DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.18203/2320-1770.ijrcog20162664

Assessment of clinical methods and ultrasound in predicting fetal birth weight in term pregnant women

Ruby Yadav, Barun Kumar Sharma, Ritu Nath Deokota, Hafizur Rahman

Abstract


Background: Birth weight is the greatest single factor in the survival of fetus and important factor of neonatal problems. Thus estimating fetal weight antenatally is important to the obstetricians to prevent respiratory morbidity and anticipate problems of shoulder dystocia. The objectives of this study were to assess the fetal weight in term pregnancies by various clinical methods and Ultrasound and to correlate these methods of estimation of fetal weight with the actual birth weight of the baby after delivery.

Methods: Between January 2013 to June 2014 a prospective cross-sectional hospital based study was conducted at the Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology of Central Referral Hospital, Sikkim Manipal Institute of Medical Sciences Gangtok. All subjects with singleton pregnancy with reliable date/dating scan, with no fetal anomalies, undergoing obstetric scan at term one week prior to delivery were included. Estimated fetal weight (EFW) was calculated by clinical method AG×SFH (Abdominal girth x Symphysiofundal height) and Johnson’s formula. Hadlock formula using Ultrasound was used. EFW were compared with the actual birth weight.

Results: Two hundred women were recruited during the study period. Mean age of the women were 25.24 ±3.32 years and mean gestational age was 38.83 ± 1.10 weeks. For all the cases scan delivery interval was less than seven days. Sixty nine percent of birth weights were distributed between 2000-3500 grams. Mean birth weight of Hadlock’s formula (3240 grams) was closest to the mean of actual birth weight (3100 grams). Hadlock Formula was more accurate for birth range between 2500-3500 grams followed by AG×SFH. For Large for Gestational age babies Johnson’s Formula was found to be better. Average error in estimating fetal weight was 190.34 grams by Hadlock’s formula, 208.78 grams by AG x SFH and 290.29 grams by Johnson’s method. The difference between Hadlock’s and AG×SFH was not statistically significant (p>0.01); but for Johnson’s it was statistically significant (p<0.01). Prediction of birth weight within 10% of actual birth weight was in 81% of Cases by AG x SFH formula, 79% by Hadlock’s formula, and 47% by Johnson’s formula.

Conclusions: Clinical estimation of birth weight clearly has a role in management of labour and delivery in a term pregnancy. Clinical estimation especially by SFH×AG method is as accurate as routine USG estimated in average birth weight. SFH × AG clinical formula can be of great value in developing countries like ours, where ultrasound is not available at many health care centers especially in a rural area.


Keywords


Abdominal girth, Symphysiofundal height, Fetal weight, Hadlock formula, Ultrasound

Full Text:

PDF

References


Barnhard Y, Bar-Hava I, Divon MY. Accuracy of intrapartum estimates of fetal weight. Effect of oligohydramnios. J Reprod Med. 1996;41(12):907-10.

Raman S, Urquhart R, Yusof M. Clinical versus ultrasound estimation of fetal weight. Aust N Z J Obstet Gynaecol. 1992;32(3):196-9.

Jolly MC, Sebire NJ, Harris JP, Regan L, Robinson S. Risk factors for macrosomia and its clinical consequences: a study of 350,311 pregnancies. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol. 2003;10:111(1):9-14.

Nahum G. Estimation of fetal weight-a review article last updated on 11 July 2002 (http://www.emedicine.com) as accessed on 22 January 2016.

Sirohiwal D, Singal SR, Passi V, Sen J. Estimation of fetal weight. Obstet Gynaecol Today. 2004;9:247-9.

Mehdizadeh A, Alaghehbandan R, Horsan H. Comparison of clinical versus ultrasound estimation of fetal weight. Am J Perinatol. 2000;17(5):233-6.

Wilcox AJ, Skjaerven R. Birth weight and perinatal mortality: the effect of gestational age. Am J Public Health. 1992;82(3):378-82.

Ratanasiri T, Jirapornkul S, Somboonporn W, Seejorn K, Patumnakul P. Comparison of the accuracy of ultrasonic fetal weight estimation by using the various equations. J Med Assoc Thai. 2002;85(9):962-7.

Baum JD, Gussman D, Wirth JC. Clinical and patient estimation of fetal weight vs. ultrasound estimation. J Reprod Med. 2002;47(3):194-8.

Hendrix NW, Grady CS, Chauhan SP. Clinical vs. sonographic estimate of birth weight in term parturients. A randomized clinical trial. J Reprod Med. 2000;45(4):317-22.

Chauhan KP, Patel UJ. Comparative study of various methods of fetal weight estimation at term pregnancy. The Journal of Integrated Health Sciences. 2013;1(1):3-6.

Raghuvanshi T, Pawar M. Comparative Study of Fetal Weight Estimation by Various Methods among Term Pregnancies at Rural Tertiary Care Centre, Maharashtra. Journal of Evolution of Medical and Dental Sciences. 2014;3(41):10291-6.

Sherman DJ. A comparison of clinical and ultrasonic estimation of fetal weight. Obstetrics and gynecology. 1998;91:212-7.

Bhandary Amritha A, Pinto Patrick J, Shetty Ashwin P. Comparative Study of Various Methods of Fetal Weight Estimation in Term Pregnancy. Ind J Gynecol Obstet. 2004;54:336-9.