Search

Aim: Neonatal jaundice is an important and prevalent condition that can cause kernicterus and mortality. This study validated a smartphone‐based screening application (Biliscan) in detecting neonatal jaundice. Methods: A cross‐sectional prospective study was conducted at the neonatal unit in a tertiary teaching hospital between August 2020 and October 2021. All babies born at the gestation of 35 weeks and above with clinical jaundice or are recommended for screening of jaundice within 21 days of post‐natal age were recruited. Using Biliscan, images of the babies' skin over the sternum were taken against a standard colour card. The application uses feature extraction and machine learning regression to estimate the bilirubin level. Independent Biliscan bilirubin estimates (BsB) were made and compared with total serum bilirubin (TSB) and transcutaneous bilirubin (TcB) levels. Bland Altman plots were used to establish the agreement between BsB and TSB, as well as TcB, using the clinically acceptable limits of agreement of ±35 μmol/L, which were defined a priori. Pearson correlation coefficient was assessed to establish the strength of the relationship between BsB versus TSB and TcB. Diagnostic accuracy was assessed through receiver operating characteristic curve analysis. Results: Sixty‐one paired TSB‐BsB and 85 paired TcB‐BsB measurements were obtained. Bland Altman plot for the entire group showed that 54% (33/61) of the pairs of TSB and BsB readings and 66% (56/85) of the pairs of TcB and BsB readings were within the maximum clinically acceptable difference of 35 μmol/L. Pearson r for BsB versus TSB and TcB was 0.54 (P < 0.001) and 0.66 (P < 0.001) respectively. Compared with TSB, the recommended gold standard measure for jaundice, Biliscan has a sensitivity of 76.92% and specificity of 70.83% for jaundice requiring phototherapy. The positive and negative predictive values in term infants were 93.3% and 36.9%, respectively. Conclusion: Our results suggest that there is moderate correlation and mediocre agreement between BsB and TSB, as well as TcB. Improvement to the application algorithm and further studies that include a larger population, and a wider range of bilirubin values are necessary before the tool may be considered for use in screening of jaundice in newborns. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction/objectives: To address the diagnostic delay in axial spondyloarthritis (axSpA), we have cross-culturally adapted the Hamilton axSpA questionnaire, a self-administered screening questionnaire, in the Singapore population. In this study, we compared the performance of various scoring methods for this questionnaire in detecting axSpA. Method: The questionnaire was self-administered by eligible subjects. Scoring methods included method A, the original questionnaire scoring, and methods B–E, scoring developed based on the Assessment of SpondyloArthritis International Society (ASAS) criteria for inflammatory back pain (IBP) and the referral, classification and both referral and classification of axSpA, respectively. The reference standard was diagnosis by a rheumatologist. Since the ASAS criteria-based scoring methods were mainly based on clinical axSpA features, self-report and rheumatologist-assessment of clinical axSpA features were also compared in subjects with axSpA. Results: Of 1418 subjects (age: 54 ± 14 years, female: 73%) recruited, 46 were diagnosed with axSpA by a rheumatologist. Sensitivities of methods A–E were 35%, 61%, 63%, 48% and 83%, respectively. Self-report of clinical axSpA features exceeded rheumatologist-assessment for arthritis (83 vs 26%), good response to NSAIDs (37 vs 30%), enthesitis (35 vs 30%), dactylitis (20 vs 2%) and family history for axSpA (13 vs 4%). The reverse was true for IBP (41 vs 63%) and uveitis (4 vs 15%). Conclusions: A self-administered questionnaire using the ASAS referral and classification criteria-based scoring yielded relatively high sensitivity in detecting axSpA in subjects newly referred to rheumatology clinics. This supports its evaluation as a screening and referral tool in the general population in future studies. Key Points • A self-administered questionnaire could be used as a screening and referral tool. • ASAS referral and classification criteria-based scoring yielded relatively high sensitivity. • Inaccurate perception of clinical axSpA features was observed in axSpA patients. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]