scholarly journals Deviasi Taksiran Berat Janin pada Metode Johnson-Toshack, Formula Sederhana dan Formula Dare

2017 ◽  
Vol 8 (2) ◽  
pp. 235
Author(s):  
Emy Rianti ◽  
Siti Aminah
Keyword(s):  
Birth Weight ◽  
Simple Formula ◽  
Fetal Weight ◽  
Abdominal Circumference ◽  
Weight Estimation ◽  
Cross Sectional ◽  
Birth Canal ◽  
Fetal Weight Estimation ◽  
Method Of Measurement ◽  
Infant Birth

<p><em>The ability of the birth attendant to estimate the birth weight of the fetus </em><em>is </em><em>very</em><em> important that it does not cause </em><em>childbirth</em><em> dystocia that may cause </em><em>rip</em><em> in the birth canal. </em><em>The aim of this study was to</em><em> compare the deviation of fetal weight estimation according to Johnson-Toshack method, simple formula and Dare formula. Thedesign used was cross sectional, </em><em>the data taken primarily</em><em>, involving 100 respondents at Fatmawati General Hospital Jakarta, from August to September 2015. The findings showed that the smallest deviation mean of fetal weight estimation is Johnson-Toshack method. The results of this method of measurement tend to be close to infant birth weight, especially in the client </em><em>childbirth</em><em> with abdominal circumference 90 - 100 cm. The conclusion of this study is that Johnson-Toshack's fetal weighing estimates are more appropriate for </em><em>childbirth</em><em> with 90 to 100 cm </em><em>a</em><em>bdominal circumference size, except in </em><em>childbirth</em><em> with ruptured membranes, applying a fetal weight estimate based on the Dare formula would be more appropriate.</em></p><p><strong><em> </em></strong></p>

scholarly journals Accuracy of ultrasonic fetal weight estimation using head and abdominal circumference and femur length

2005 ◽  
Vol 58 (11-12) ◽  
pp. 548-552 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ljiljana Mladenovic-Segedi ◽  
Dimitrije Segedi
Keyword(s):  
Birth Weight ◽  
Head Circumference ◽  
Fetal Weight ◽  
Abdominal Circumference ◽  
Weight Estimation ◽  
Fetal Head ◽  
Total Body Mass ◽  
Femur Length ◽  
Fetal Weight Estimation ◽  
Gynecology And Obstetrics

Introduction Former investigations have shown that the accuracy of fetal weight estimation is significantly higher if several ultrasonic fe?tal parameters are measured, because the total body mass depends on the size of fetal head, abdominal circumference and femur length. The aim of this investigation was to establish the best regression model, that is a number of combinations of fetal parameters providing the most accurate fetal weight estimation in utero in our population. Material and methods This prospective study was carried out at the Gynecology and Obstetrics Clinic of the Clinical Center Novi Sad. It included 270 pregnant women with singleton pregnancies within 72 hours of delivery who underwent ultrasound measurements of the biparietal diameter (BPD), head circumference (HC), ab?dominal circumference (AC) and femur length (FL). Results In regard to fetal weight estimation formulas, the deviation was lowest using regression models that simultaneously analyzed four fetal parameters (0.55%) with SD ?7.61%. In these models the estimates of fetal weights were within ?5% of actual birth weight in 48.89%, and within ?10% of actual birth weight in 81.48%. Good results were also obtained using AC, FL measurements (0.92% ? 8.20) as well as using AC, HC, FL measurements (-1.45% ? 7.81). In our sample the combination of AC and FL model gave better results in fetal weight estimation (0.92 ? 8.20%) than the one using BPD and AC (2.97 ? 8.83%). Furthermore, the model using parameters AC, HC and FL showed a lower error in accuracy (-1.45 ? 7.81%) than the model using BPD, AC and FL (2.51 ? 7.82%). Conclusion This investigation has confirmed that the accuracy of fetal weight estimation increases with the number of measured ultra?sonic fetal parameters. In our population the greatest accuracy was obtained using BPD, HC, AC and FL model. In cases when fast estimation of fetal weight is needed, AC, HC, FL model may be appropriate, but if fetal head circumference cannot be measured (amnion rupture and/or fetal head already in the pelvis) the AC, FL model should be used.

