{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.04658018867924528, 'fraction_numerical': 0.021816037735849055, 'mean_word_length': 4.791808873720137, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Assessment of anthropometric indicators in children with cerebral palsy according to the type of motor dysfunction and reference standard.

AIM
The study aimed to demonstrate that the assessment of the anthropomorphic measurements of children with cerebral palsy (CP) varies according to the type of motor dysfunction and references standard used for comparison.


METHOD
In a cross-sectional design, 108 children 2 to 16 years were classified according to the type of motor dysfunction by gender and age group. Weight, mid-upper-arm-circumference (MUAC), and alternative measures for height were performed. Height/age and weight/age indexes and BMI were evaluated with percentiles and/or Z-scores with reference to a number of previously published references of growth, including those of the World Health Organization (WHO).


RESULTS
Fifty-three (49.1%) were females and 55 (50.9%) males. Spastic type was predominant (73.1%) and 26.9% were other types of dysfunction. Most of the children were located on level IV (14.6%) and level V (73.1%) of the Gross Motor Function Classification System (GMFCS). Significant differences were found, suggesting that weight (p = 0.002), height (p = 0.001), and MUAC (p = 0.05) are higher in the spastic group than in other groups.


CONCLUSIONS
The anthropometric indicators were significantly higher in the spastic group than in other groups. Upper-arm length (UAL) seemed less appropriate than knee height (KH) and lower-leg length (LLL) for measuring height. The WHO reference standard was not useful to evaluate the majority of anthropometric indexes in children with CP, other references as the growth charts of Day and Brooks have been more suitable.