Re: ? about percentages.

[Guest guest]

It is true that the % is only one measurement, and not doesn't completely

represent any child's head shape. It is the ration of width to length. However

for those of us good with numbers who might not see all the aspects of a given

child's head, it is a good guideline. Normal is about 78-80%.

-christine

sydney, 3.5 yrs, starband grad

>

> I'm really confused.

>

> I see a lot of people posting about the starting % and ending %.

>

> At my daughter's last appointment (she had been in her band one week) I asked

the clinician about what her starting percentage was. She said that % are not

an accurate way of diagnosing how severe the condition is.

>

> Is this right? My daughter started at 85% she said, which seems like a lot

higher than most people are posting, yet they said her case was moderate.

>

> Any help is greatly appreciated!

>

[Guest guest]

Thanks . I guess this is just confusing me even more because the clinician said that we are trying to get her as close to 0 as possible.  I don't get it.........

[Guest guest]

oops, I think we are talking about different percentages. The one I mean is the

cranial ration or cephalic index. It is a measure of brachy, not plagio. It

measures the ratio of width to length. Brachy is generally measured this way.

There is a different percentage that can be used for plagio (asymmetry) but

using the mm is more common. I think the percentage is called the radial

symmetry index (but I could be wrong) and it gives you the percentage of

asymmetry. If your daughter has only plagio (not brachy) then percentages are

probably not needed. My daughter started with 4.5 mm of asymmetry meaning the

measurement of one diagonal was 4.5 mm larger than the measurement of the other

diagonal. She graduated at 3.5 mm, which isn't much change, but that is because

we were focusing on the brachy. Her brachy meant her head was quite wide

compared to normal. By directing growth to the back her overall head shape

became more normal, thus her brachy number went from 96% to 85%.

-christine

sydney, 3.5 yrs, starband grad

>

> Thanks .

>

> I guess this is just confusing me even more because the clinician said that

> we are trying to get her as close to 0 as possible. I don't get it.........

>

[Guest guest]

Thanks !I think I need some clarification from CT next time we go in.Another thing the clinician said was " we are trying to get her head to go from this " (and she imitated a brachy head) " to this " (imitating a brachy head stretching out front to back).

So...she basically said my daughter had brachy.  But, when I look @ the Clinical Eval. plagio is marked.  AND, looking at the diagrams plagio is what my daughter has. This makes me nervous, that the clinician didn't know what she was talking about....I had a strange feeling with her ANYWAY so now I'm really weirded out.  Good thing is she isn't normally with the office we were at.  I'm going to confirm with a new clinician next Tuesday.

[Guest guest]

Which CT did you go to? I guess I'm a little confused because it seems that you

asked her for the %age, so that's what she gave you. Did you ask her for the mm

measurement since your daughter apparently has plagio? Maybe she was just

answering your question the way you asked it? Also, my son's %age measurement

was 78% and he only had plagio, so that %age is well within the normal range.

85% is mild, but it still infers that the head is slightly wider than it should

be so maybe she has a mild combination of both (which a lot of babies have these

days). An ideal head should be 2/3 longer than it is wide. Of course in the wake

of the Back to Sleep campaign a lot of heads are just generally wider without

having a lot of, if any, flatness.

I guess what I'm trying to say is that I wouldn't give up on the clinician just

yet. All of them at CT are really quite knowledgable. And if she was from

another clinic, that gives her even more clout, I would think, to be chosen as a

fill-in or whatever the case was. So maybe you just have to get a clearer

picture of what she was talking about.

Good luck!

Jake-3 (DOCBand Grad 9/08)

>

> Thanks !

>

> I think I need some clarification from CT next time we go in.

>

> Another thing the clinician said was " we are trying to get her head to go

> from this " (and she imitated a brachy head) " to this " (imitating a brachy

> head stretching out front to back).

>

> So...she basically said my daughter had brachy. But, when I look @ the

> Clinical Eval. plagio is marked. AND, looking at the diagrams plagio is

> what my daughter has.

>

> This makes me nervous, that the clinician didn't know what she was talking

> about....I had a strange feeling with her ANYWAY so now I'm really weirded

> out. Good thing is she isn't normally with the office we were at. I'm

> going to confirm with a new clinician next Tuesday.

>

[Guest guest]

One correction as an FYI, I just looked at my son's measurement sheet from CT

and his starting cephalic index was officially 79.4%, and at the end of

treatment it was down to 75% (even with 1-2 mm of error in measuring, it

obviously changed a little). So even though they were only really treating

plagio, in the end it also improved his width-length ratio.

Jake-3 (DOCband Grad 9/08)

> >

> > Thanks !

> >

> > I think I need some clarification from CT next time we go in.

> >

> > Another thing the clinician said was " we are trying to get her head to go

> > from this " (and she imitated a brachy head) " to this " (imitating a brachy

> > head stretching out front to back).

> >

> > So...she basically said my daughter had brachy. But, when I look @ the

> > Clinical Eval. plagio is marked. AND, looking at the diagrams plagio is

> > what my daughter has.

> >

> > This makes me nervous, that the clinician didn't know what she was talking

> > about....I had a strange feeling with her ANYWAY so now I'm really weirded

> > out. Good thing is she isn't normally with the office we were at. I'm

> > going to confirm with a new clinician next Tuesday.

> >

>