scholarly journals INTEGRATION OF FETAL MID THIGH SOFT TISSUE THICKNESS IN ULTRASOUND BIRTH WEIGHT ESTIMATION FORMULA INCREASES THE ACCURACY OF FETAL WEIGHT ESTIMATION NEAR TERM

2018 ◽  
Vol 11 (4) ◽  
pp. 446
Author(s):  
Shripad Hebbar ◽  
Sukriti Malaviya ◽  
Sunanda Bharatnur
Keyword(s):  
Birth Weight ◽  
Prediction Models ◽  
Fetal Weight ◽  
Abdominal Circumference ◽  
Estimation Methods ◽  
Weight Estimation ◽  
Singleton Pregnancy ◽  
Fetal Biometry ◽  
Fetal Weight Estimation ◽  
Soft Tissue Thickness

Objective: The objective of the study was to find whether incorporation of MTSTT in fetal weight estimation formulae which are traditionally based on biparietal diameter (BPD), head circumference (HC), abdominal circumference (AC), and femur length (FL) improves birth weight (BW) estimation. Methods: In a prospective observational study, MTSTT was measured within 1 week of delivery in 100 women with term singleton pregnancy along with other standard biometric parameters, i.e. BPD, HC, AC and FL, and MTSTT. Multiple regression analysis was carried out using PHOEBE regression software using different combinations of biometric variables to find out the best fit model of fetal weight estimation. The predicted BW was compared with actual neonatal BW soon after delivery and regression coefficients (R2) were determined for each of prediction models for comparing the accuracies. Results: Mean gestational age at delivery was 38.4±1.08 weeks and the BW of neonates varied between 2.18 kg and 4.38 kg (mean ± standard deviation: 3.07±0.43 kg). By adding MTSTT to BPD, HC, AC, and FL, we obtained the formula Log 10 (BW) = −0.14783+0.00725 *BPD +0.00043 *HC +0.00436 *AC +0.01942 *FL +0.16299 *MTSTT, which had a very good Pearson regression coefficient ((r2: 0.89 p<0.001) compared to conventional models based on standard fetal biometry. All prediction models had better strength of correlation when combined with MTSTT (p<0.001). The routine four parameter formula could identify 45% and 80% of fetuses within 5% and 10% weight range; pick up rate was further increased to 61% and 95% by addition of MTSTT. Conclusion: It is evident that addition of MTSTT to other biometric variables in models of fetal weight estimation improves neonatal BW prediction (r2=0.89).

scholarly journals Accuracy of Fetal Weight Estimation Using Hadlock II Formula

2019 ◽  
pp. 166-169
Author(s):  
Dwi Pratika Anjarwati ◽  
Yudhistya Ngudi Insan Ksyatria ◽  
Widardo Widardo
Keyword(s):  
Birth Weight ◽  
Skills Training ◽  
Cross Sectional Study ◽  
Fetal Weight ◽  
Weight Estimation ◽  
Cross Sectional ◽  
Fetal Weight Estimation ◽  
Fetal Birth Weight ◽  
The Relationship ◽  
Estimated Fetal Weight

