Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in
Book cover

Neonatology pp 250–256Cite as

Physical Examination of the Newborn

  • Chapter

  • 659 Accesses

Abstract

A complete physical examination of every newborn should be performed by a trained neonatology care provider within 24 hours of birth. Although there is no international standard, routine examination is regarded as a good practice in the guidelines for postnatal care [1–4].

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.

Chapter
USD   29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD   149.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Learn about institutional subscriptions

References

  1. Elliman D, Dezetaux C, Bedford HE (2002) Newborn and child screening programmes: criteria, evidence and current policy. Arch Dis Child 87: 6–9

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  2. Hall DMB, Elliman D (eds) (2003) Health for all children, 4th edn. Oxford University Press, Oxford

    Google Scholar 

  3. Hernández JA, Morelli JG (2003) Birthmarks of potential medical significance. Neo Reviews 4: 263–269

    Google Scholar 

  4. Wolke D, Dave S, Hayes J et al (2002) Routine examination of the newborn and maternal satisfaction: a randomised controlled trial. Arch Dis Child Fetal Neonatal Ed 86: F155–F160

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  5. Dubowitz LMS, Dubowitz V (1981) The neurological assessment of the preterm and full-term newborn infant. SIMP/Heinemann, London

    Google Scholar 

  6. Ballard JL, Khoury JC, Wedig K et al (1991) New Ballard score, expanded to include extremely premature infants. J Pediatr 119: 417–423

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. Brazelton TB (1973) Neonatal Behavioral Assessment Scale. SIMP, London

    Google Scholar 

  8. Swaiman KF (1999) Neurologic examination of the term and preterm infant. In: Swaiman KF, Ashwal A (eds) Pediatric Neurology: principles and practice, 3rd edn. Mosby, St Louis pp 39–53

    Google Scholar 

  9. Kugelman A, Hadab B, Ben-David J et al (1997) Preauricular tags and pits in the newborn: the role of hearing tests. Acta Paediatr 86: 170–172

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  10. Kugelman A, Tubi A, Bader D et al (2002) Preauricular tags and pits in the newborn: the role of renal ultrasonography. J Pediatr 141: 388–391

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Wren C, Richmond S, Donaldson L (1999) Presentation of congenital heart disease in infancy: implications for routine examination. Arch Dis Child Fetal Neonatal Ed 80: F49–F53

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  12. Farrer KFM, Rennie JM (2003) Neonatal murmurs: are senior house officers good enough? Arch Dis Child Fetal Neonatal Ed 88: F147–F151

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  13. Koppel RI, Druschel M, Carter T et al (2003) Effectiveness of pulse oximetry screening for congenital hearth disease in asymptomatic newborns. Pediatrics 111: 451–455

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Reich JD, Miller S, Brogdon B et al (2003) The use of pulse oxime- try to detect congenital heart disease. J Pediatr 142: 268–272

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Richmond S, Reay G, Abu Harb M (2002) Routine pulse oximetry in the asymptomatic newborn. Arch Dis Child Fetal Neonatal Ed 87: F83–F88

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  16. Ainsworth SB, Wyllie JP, Wren C (1999) Prevalence and clinical significance of cardiac murmurs in neonates. Arch Dis Child Fetal Neonatal Ed 80: F43–F45

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  17. McCrindle BW, Shaffer KM, Kan JS et al (1996) Cardinal clinical signs in the differentiation of hearth murmurs in children. Arch Pediatr Adolesc Med 150: 169–174

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  18. Smythe JF, Teixeira OH, Vlad P et al (1990) Initial evaluation of heart murmurs: Are laboratory tests necessary? Pediatrics 86: 497–500

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  19. Thummala MR, Raju TN, Langeberg P et al (1998) Isolated single umbilical artery anomaly and the risk for congenital malformations: a meta-analysis. J Pediatr Surg 33: 580–585

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  20. Driver CP, Losty PD (1998) Neonatal testicular torsion. Br J Urol 82: 855–858

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  21. Gibson P Britton J, Hall DMB et al (1995) Lumbosacral skin markers and identification of occult spinal dysrafism in neonates. Acta Pediatr 84: 208–209

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Kriss VM, Desai NS (1998) Occult spinal dysraphism in neonates: assessment of high risk cutaneous stigmata on sonography. AJR Am J Roentgenol 171: 1687–1693

