CMT by yielding acceptable values of false-negative and false-positive cases.

      Key Words

      To read this article in full you will need to make a payment

      Purchase one-time access:

      Academic & Personal: 24 hour online accessCorporate R&D Professionals: 24 hour online access
      One-time access price info
      • For academic or personal research use, select 'Academic and Personal'
      • For corporate R&D use, select 'Corporate R&D Professionals'

      Subscribe:

      Subscribe to Archives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation
      Already a print subscriber? Claim online access
      Already an online subscriber? Sign in
      Institutional Access: Sign in to ScienceDirect

      References

        • Bredenkamp J.K.
        • Hoover L.A.
        • Berke G.S.
        • Shaw A.
        Congenital muscular torticollis. A spectrum of disease.
        Arch Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 1990; 116: 212-216
        • Porter S.B.
        • Blount B.W.
        Pseudotumor of infancy and congenital muscular torticollis.
        Am Fam Physician. 1995; 52: 1731-1736
        • Fabian K.
        • Marshall M.
        Conservative and surgical treatment of congenital muscular torticollis.
        Physiother Can. 1984; 36: 146-151
        • Staheli L.T.
        Muscular torticollis.
        Surgery. 1971; 69: 469-473
        • Cheng J.C.
        • Au A.W.
        Infantile torticollis.
        J Pediatr Orthop. 1994; 14: 802-808
        • Ling C.M.
        • Balanchandran N.
        A prospective study of sternomastoid tumour in a closed community.
        in: Proceedings of the 10th Singapore-Malaysia Congress of Medicine.Vol 10. Academy of Medicine, Singapore1975: p 233-p 236
        • Suzuki S.
        • Yamamuro T.
        • Fujita A.
        The aetiological relationship between congenital torticollis and obstetrical paralysis.
        Int Orthop. 1984; 8: 175-181
        • Gonzales J.
        • Ljung B.M.
        • Guerry T.
        • Schoenrock L.D.
        Congenital torticollis.
        Laryngoscope. 1989; 99: 651-654
        • Cheng J.C.
        • Tang S.P.
        Outcome of surgical treatment of congenital muscular torticollis.
        Clin Orthop. 1999; (May): 190-200
        • Cheng J.C.
        • Metreweli C.
        • Chen T.M.
        • Tang S.P.
        Correlation of ultrasonographic imaging of congenital muscular torticollis with clinical assessment in infants.
        Ultrasound Med Biol. 2000; 26: 1237-1241
        • Sherman N.H.
        • Rosenberg H.K.
        • Heyman S.
        • Templeton J.
        Ultrasound evaluation of neck masses in children.
        J Ultrasound Med. 1985; 4: 127-134
        • Friedman A.P.
        • Haller J.O.
        • Goodman J.D.
        • Nagar H.
        Sonographic evaluation of non-inflammatory neck masses children.
        Radiology. 1983; 147: 693-697
        • Kraus R.
        • Han B.K.
        • Babcock D.S.
        • Oestreich A.E.
        Sonography of neck masses in children.
        AJRH Am J Roentgenol. 1986; 146: 609-613
        • Glasier C.M.
        • Seibert J.J.
        • Williamson S.L.
        • et al.
        High resolution ultrasound characterization of soft tissue masses in children.
        Pediatr Radiol. 1987; 17: 233-237
        • Binder H.
        • Eng G.
        • Gaiser J.F.
        • Koch B.
        Congenital muscular torticollis.
        Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 1987; 68: 222-225
        • Canale S.T.
        • Griffin D.W.
        • Hubbard C.N.
        Congenital muscular torticollis.
        J Bone Joint Surg Am. 1982; 64: 810-816
        • Cheng J.C.
        • Wong M.W.
        • Tang S.P.
        • Chen T.M.
        • Shum S.L.
        • Wong E.M.
        Clinical determinants of the outcome of manual stretching in the treatment of congenital muscular torticollis in infants.
        J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2001; 83: 679-687
        • Davids J.R.
        • Wenger D.R.
        • Mubarak S.J.
        Congenital muscular torticollis.
        J Pediatr Orthop. 1993; 13: 141-147
        • Thompson F.
        • McManus S.
        • Colville J.
        Familial congenital muscular torticollis.
        Clin Orthop. 1986; (Jan): 193-196
        • Baker S.G.
        • Kramer B.S.
        • Srivastava S.
        Markers for early detection of cancer.
        BMC Med Res Methodol. 2002; 2: 1-8