Limitations of Clinical and Sonographic Estimates of Birth Weight: Experience With 1034 Parturients

Chauhan, Suneet P.; Hendrix, Nancy W.; Magann, Everett F.; Morrison, John C.; Kenney, Sean P.; Devoe, Lawrence D.

doi:10.1016/s0029-7844(97)00590-5

Cited by 186 publications

(133 citation statements)

References 13 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

109

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Previous papers have indicated that the inter and intraobserver variability of uterine height measurements is small, ranging from 0.52 cm to 1.72 cm. 12 In the largest study evaluating the accuracy of FWE through clinical palpation (n = 661 full-term patients), Chauhan et al 13 reported a mean absolute weight error of 367 g and a mean absolute percentage error of 10.3, which are very similar to the numbers obtained using Johnson's formula in the present study. Assuming that the accuracy of FWE using Leopold's maneuvers and Johnson's method is similar, it seems that since Johnson's method relies on objective measurements and calculations, this latter method of FWE may be easier to perform and teach, especially to midwives or less experienced examiners such as medical students or residents.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 86%

“…18 While some studies have indicated that ultrasound FWE is superior 19,20 or inferior 2,21 to clinical predictions, most have reported that the two methods have similar accuracy. 1,4,8,17,22 In the largest study comparing ultrasound versus clinical FWE, Chauhan et al 13 did not find significant differences in 460 patients at gestational ages of between 37 and 40 weeks. While clinical estimates were correct (± 10%) in 61.7% of their cases, ultrasound estimates were correct in 60%.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 97%

See 1 more Smart Citation

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

Torloni¹,

Sass²,

Sato³

et al. 2008

Sao Paulo Med. J.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

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 (Â± 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.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 86%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 97%

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

Torloni¹,

Sass²,

Sato³

et al. 2008

Sao Paulo Med. J.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In our series, a fetal weight greater than 4300 g was significantly associated with a risk of caesarean delivery, which differs from the recommendations of the High Authority of Health [11] and the American College of Obstetrics and Gynecologists [12]. Indeed, the latter recommend to perform a Caesarean section programmed in the case of weight estimate greater than or equal to 5000 g in the absence of diabetes or 4500 g in the case of diabetes (Table 4).…”

Section: Discussioncontrasting

confidence: 71%

Indication of caesarean section in the childbirth of a macrosome in a Level 2 Health Center in Dakar

Niang¹,

Gaye²,

Mbodj³

et al. 2017

Gynecol Obstet

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objectives: To determine the factors influencing the mode of delivery in case of fetal macrosomia. Materials and Methods:That was a retrospective, descriptive and analytical study carried out from October 1st 2010 to March 31st 2013 at the maternity of Gaspard Kamara Health Center in Dakar. A multivariate analysis using logistic regression was used to determine the factors which influence the mode of delivery in case of fetal macrosomia. Results:We collected 333 delivery records of macrosome on 10639 registered births, a rate of 3.1%. Two hundred and fifteen (215) patients met the inclusion criteria. The labor's test was performed in 55.3% of patients with a failure rate of 15.1%. Caesarean section was performed in 22.8% of patients. The main indications were: acute fetal distress (36.7%), the fetal-pelvic disproportion (26.5%), premature rupture of membranes (12.2%), the extended labor (10.2%), and the lack of engagement (10.2%). All newborns had Apgar score in the fifth minute greater than or equal to 7. The factors that influenced the type of delivery were: fetal weight above 4300 g (p=0.007), nulliparity (p<0.001) and a uterine height upper than 34 cm (p=0.034). Conclusion:In case of fetal macrosomia, fetal weight above 4300 g, nulliparity and the upper uterine height 34 cm are associated with a higher incidence of caesarean delivery.

show abstract

“…For instance, management of diabetic pregnancy, vaginal birth after a previous caesarean section, and intrapartum management of fetuses presenting by the breech will be greatly influenced by estimated fetal weight. 8,9 During the initial era or before the birth of science fetal weight estimation was more a kind guess work. The cardinal importance of knowledge of the size and shape of the fetal head in order to understand the mechanism of labor was first recognized by Smellie (1752) who also pointed out that it is the biparietal diameter which passes through the narrowest part of the pelvic brim.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

COMPARATIVE STUDY FOR ESTIMATION OF FETAL WEIGHT BY CLINICAL & ULTRASONOGRAPHICAL METHODS IN TERM PATIENTS

Ratwani¹,

Madkar²,

Deshpande³

et al. 2010

jemds

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BACKGROUND: Accurate determination of fetal birth weight prior to delivery can have significant bearing on management decision in labor, thereby markedly improving perinatal outcome. OBJECTIVE: To assess fetal weight in term pregnancy by different clinical and ultrasonographical methods. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The study was conducted in Obstetrics and Gynecology department of Dr. D.Y. Patil Medical College, Pimpri, Pune. Two hundred (200) women were selected and studied for a period of one year based on convenience sampling from October 2011 to September 2013.The fetal weight was estimated a week prior to the delivery by both ultrasound and clinical examination. Various formulae's for estimation of fetal weight were applied based on Ultrasound and clinical parameters. All results arising from different formulas were studied and suitable statistics was applied and compared to have clear idea regarding results. RESULTS: All results arising from different formulas were studied by Descriptive statistics and compared with Actual weight at the time of delivery (gold standard). A box plot was used to differentiate various methods used for estimation of fetal weight, It shows that Johnson, Dawn formula and weight in gms (Dare's) formula corresponds with the base line indicating that they can predict birth weight correctly and among these Johnson showed promising results, whereas formulas like Campbell, Comb's, Hadlock and Warsof didn't predict birth weight as accurately as the three clinical methods used, thus in our study it can be seen that clinical methods are better predictors of birth weight than ultrasonographic methods. CONCLUSIONS: In our study it was observed that Clinical methods used for estimation of fetal birth weight was found to be by far simple and reliable methods in estimation of fetal birth weight than Ultrasonographic estimation methods and thus holds importance in day to day practice especially in countries like us where still a large group of population resides in rural areas.

show abstract

Limitations of Clinical and Sonographic Estimates of Birth Weight: Experience With 1034 Parturients

Cited by 186 publications

References 13 publications

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

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

Indication of caesarean section in the childbirth of a macrosome in a Level 2 Health Center in Dakar

COMPARATIVE STUDY FOR ESTIMATION OF FETAL WEIGHT BY CLINICAL & ULTRASONOGRAPHICAL METHODS IN TERM PATIENTS

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About