Skip to main content
PMC home page
The BMJ logoLink to The BMJ
. 1993 Jul 17;307(6897):159–164. doi: 10.1136/bmj.307.6897.159

Routine ultrasonography in utero and subsequent handedness and neurological development.

K A Salvesen 1, L J Vatten 1, S H Eik-Nes 1, K Hugdahl 1, L S Bakketeig 1
PMCID: PMC1678377  PMID: 7688253

Abstract

OBJECTIVE--To examine any associations between routine ultrasonography in utero and subsequent brain development as indicated by non-right handedness at primary school age and neurological development during childhood. DESIGN--Follow up of 8 and 9 year old children of women who took part in two randomised, controlled trials of routine ultrasonography during pregnancy. SETTING--Clinics of 60 general practitioners in Norway during 1979-81. Maternal and child health centres. SUBJECTS--2161 (89%) of 2428 eligible singletons were followed up, partly through a questionnaire to their parents and partly through information from health centres. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES--The dominant hand of the child was assessed by 10 questions. Deficits in attention, motor control, and perception were evaluated by five questions. Impaired neurological development during the first year of life was assessed by an abbreviated version of the Denver developmental screening test. RESULTS--The odds of non-right handedness were higher among children who had been screened in utero than among control children (odds ratio 1.32; 95% confidence interval 1.02 to 1.71). No clear differences were found between the groups with regard to deficits in attention, motor control, and perception or neurological development during the first year of life. CONCLUSION--Our data suggest a possible association between routine ultrasonography in utero and subsequent non-right handedness, whereas no association with impaired neurological development was found. As the question on non-right handedness was one of six initial hypotheses, the observed results may be due to chance. None the less, the results suggest that the hypothesis may have some merit and should be tested in future studies.

Full text

PDF
164

Selected References

These references are in PubMed. This may not be the complete list of references from this article.

  1. Bakketeig L. S., Eik-Nes S. H., Jacobsen G., Ulstein M. K., Brodtkorb C. J., Balstad P., Eriksen B. C., Jörgensen N. P. Randomised controlled trial of ultrasonographic screening in pregnancy. Lancet. 1984 Jul 28;2(8396):207–211. doi: 10.1016/s0140-6736(84)90492-6. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  2. Eik-Nes S. H., Okland O., Aure J. C., Ulstein M. Ultrasound screening in pregnancy: a randomised controlled trial. Lancet. 1984 Jun 16;1(8390):1347–1347. doi: 10.1016/s0140-6736(84)91834-8. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  3. Frankenburg W. K., Dodds J. B. The Denver developmental screening test. J Pediatr. 1967 Aug;71(2):181–191. doi: 10.1016/s0022-3476(67)80070-2. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  4. Joynt R. J. Cerebral dominance. Arch Neurol. 1985 May;42(5):427–427. doi: 10.1001/archneur.1985.04060050025007. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  5. Liebeskind D., Padawer J., Wolley R., Bases R. Diagnostic ultrasound time-lapse and transmission electron microscopic studies of cells insonated in vitro. Br J Cancer Suppl. 1982 Mar;5:176–186. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  6. Mole R. Possible hazards of imaging and Doppler ultrasound in obstetrics. Birth. 1986 Mar;13(1):29–38. doi: 10.1111/j.1523-536x.1986.tb00999.x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  7. Mortimer A. J., Dyson M. The effect of therapeutic ultrasound on calcium uptake in fibroblasts. Ultrasound Med Biol. 1988;14(6):499–506. doi: 10.1016/0301-5629(88)90111-1. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  8. Raczkowski D., Kalat J. W., Nebes R. Reliability and validity of some handedness questionnaire items. Neuropsychologia. 1974 Jan;12(1):43–47. doi: 10.1016/0028-3932(74)90025-6. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  9. Rasmussen P., Gillberg C. Perceptual, motor and attentional deficits in seven-year-old children. Paediatric aspects. Acta Paediatr Scand. 1983 Jan;72(1):125–130. doi: 10.1111/j.1651-2227.1983.tb09676.x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  10. Saari-Kemppainen A., Karjalainen O., Ylöstalo P., Heinonen O. P. Ultrasound screening and perinatal mortality: controlled trial of systematic one-stage screening in pregnancy. The Helsinki Ultrasound Trial. Lancet. 1990 Aug 18;336(8712):387–391. doi: 10.1016/0140-6736(90)91941-3. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  11. Salvesen K. A., Bakketeig L. S., Eik-nes S. H., Undheim J. O., Okland O. Routine ultrasonography in utero and school performance at age 8-9 years. Lancet. 1992 Jan 11;339(8785):85–89. doi: 10.1016/0140-6736(92)90998-i. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  12. Salvesen K. A., Vatten L. J., Jacobsen G., Eik-Nes S. H., Økland O., Molne K., Bakketeig L. S. Routine ultrasonography in utero and subsequent vision and hearing at primary school age. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 1992 Jul 1;2(4):243-4, 245-7. doi: 10.1046/j.1469-0705.1992.02040243.x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  13. Satz P. Pathological left-handedness: an explanatory model. Cortex. 1972 Jun;8(2):121–135. doi: 10.1016/s0010-9452(72)80013-3. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  14. Scheidt P. C., Stanley F., Bryla D. A. One-year follow-up of infants exposed to ultrasound in utero. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1978 Aug 1;131(7):743–748. doi: 10.1016/0002-9378(78)90238-7. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  15. Stark C. R., Orleans M., Haverkamp A. D., Murphy J. Short- and long-term risks after exposure to diagnostic ultrasound in utero. Obstet Gynecol. 1984 Feb;63(2):194–200. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  16. Waldenström U., Axelsson O., Nilsson S., Eklund G., Fall O., Lindeberg S., Sjödin Y. Effects of routine one-stage ultrasound screening in pregnancy: a randomised controlled trial. Lancet. 1988 Sep 10;2(8611):585–588. doi: 10.1016/s0140-6736(88)90636-8. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

Articles from BMJ : British Medical Journal are provided here courtesy of BMJ Publishing Group

RESOURCES