abstract Objective: to investigate the accuracy of estimated fetal weight using Hadlock II formula in RSUD Dr Moewardi. Methods: This cross-sectional study was conducted at RSUD Dr Moewardi in June 2017. Subjects were women who gave birth at RSUD Dr Moewardi from August 2014 to March 2017. The method of collecting data by quoting the medical record as required. Data analysis was done by using linear regression statistic test. Result: By distribution, the number of samples that, according to the standard, is 81.67 %. With the value of R = 0.706 which means that the relationship between two research variables are strong and the value of R Square = 0.499 which means that estimated fetal weight using Hadlock II formula has contribution 49.9 % on fetal birth weight and 50.1 % others by other factors. Conclusion: Fetal weight estimation using Hadlock II formula in RSUD Dr Moewardi has low accuracy. Operator skills training is required to improve the accuracy of estimated fetal weight. Keywords:  fetal birth weight,  fetal weight estimation, Hadlock II   abstrak Tujuan : Mengetahui keakuratan taksiran berat janin menggunakan rumus Hadlock II di RSUD Dr Moewardi. Metode : Penelitian ini adalah penelitian observasional analitik. Penelitian ini dilaksanakan di RSUD Dr Moewardi pada Juni 2017. Subjek penelitian ini adalah data rekam medis dari ibu hamil yang mengalami partus di RSUD Dr Moewardi pada Agustus 2014 – Maret 2017. Metode pengumpulan data dengan mengutip data rekam medis pasien sesuai ketentuan. Analisis data dilakukan dengan uji statistik regresi linier. Hasil : Secara distribusi, jumlah sampel yang memenuhi standar yaitu   81,67 %. Dengan nilai R = 0,706 yang artinya bahwa hubungan kedua variabel penelitian ada dalam kategori kuat dan nilai R Square = 0,499 yang berarti taksiran berat janin menggunakan rumus Hadlock II memiliki pengaruh kontribusi sebesar 49,9% terhadap berat bayi lahir sedangkan 50.1 % lainnya dipengaruhi oleh faktor lain. Kesimpulan : Taksiran berat janin menggunakan rumus Hadlock II  di RSUD Dr Moewardi kurang akurat. Perlu dilakukan pelatihan ketrampilan operator sehingga diharapkan dapat meningkatkan keakuratan taksiran berat janin.  Kata kunci:   berat bayi lahir , Hadlock II, , taksiran berat janin

scholarly journals Validation of Sonographic Fetal Weight Estimators Among Term Parturients in Uganda

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Senai Goitom Sereke ◽  
Richard Okello Omara ◽  
Felix Bongomin ◽  
Sarah Nakubulwa ◽  
Harriet Nalubega Kisembo
Keyword(s):  
Birth Weight ◽  
Mode Of Delivery ◽  
Mean Difference ◽  
Fetal Weight ◽  
Abdominal Circumference ◽  
Weight Estimation ◽  
Fetal Weight Estimation ◽  
Biparietal Diameter ◽  
Mulago National Referral Hospital ◽  
Fetal Birth Weight

Abstract BackgroundAccuracy of fetal weight estimation by ultrasound is essential in making decisions on the time and mode of delivery. There are many proposed formulas for fetal weight estimation such as Hadlock 1, Hadlock 2, Hadlock 3, Hadlock 4 and Shepard. What best applies to the Ugandan population isn’t known since no validation of any of the formulas has been done before. The primary aim of this study was to determine the accuracy of sonographic estimation of fetal weight using five most commonly used formulas, and analyze formula variations for different weight ranges. MethodsThis was a hospital based prospective cohort study at Mulago National Referral Hospital, Kampala, Uganda. A total of 356 pregnant women who consented and were within three days of birth, prenatal ultrasound fetal weight determined by measuring the biparietal diameter, head circumference, abdominal circumference, femoral length, and then was compared with actual birth weight. ResultsThe overall accuracy of Hadlock 1, Hadlock 2, Hadlock 3, Hadlock 4 and Shepard formula were 66.9%, 73.3%, 77.3%, 78.4% and 69.7% respectively. All Hadlocks showed significant mean difference between weight estimates and actual birth weight (p<0.01) whereas Shepard formula did not [p - 0.2], when no stratification of fetal weights was done. However, all Hadlocks showed a none significant (p-values > 0.05) mean difference between weight estimates and actual birth weight when the actual birth weight was ≥4000.0gms. Shepard weight estimates showed a none significant mean difference when actual birth weight was <4000gms. Bland-Altman graphs also showed a better agreement of weight estimated by Shepard formula and actual birth weights. ConclusionAll the five formulas were accurate at estimating actual birth weights within 10% accuracy. However, this accuracy varied with the fetal birth weight. Shepard was more accurate in estimating actual birth weights <4000grams whereas all Hadlocks were more accurate when the actual birthweight was ≥ 4000grams.

