Jonathan D Baum1, Debra Gussman, John C Wirth. 1. Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, New York University, Downtown Hospital, New York, New York, USA. muab@aol.com
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To compare clinical and patient estimation of fetal weight to ultrasound estimation. STUDY DESIGN: Prospective study of clinical, patient and ultrasound estimation of fetal weight at term. RESULTS: A total of 200 pregnant women participated. There was no statistically significant difference between clinical and sonographic estimates of fetal weight: of the estimates, 64.0% were within 10% of the actual birth weight vs. 62.5% (P > .2). There was no statistically significant difference between patient and sonographic estimates of fetal weight: of the estimates, 53.5% were within 10% of the actual birth weight vs. 62.5%, respectively (P < .1). Senior resident clinical and sonographic estimates of fetal weight were superior to junior resident estimates: 75.2% of clinical estimates were within 10% of the actual birth weight vs. 59.2% (P < .03), and 73.1% of sonographic estimates were within 10% of the actual birth weight vs. 58.3% (P < .05). Nulliparous and multiparous patients were equally accurate in estimating fetal weight: 48.1% of estimates were within 10% of birth weight vs. 57.4% (P > .2). CONCLUSION: Sonographic estimation of fetal weight offers no advantage over clinical or patient estimation of fetal weight at term. Senior resident clinical and sonographic estimates are superior to junior resident estimates. Parity has no effect on patient accuracy in estimating fetal weight.
OBJECTIVE: To compare clinical and patient estimation of fetal weight to ultrasound estimation. STUDY DESIGN: Prospective study of clinical, patient and ultrasound estimation of fetal weight at term. RESULTS: A total of 200 pregnant women participated. There was no statistically significant difference between clinical and sonographic estimates of fetal weight: of the estimates, 64.0% were within 10% of the actual birth weight vs. 62.5% (P > .2). There was no statistically significant difference between patient and sonographic estimates of fetal weight: of the estimates, 53.5% were within 10% of the actual birth weight vs. 62.5%, respectively (P < .1). Senior resident clinical and sonographic estimates of fetal weight were superior to junior resident estimates: 75.2% of clinical estimates were within 10% of the actual birth weight vs. 59.2% (P < .03), and 73.1% of sonographic estimates were within 10% of the actual birth weight vs. 58.3% (P < .05). Nulliparous and multiparous patients were equally accurate in estimating fetal weight: 48.1% of estimates were within 10% of birth weight vs. 57.4% (P > .2). CONCLUSION: Sonographic estimation of fetal weight offers no advantage over clinical or patient estimation of fetal weight at term. Senior resident clinical and sonographic estimates are superior to junior resident estimates. Parity has no effect on patient accuracy in estimating fetal weight.
Authors: Katherine R Goetzinger; Anthony O Odibo; Anthony L Shanks; Kimberly A Roehl; Alison G Cahill Journal: J Matern Fetal Neonatal Med Date: 2013-06-20
Authors: Akinola S Shittu; Oluwafemi Kuti; Ernest O Orji; Niyi O Makinde; Solomon O Ogunniy; Oluwagbemiga O Ayoola; Salami S Sule Journal: J Health Popul Nutr Date: 2007-03 Impact factor: 2.000