Biparietal diameter and menstrual age in the black population attending edendale hospital

Muñoz, Washington Patricio; Moore, P. J.; MacKinnon, Anne; Haines, Linda M.

doi:10.1002/jcu.1870140904

Cited by 5 publications

(2 citation statements)

References 14 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Eighty‐three publications from 32 countries were identified; 14–96 the earliest was published in 1971 and the latest in 2008. In two publications, 49,76 multiple study designs were used, for instance AC using a longitudinal and a cross‐sectional design; the best described methodology with the highest quality score was used in the final analysis.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Systematic review of methodology used in ultrasound studies aimed at creating charts of fetal size

Ioannou

Talbot

Ohuma

et al. 2012

BJOG

132

163

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background Reliable ultrasound charts are necessary for the prenatal assessment of fetal size, yet there is a wide variation of methodologies for the creation of such charts.Objective To evaluate the methodological quality of studies of fetal biometry using a set of predefined quality criteria of study design, statistical analysis and reporting methods.Search strategy Electronic searches in MEDLINE, EMBASE and CINAHL, and references of retrieved articles.Selection criteria Observational studies whose primary aim was to create ultrasound size charts for bi-parietal diameter, head circumference, abdominal circumference and femur length in fetuses from singleton pregnancies.Data collection and analysis Studies were scored against a predefined set of independently agreed methodological criteria and an overall quality score was given to each study. Multiple regression analysis between quality scores and study characteristics was performed.Main results Eighty-three studies met the inclusion criteria. The highest potential for bias was noted in the following fields: 'Inclusion/exclusion criteria', as none of the studies defined a rigorous set of antenatal or fetal conditions which should be excluded from analysis; 'Ultrasound quality control measures', as no study demonstrated a comprehensive quality assurance strategy; and 'Sample size calculation', which was apparent in six studies only. On multiple regression analysis, there was a positive correlation between quality scores and year of publication: quality has improved with time, yet considerable heterogeneity in study methodology is still observed today.Conclusions There is considerable methodological heterogeneity in studies of fetal biometry. Standardisation of methodologies is necessary in order to make correct interpretations and comparisons between different charts. A checklist of recommended methodologies is proposed.

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Systematic review of methodology used in ultrasound studies aimed at creating charts of fetal size

Ioannou

Talbot

Ohuma

et al. 2012

BJOG

132

163

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Clear guidelines and recommendations for screening of abnormal fetal size and subsequent management were also put in place [5,[15][16][17][18][19][20][21]. In low-and middle-income countries (LMICs), and particularly in sub-Saharan Africa, local charts are either lacking or not implemented where available [22][23][24][25]. The latter mostly refer to European charts [26], or charts preprogramed by default in the ultrasound device software [11][12][13][14]27].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Fetal biometry assessment with Intergrowth 21st’s and Salomon’s equations in rural Burkina Faso

Bihoun

Zango

Traoré-Coulibaly

et al. 2020

BMC Pregnancy Childbirth

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: Ultrasound scanning during the 2nd or the 3rd trimester of pregnancy for fetal size disturbances screening is heavily dependent of the choice of the reference chart. This study aimed to assess the agreement of Salomon and the Intergrowth 21st equations in evaluating fetal biometric measurements in a rural area of Burkina Faso, and to measure the effect of changing a reference chart. Methods: Data collected in Nazoanga, Burkina Faso, between October 2010 and October 2012, during a clinical trial evaluating the safety and efficacy of several antimalarial treatments in pregnant women were analyzed. We included singleton pregnancies at 16-36 weeks gestation as determined by ultrasound measurements of fetal bi-parietal diameter (BPD), head circumference (HC), abdominal circumference (AC) and femur length (FL). Expected mean and standard deviation at a given gestational age was computed using equations from Salomon references and using Intergrowth 21st standard. Then, z-scores were calculated and used subsequently to compare Salomon references with Intergrowth 21st standards. Results: The analysis included 276 singleton pregnancies. Agreement was poor except for HC: mean difference − 0.01, limits of agreement − 0.60 and 0.59. When AC was used as a surrogate of fetal size, switching from the reference of Salomon to the standards of Intergrowth 21st increased ten times the proportion of fetuses above the 90th percentile: 2.9 and 31.2%, respectively. Mean differences were larger in the third trimester than in the second trimester. However, agreement remained good for HC in both trimesters. Difference in the proportion of AC measurements above the 90th percentile using Salomon and Intergrowth 21st equations was greater in the second trimester (2.6 and 36.3%, respectively) than in the third trimester (3.5 and 19.8%, respectively). The greatest difference between the two charts was observed in the number of FL measurements classified as large in the second trimester (6.8 and 54.2%, using Salomon and Intergrowth 21st equations, respectively). Conclusion: The agreement between Intergrowth 21st and Salomon equations is poor apart from HC. This would imply different clinical decision regarding the management of the pregnancy.

show abstract

Ultrasonographic dating of pregnancy causes significant errors in Down syndrome risk assessment that may be minimized by use of biparietal diameter—based means

Reynolds¹,

Penney²,

Hughes³

1992

American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Biparietal diameter and menstrual age in the black population attending edendale hospital

Cited by 5 publications

References 14 publications

Systematic review of methodology used in ultrasound studies aimed at creating charts of fetal size

Systematic review of methodology used in ultrasound studies aimed at creating charts of fetal size

Fetal biometry assessment with Intergrowth 21st’s and Salomon’s equations in rural Burkina Faso

Ultrasonographic dating of pregnancy causes significant errors in Down syndrome risk assessment that may be minimized by use of biparietal diameter—based means

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About