scholarly journals Prospective verification of sonographic fetal weight estimators among term parturients in Uganda

2021 ◽  
Vol 21 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Senai Goitom Sereke ◽  
Richard Okello Omara ◽  
Felix Bongomin ◽  
Sarah Nakubulwa ◽  
Harriet Nalubega Kisembo
Keyword(s):  
Birth Weight ◽  
Mode Of Delivery ◽  
Mean Difference ◽  
Fetal Weight ◽  
Abdominal Circumference ◽  
Weight Estimation ◽  
Fetal Weight Estimation ◽  
Biparietal Diameter ◽  
Mulago National Referral Hospital ◽  
Fetal Birth Weight

Abstract Background Accuracy of fetal weight estimation by ultrasound is essential in making decisions on the time and mode of delivery. There are many proposed formulas for fetal weight estimation such as Hadlock 1, Hadlock 2, Hadlock 3, Hadlock 4 and Shepard. What best applies to the Ugandan population is not known since no verification of any of the formulas has been done before. The primary aim of this study was to determine the accuracy of sonographic estimation of fetal weight using five most commonly used formulas, and analyze formula variations for different weight ranges. Methods This was a hospital based prospective cohort study at Mulago National Referral Hospital, Kampala, Uganda. A total of 356 pregnant women who consented and were within 3 days of birth were enrolled. Prenatal ultrasound fetal weight determined by measuring the biparietal diameter, head circumference, abdominal circumference, femoral length, and then was compared with actual birth weight. Results The overall accuracy of Hadlock 1, Hadlock 2, Hadlock 3, Hadlock 4 and Shepard formula were 66.9, 73.3, 77.3, 78.4 and 69.7% respectively. All Hadlocks showed significant mean difference between weight estimates and actual birth weight (p < 0.01) whereas Shepard formula did not [p - 0.2], when no stratification of fetal weights was done. However, all Hadlocks showed a none significant (p-values > 0.05) mean difference between weight estimates and actual birth weight when the actual birth weight was ≥4000.0 g. Shepard weight estimates showed a none significant mean difference when actual birth weight was < 4000 g. Bland-Altman graphs also showed a better agreement of weight estimated by Shepard formula and actual birth weights. Conclusion All the five formulas were accurate at estimating actual birth weights within 10% accuracy. However, this accuracy varied with the fetal birth weight. Shepard was more accurate in estimating actual birth weights < 4000 g whereas all Hadlocks were more accurate when the actual birthweight was ≥4000 g.

Discrepancy Analysis between Clinical Versus Ultrasound Estimated Fetal Weight and Actual Birth Weight at 3rd Trimester

2019 ◽  
Vol 11 (1) ◽  
pp. 32-38
Author(s):  
Naznin Rashid Shewly ◽  
Menoka Ferdous ◽  
Hasina Begum ◽  
Shahadat Hossain Khan ◽  
Sheema Rani Debee ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Birth Weight ◽  
Low Birth Weight ◽  
Fetal Weight ◽  
P Value ◽  
Weight Estimation ◽  
Third Trimester ◽  
Mortality And Morbidity ◽  
Fetal Weight Estimation ◽  
Obstetric Management ◽  
Estimated Fetal Weight

Background: In obstetric management fetal weight estimation is an important consideration when planning the mode of delivery in our day to day practice. In Bangladesh low birth weight is a major public health problem & incidence is 38% - 58%. Neonatal mortality and morbidity also yet high. So accurate antenatal estimation of fetal weight is a good way to detect macrosomia or small for date baby. Thus to improve the pregnancy outcome and neonatal outcome decreasing various chance of neonatal mortality and morbidity antenatal fetal weight prediction is an invaluable parameter in some situation where to identify the at risk pregnancy for low birth weight become necessary. Reliable method for prenatal estimation of fetal weight two modalities have got popularity - Clinical estimation and another one is ultrasonic estimation. This study was designed to determine the accuracy of clinical versus ultrasound estimated fetal weight detecting the discrepancy with actual birth weight at third trimester. So that we can verify more reliable and accurate method. Objectives: To find out more accurate and reliable modality of fetal weight estimation in antenatal period during obstetric management planning. To compare clinical versus ultrasound estimated fetal weight & to determine discrepancy of both variable with actual birth weight. Method: This prospective, cross sectional analytical study was carried out in Dhaka Medical College Hospital from January 2006 to December 2006. By purposive sampling 100 pregnant women fulfilling inclusion criteria were included in my study in third trimester (29wks-40wks). In clinical weight estimation procedure SFH (Symphysio Fundal Height) was measured in centimeter. On pervaginal finding whether vertex below or above the ischial spine was determined. By Johnson’s formula fetal weight in grams was estimated. Then by ultrasound scan different biometric measurements were taken and finally by Hadlock’s formula fetal weight was estimated. Eventually actual birth weight was taken after birth by Globe Brand weighing machine. Accuracy of both modalities were compared and which one was more reliable predictor was determined by statistical analysis. Results: After data collection were analyzed by computer based software (SPSS). There was gradual and positive relationship between symphysiofundal height and estimated birth weight. Discrepancy between clinical and actual birth weight at third trimester was statistically significant – Paired Student’s ‘t’ test was done where p value was <0.001. Whereas discrepancy between sonographically estimated fetal weight with actual birth weight was not statistically significant (by paired ‘t’ test where p value was >0.05). That implies discrepancy between ultrasound estimated fetal weight and actual birth weight was significantly less than that of clinically estimated fetal weight. 14% clinically and 46% sonographically estimated fetal weight were observed within £ 5% of actual birth weight. 31% clinical and 42% sonographically estimates observed within 6% to 10% of actual birth weight and 55% clinical and 12% sonographically estimate were >10% of actual birth weight. That is about 88% sonographical versus 45% clinical estimates were within 10% of actual birth weight. Conclusion: There is no doubt about importance of fetal weight in many obstetric situations. Clinical decisions at times depends on fetal weight. Whether to use oxytocin, to use forceps or vacuum for delivery or extend of trial or ended by Caesarian section immediately or no scope of trial to be largely depend on fetal size and weight. So more accurate modality for antenatal fetal weight estimation has paramount importance. In my study sonographically estimated weight have more accuracy than that of clinical estimate in predicting actual birth weight. Sonographically estimated fetal weight is more reliable, accurate and reproducible rather than other modality. J Shaheed Suhrawardy Med Coll, June 2019, Vol.11(1); 32-38

Accuracy of sonographic fetal weight estimation of fetuses with a birth weight of 1500g or less

2010 ◽  
Vol 153 (2) ◽  
pp. 131-137 ◽  
Author(s):  
Harald Abele ◽  
Markus Hoopmann ◽  
Norbert Wagner ◽  
Markus Hahn ◽  
Diethelm Wallwiener ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Birth Weight ◽  
Fetal Weight ◽  
Weight Estimation ◽  
Fetal Weight Estimation

scholarly journals Accuracy of Ultrasound Estimation of Fetal Weight at Three Teaching Hospitals in Addis Ababa

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Alexander Mohamed Ibrahim ◽  
Eskinder Kebede Weldetensaye
Keyword(s):  
Birth Weight ◽  
Addis Ababa ◽  
Obstetric Care ◽  
Working Hours ◽  
Fetal Weight ◽  
Teaching Hospitals ◽  
Weight Estimation ◽  
Cross Sectional ◽  
Place Of Delivery ◽  
Fetal Survival

Abstract BackgroundUltrasound examination and measurement of fetal weight have become an integral part of modern obstetric care. Knowing the accuracy of the ultrasound estimation of fetal weight (EFW) and what factors affect it helps make a more informed decision. Fetal weight estimation is thought to help predict fetal survival and make management decisions in the low birth weight group and in managing the delivery of the large baby, where complications may occur.ObjectiveTo assess the accuracy of ultrasound estimation of fetal weight.MethodsThe study design was a facility-based prospective cross-sectional study comparing sonographic EFW with actual birth weight, involving 384 women admitted to the study hospitals. And assessed 12 factors that might affect accuracy (place of delivery/scan, level of the operator, time of scan (working vs. non-working hours), fetal presentation, liquor volume, placental location, days passed between scan and delivery, time of the scan to labor (antepartum vs. intrapartum), fetal sex, maternal BMI, gestational age, and fetal weight. Data were collected using structured questionnaires, developed based on study variables and available literature, and analyzed using SPSS software.ResultThe EFW that is within 10% of the actual birth weight is 62.4%. The overall mean error of EFW was 9.1%, with an SD of ± 7.1%. Of the 12 factors assessed, it was found that the place of delivery/scan (p = 0.017) and the level of resident experience (p = 0.47) significantly affected the accuracy. When R4 was compared to R1’s OR = 4.656(95%CI, [1.111–19.506], p = 0.035) and R2’s OR = 2.112(95%CI,[1.062–4.201],p = 0.033) but not significant when compared to R3’s OR = 1.227(95%CI,[0.563–1.191],p = 0.607). A paired sample t-test was applied (P = 0.14).Conclusion and recommendationThe EFW of R4’s was significantly different from that of R1’s and R2’s, but not R3’s we recommend that all ultrasound scans whose weight estimation can affect the management plan of the patient to be done by the senior residents rather than the junior residents i.e. the R3’s and R4’s.

scholarly journals ACCURACY OF ULTRASOUND VERSUS CLINICAL FETAL WEIGHT ESTIMATION AT TERM WITH ACTUAL BIRTH WEIGHT IN KENYATTA NATIONAL HOSPITAL

2017 ◽  
Vol 1 (1) ◽  
pp. 22
Author(s):  
Dr. Daniel K. Wanjaria ◽  
Prof. Koigi Kamau
Keyword(s):  
Birth Weight ◽  
Fetal Weight ◽  
Ultra Sound ◽  
Categorical Variables ◽  
Weight Estimation ◽  
National Hospital ◽  
Actual Weight ◽  
Kenyatta National Hospital ◽  
Fetal Weight Estimation ◽  
Clinical Methods

Purpose: The purpose of this study was to correlate fetal weight estimation by ultrasound and clinical methods with actual birth weight in KNH.Methodology: This is a prospective comparative study. The design was suitable because it enabled comparison of the predictive value, sensitivity and specificity in estimating fetal weight which is known after birth. Study area was KNH Obstetric wards. The study population was all pregnant women admitted to obstetric wards for elective caesarean delivery and study period was February -March 2016. Data was analysed using SPSS version 20. Categorical variables were presented as proportions in tables and graphs, bars or pie charts). Continuous variable were summarized as means or medians and presented in table form.Results: The findings show that the correlation between actual weight and Ultra Sound estimated weight was significant (r=0.65, p<0.000). The findings further showed that the proportion of Ultra Sound methods estimations within 10% of the actual birth weight was 44% of the overall weights. Clinical methods estimations within 10% of the actual birth weight were 47% of the overall weights. The mean difference between actual birth weights and ultra sound estimated weights were statistically insignificantThe findings revealed that the correlation between actual weight and clinical methods estimated weight was stronger (r=0.79, p<0.000) as compared to the correlation between actual weight and Ultra Sound estimated weight (r=0.65, p<0.000).Unique contribution to theory, practice and policy: The finding of this study may influence further studies and decision on estimation of fetal weight. If clinical estimation is equal or same as ultrasound estimation then it can be recommended that all mothers undergo this instead of ultrasound for estimation of fetal weight. The results may be shared with the University of Nairobi, Kenyatta National Hospital and the Ministry of Health and any policy change resulting from this can be rolled down to counties.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document