1 / 18

Regional Distribution of Orofacial Cleft Defects in Wisconsin

Regional Distribution of Orofacial Cleft Defects in Wisconsin. Allison Derrick Masters of Public Health Candidate UW School of Medicine and Public Health. Acknowledgements. Delora Mount, MD; UW Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery Glen Leverson, PhD; Biostatistics

nelly
Download Presentation

Regional Distribution of Orofacial Cleft Defects in Wisconsin

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Regional Distribution of Orofacial Cleft Defects in Wisconsin Allison Derrick Masters of Public Health Candidate UW School of Medicine and Public Health

  2. Acknowledgements • Delora Mount, MD; UW Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery • Glen Leverson, PhD; Biostatistics • Henry Anderson, MD, MPH; DHFS • Kristen Malecki, PhD; DHFS • Liz Oftedahl, MPH; DHFS • Laura Ninneman, DHFS

  3. Outline • Background • Objectives • Methods • Results • Discussion • Conclusion

  4. Background

  5. Background • Orofacial clefts are the most common craniofacial birth defects • Incidence ranging from approximately 0.5 to 2 per 1,000 births* • Multifactorial etiology • Both genetic and environmental factors implicated • Public health Problem • significant lifelong morbidity • complex etiology • requires extensive treatment • surgical, psychological, speech and dental interventions • Lifetime cost of >$101,000 Marazita, M. L. and M. P. Mooney. Clin Plast Surg 2004; 31(2): 125-40 Waitzman NJ, Romano PS, Scheffler RM. Inquiry 1994;31:188-205.

  6. Objectives • Perform the first analysis of the distribution of orofacial cleft births in Wisconsin • Evaluate the incidence of orofacial cleft births in the Fox River Valley with respect to the rest of Wisconsin • Examine the geographical distribution for potential associations between environmental factors and orofacial cleft defects

  7. Methods • Performed a comprehensive literature review on the etiology and CL/P, environmental risk factors, research methodology • IRB approval • Data Collection: • Vital Records: 1997-2006* • WBDR: 2005-2006 • WISH database: 1997-2006 • Calculated incidences by county* • Logistical regression to adjust for confounders* • Determined OR for OFCs w/in FRV vs. WI-FRV*

  8. Results

  9. Results

  10. Results Incidence Rates WI…………..1.046/1,000 FRV………..…1.463/1,000 WI - FRV……..0.997/1,000 Adjusted OR …1.52 (95% CI 1.23, 1.89; p=0.0001)

  11. Results Demographic Trends • Maternal age - NS • Maternal race - NS • Maternal educational achievement - NS • Maternal smoking status OR 1.032 (95% CI 1.017,1.048) P-value = 0.0009

  12. Discussion • Interpretation of results • Incidence of 1.46/1,000 births in FRV is significantly higher than the rest of WI, but still WNL • Cluster by chance? • Potential Environmental associations • PCBs? • TTHMs? • Pesticides?

  13. PCBs WI DNR: http://www.dnr.state.wi.us/org/gmu US EPA: www.epa.gov/region5/foxriver/lower_fox_river_map

  14. Results* *TexasSharpshooter

  15. TTHMs* Distribution of Drinking Water from Surface Water Sources *TexasSharpshooter WI DNR: http://dnr.wi.gov/org/water/dwg/swap/delineation.htm Bove et al. Am J Epidemiol. 1995; 141 (9): 850-62.

  16. Pesticides in Groundwater* *TexasSharpshooter U.S. Geological Survey Fact Sheet: Pesticides in ground water in the Western Lake Michigan Drainages. 1996

  17. Discussion Limitations of study • Sensitivity of Birth Certificate Data • Differences in reporting among counties • Maternal migration during pregnancy • Misclassification bias • No differentiation between CL/P and CP alone, or those cases associated with syndromes • Potential Confounders • prenatal care/nutritional status • alcohol intake during pregnancy • Descriptive geographic study • Cannot define causality Watkins ML et al. Am J Public Health 1996;86:731-4.

  18. Conclusions • Established a geographic distribution of OFC births in WI • Found a statistically significant elevated risk of OFCs in the FRV • Useful for formulating hypotheses for future testing, but no causal relationship can be established • Need to encourage reliable birth defect reporting and regular environmental exposure measurements • WI EPHT system Sept 2008…

More Related