Clinical formulas, mother's opinion and ultrasound in predicting birth weight

Abstract

CONTEXT AND OBJECTIVE: Accurate fetal weight estimation is important for labor and delivery management. So far, there has not been any conclusive evidence to indicate that any technique for fetal weight estimation is superior to any other. Clinical formulas for fetal weight estimation are easy to use but have not been extensively studied in the literature. This study aimed to evaluate the accuracy of clinical formulas for fetal weight estimation compared to maternal and ultrasound estimates. DESIGN AND SETTING: Prospective study involving 100 full-term, cephalic, singleton pregnancies delivered within three days of fetal weight estimation. The setting was a tertiary public teaching hospital in São Paulo, Brazil. METHODS: Upon admission, the mother's opinion about fetal weight was recorded. Symphyseal-fundal height and abdominal girth were measured and two formulas were used to calculate fetal weight. An ultrasound scan was then performed by a specialist to estimate fetal weight. The four estimates were compared with the birth weight. The accuracy of the estimates was assessed by calculating the percentage that was within 10% of actual birth weight for each method. The chi-squared test was used for comparisons and p < 0.05 was considered significant. RESULTS: The birth weight was correctly estimated (± 10%) in 59%, 57%, 61%, and 65% of the cases using the mother's estimate, two clinical formulas, and ultrasound estimate, respectively. The accuracy of the four methods did not differ significantly. CONCLUSION: Clinical formulas for fetal weight prediction are as accurate as maternal and ultrasound estimates.

Performance de l’estimation échographique du poids fœtal réalisée par les internes de spécialité le jour du terme

“…Cependant, l'échographie restait plus performante pour les poids les plus faibles et les plus élevés [20]. Dans une étude récente brésilienne, sur 100 patientes au-delà de 37 SA, l'estimation échographique n'était pas plus performante que l'estimation clinique évaluée par la hauteur utérine et le périmètre ombilical [21]. Dans notre étude, le coefficient de corrélation bien que statistiquement significatif reste assez bas (0,48) comparé à d'autres études avec des coefficients > 0,7 [5].…”

Comparing the accuracy of maternal, clinical, and ultrasound estimations to predict birthweight: a meta‐analysis

“…Five studies involving 492 women were extracted to evaluate the difference in correlation coefficient of actual birthweight with ultrasound estimation compared with clinical estimation (Table S2) (5,9,14,17,18,21). Maternal estimation was performed based on the women's experiences and their responses to a questionnaire (2)(3)(4)(7)(8)(9)11,20). Clinical and ultrasound estimations were performed based on various methods, including abdominal palpation and Leopold maneuver (40.5%, n = 15 of 37) (1,3,4,(6)(7)(8)(9)11,15,16) and the formulas of Hadlock I, II, III, and IV (1985) (70.3%, n = 26 of 37) (1,3,(5)(6)(7)(8)(9)(10)(13)(14)(15)(16)(17)(18)20,21), respectively ( Table 2 and Table S2).…”

Factors affecting sustainable iodine deficiency elimination in Pakistan: A global perspective

“…In 2008, economists participating in the Copenhagen Consensus ranked universal salt iodization (USI) as third on the list of the 10 biggest challenges in advancing global welfare 2 . The International Child Development Steering Group has identified iodine deficiency as one of four key global health factors related to impaired child development 3 . Even today, more than 1.88 billion people globally have inadequate iodine intake, and 241 million of them are children, 4 who are at risk of the detrimental effects of iodine deficiency, including endemic goiter, cretinism, intellectual impairment, growth retardation, neonatal hypothyroidism, pregnancy loss, and infant mortality 1 …”