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  23. Medina LS, Crone K, Kuntz KM (2001) Newborns with suspected occult spinal dysraphism: a cost-effectiveness analysis of diagnostic strategies. Pediatrics 108: e101

    Google Scholar 

  24. Evans-Jones G, Kay SPJ, Weindling AM et al (2003) Congenital brachial palsy: incidence, causes and outcome in the UK and Republic of Ireland. Arch Dis Child Fetal Neonatal Ed 88:F185–F189

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  25. Pondaag W, Malessy MJA, Thomeer RTWM (2004) Natural history of obstetric brachial plexus palsy: a systematic review. Dev Med Child Neurol 46: 138–144

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Malessy MJ, Pondaag W (2009) Obstetric brachial plexus injuries. Neurosurg Clin N Am 20: 1–14

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Chan A, McCaul KA, Cundy PJ et al (1997) Perinatal risk of factors for developmental dysplasia of the hip. Arch Dis Child Fetal Neonatal Ed 76: F94–F100

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  28. Godward S, Dezateux C (1998) Surgery for congenital dislocation of the hip in the UK as a measure of outcome of screening. Lancet 351: 1149–1152

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  29. Dezateux C, Brown J, Arthur R et al (2003) Performance, treatment patways, and effects of alternative policy options for screening for developmental of the hip in the United Kingdom. Arch Dis Child 88: 753–759

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  30. Committee on Quality Improvement, Subcommittee on Developmental Dysplasia of the Hip. American Academy of Pediatrics (2000) Clinical practice guideline: early detection of developmental dysplasia of the hip. Pediatrics 105: 896–905

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. Ortolani M (1937) Un segno poco noto e sua importanza precoce di prelussazione congenita dell’anca. La Pediatria 45: 129–136

    Google Scholar 

  32. Barlow TG (1962) Early diagnosis and treatment of congenital dislocation of the hip. J Bone Joint Surg Br 44: B292–B301

    Google Scholar 

  33. Ballard JL, Novak KK, Driver MA (1979) A simplified score of fetal maturation of newly born infants. J Pediatr 95: 769–774

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Pediatric and Adolescence Science Division of Neonatology, University of Turin, Turin, Italy

    Claudio Fabris

Authors
  1. Claudio Fabris
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Alessandra Coscia
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Pediatrics, Obstetrics and Reproductive Medicine, Division of Neonatology, University of Siena General Hospital S. Maria alle Scotte Azienda Ospedaliera Universitaria Senese, Siena, Italy

    Giuseppe Buonocore (Professor of Pediatrics and Neonatology, Head of School of Pediatrics) (Professor of Pediatrics and Neonatology, Head of School of Pediatrics)

  2. University of Siena, Siena, Italy

    Rodolfo Bracci (Formerly Professor of Pediatrics and Head of Department of Pediatrics, Obstetrics and Reproductive Medicine) (Formerly Professor of Pediatrics and Head of Department of Pediatrics, Obstetrics and Reproductive Medicine)

  3. University of Liverpool, UK

    Michael Weindling (Professor of Perinatal Medicine, Director of Postgraduate Research, Head of School of Paediatrics Mersey Deanery) (Professor of Perinatal Medicine, Director of Postgraduate Research, Head of School of Paediatrics Mersey Deanery)

  4. Department of Women’s and Children’s Health, Institute of Translational Medicine, Liverpool, UK

    Michael Weindling (Professor of Perinatal Medicine, Director of Postgraduate Research, Head of School of Paediatrics Mersey Deanery) (Professor of Perinatal Medicine, Director of Postgraduate Research, Head of School of Paediatrics Mersey Deanery)

  5. Liverpool Women’s Hospital, Liverpool, UK

    Michael Weindling (Professor of Perinatal Medicine, Director of Postgraduate Research, Head of School of Paediatrics Mersey Deanery) (Professor of Perinatal Medicine, Director of Postgraduate Research, Head of School of Paediatrics Mersey Deanery)

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2012 Springer-Verlag Italia

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Fabris, C., Coscia, A. (2012). Physical Examination of the Newborn. In: Buonocore, G., Bracci, R., Weindling, M. (eds) Neonatology. Springer, Milano. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-88-470-1405-3_40

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-88-470-1405-3_40

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Milano

  • Print ISBN: 978-88-470-1404-6

  • Online ISBN: 978-88-470-1405-3

  • eBook Packages: MedicineMedicine (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation