scholarly journals Clinical Estimation of Fetal Weight with Reference to Johnson’s Formula: An Alternative Solution Adjacent to Sonographic Estimation of Fetal Weight

2020 ◽  
Vol 18 (2) ◽  
pp. 7-12
Author(s):  
A. Dongol ◽  
R. Bastakoti ◽  
N. Pradhan ◽  
N. Sharma
Keyword(s):  
Birth Weight ◽  
Confidence Interval ◽  
Pregnant Women ◽  
Cost Effective ◽  
Fetal Weight ◽  
University Hospital ◽  
P Value ◽  
Weight Estimation ◽  
Clinical Method ◽  
Fetal Weight Estimation

Background Fetal weight estimation plays a significant role in the antenatal management of high risk pregnancies. It is also an important parameter for predicting the neonatal outcome and informs decision for the mode of intra-partum management of the pregnant women. Among the various methods of prenatal fetal weight estimation, the most commonly used are clinical estimation and sonography. Objective The objective of this study was to compare the accuracy of clinical estimation of fetal weight using Johnson’s formula and sonographic estimation with actual birth weight. Method This prospective study was conducted at Dhulikhel Hospital, Kathmandu University Hospital, from January 2017 to August 2018. The study included 335 pregnant women at term gestation. Result The estimation of fetal weight at term pregnancy using Johnson’s formula is as effective as sonological method. For clinical method, the fetal weight falls between 95 gm and 183 gm at 95% confidence interval. With respect to ultrasound method, the fetal weight is found to be 45 gm and 132 gm at 95% confidence interval at p value < 0.001. Conclusion Clinical estimation of fetal weight can be utilized as an alternative to sonological estimation in the management of labor and delivery. Johnson’s formula is a simple, easy, cost-effective, and universally applicable method to predict fetal birth weight and can be used anywhere by doctors, nurses, midwives and paramedics in centers where ultrasound is not available.

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

scholarly journals Clinical versus ultrasonographic fetal weight estimation and its correlation with actual birth weight

2019 ◽  
Vol 8 (2) ◽  
pp. 503
Author(s):  
Ashwini Ingale ◽  
Shweta Avinash Khade ◽  
Sneha Shirodkar
Keyword(s):  
Birth Weight ◽  
Tertiary Care ◽  
Mean Absolute Percentage Error ◽  
Fetal Weight ◽  
Percentage Error ◽  
Care Hospital ◽  
Weight Estimation ◽  
Clinical Method ◽  
Fetal Weight Estimation ◽  
Absolute Percentage Error

Background: This is a prospective study was conducted at Obstetrics and Gynecology department, tertiary care Hospital, to compare the accuracy of clinical and ultrasonographic estimation of fetal weight at term with actual birth weight.Methods: The present study is a prospective comparative study of fetal weight estimation in Antenatal women with term gestation (37week to 42week of gestation) singleton pregnancy with vertex presentation, who had gestational age confirmed by dates and ultrasound scanning of< 22weeks admitted in tertiary care center from March 2016 to November 2016. Patients with Polyhydramnios, oligohydramnios, Antepartum hemorrhage, Congenital anomalies of fetus, Obese (Body mass index >30 kilogram/meter2) are excluded from the study. Estimation of fetal weight is done by clinical method and ultrasonography. Birth weight after delivery was recorded in grams by electronic weighing machine and tabulated.Results: Clinical as well as ultrasonography estimates observed to be strongly correlate with actual birth weight. Both the methods had more sensitivity in birth weight range 2500-4000gm than <2500g and >4000g. The overall mean absolute percentage error of the clinical method (7.2±7.7) was smaller than that of the sonographic method (16.2±11.1). In low birth-weight (<2,500g) group, mean absolute percentage error was 9.0±11.3 with USG and same with clinical was 11.7±9.0. No statistically significant difference was observed.Conclusions: The present study concludes that clinical estimation of birth-weight is as accurate as routine ultrasonographic estimation.Clinical palpation should be considered as diagnostic tool for FWE and is equally reliable even when done by trained medical person. It is cheap and easy to teach. The need is to practically apply this method in obstetrics and guide the management decisions.

scholarly journals Accuracy of sonographic fetal weight estimation in full-term singleton pregnant women

2019 ◽  
Vol 35 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Emre Erdem Tas ◽  
Edip Alptug Kir ◽  
Gamze Yilmaz ◽  
Ayse Filiz Yavuz
Keyword(s):  
Birth Weight ◽  
Pregnant Women ◽  
Full Term ◽  
Fetal Weight ◽  
Primiparous Woman ◽  
Weight Estimation ◽  
Failure Group ◽  
Fetal Weight Estimation ◽  
Neonatal Birth Weight ◽  
The Mean

Objectives: To investigate the factors which might influence the sonographic fetal weight estimation (SFWE) accuracy. Methods: This prospective study was conducted among 949 singleton term pregnant women who delivered at a tertiary center, from January 2017 to December 2017. All participants’ maternal (i.e. parity, age, body mass index and gestational weight gain during pregnancy), fetal sonographic (i.e. fetal presentation, amniotic fluid index, localization of placenta and estimated fetal weight) and neonatal (birth weight and gender) characteristics were recorded. A p<0.05 was considered significant. Results: The mean absolute percent error (APE) values of SFWE was 8.2±6.5 percent, and overall failure ratio (APE >10%) was 33%. In failure group, primiparous woman and cephalic presentation fetus were significantly more common compared to accuracy group (55.9% vs.44.8%; p=0.001 and 98% vs. 95.2%; p=0.03, respectively). In contrast, the mean neonatal birth weight (NBW) value was significantly lower in failure group compared to success group (3250±565 gr vs. 3404±410 gr; p=0.001). The correlation between SFWE and NBW was linear, however negative, and significant (p=0.001). Logistic regression analysis revealed that primiparous woman, cephalic presentation fetus and <3300 gr NBW were independent risk factors for the SFWE failure (relative risks were 1.6, 2.8 and 2.4 respectively, p<0.05). Conclusion: SFWE has a high correlation with NBW, however it’s accuracy is still unsatisfactory, and depend on many unpredictable and inconsistent factors. How to cite this:Tas EE, Kir EA, Yilmaz G, Yavuz AF. Accuracy of sonographic fetal weight estimation in full-term singleton pregnant women. Pak J Med Sci. 2019;35(1):34-38. doi: https://doi.org/10.12669/pjms.35.1.373 This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

scholarly journals Clinical and sonographic estimation of fetal weight and correlation with the birth weight: a research article

2019 ◽  
Vol 8 (9) ◽  
pp. 3595
Author(s):  
Alvencia Vaz ◽  
Aheibam Bidya Devi ◽  
Naorem Nabakishore Singh ◽  
Wahengbam Jatishwor Singh ◽  
Laiphrakpam Ranjit Singh ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Health Care ◽  
Developing Countries ◽  
Birth Weight ◽  
Fetal Weight ◽  
Accurate Estimation ◽  
Weight Estimation ◽  
Clinical Method ◽  
Ultrasound Method ◽  
Fetal Weight Estimation ◽  
Method R

Background: Accurate estimation of fetal weight is of paramount importance in the management of labour and childbirth. In developing countries including India, estimation of fetal weight by clinical method is important as ultrasound is not available in all health care settings. In view of this, the present study was conducted to estimate the fetal weight assessed by clinical and ultrasound method and correlating with the birth weight.Methods: A cross-sectional study was conducted to estimate fetal weight clinically by using Johnson’s formula and sonographically based on Hadlock’s formula in the Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology in collaboration with Department of Radiodiagnosis, Regional Institute of Medical Sciences, Imphal from October 2016 to March 2018. The study consisted of 525 pregnant women between 37 to 40 weeks of gestation in whom delivery was anticipated within one week of fetal weight estimation by clinical and ultrasound method and correlating it with the baby’s birth weight measured immediately after delivery. Analysis was done using Chi-square and Student’s t-test and p-value of <0.05 was taken as significant.Results: Both methods showed positive correlation with birth weight but clinical method (r=0.925) had stronger correlation compared with ultrasound method (r=0.508).Conclusions: Fetal weight estimation using Johnson’s formula had stronger correlation with the birth weight than ultrasound method and hence, useful for developing countries and all health care workers may be sensitized about the method. 

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).

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 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.

scholarly journals Sonographic Versus Clinical Fetal Weight Estimation Accuracy

2018 ◽  
Vol 2 (1) ◽  
pp. 01-05
Author(s):  
Amr abd el Fattah El Helali ◽  
Amal el Shabrawi El Sayed ◽  
Wesal Hamdi Ali Hassan
Keyword(s):  
Fetal Weight ◽  
Estimation Accuracy ◽  
Weight Estimation ◽  
Altman Plot ◽  
Care Clinic ◽  
Clinical Method ◽  
Fetal Weight Estimation ◽  
Plot Analysis ◽  
Ultrasound Assessment ◽  
Sensitivity Specificity

Background: Sonographic fetal weight estimation is an important component of antenatal care. It was found to be more reliable method to establish fetal weight at term and more consistent in various period of gestations. Aim of study: to compare clinical and sonographic methods for assessment of fetal weight regarding sensitivity, specificity and accuracy. Subjects and Methods: The study recruited 100 women scheduled for delivery from ante-natal care clinic with 38 weeks or more of gestation. Fetal weight was assed clinically and by ultrasound. Both techniques were compared and analyzed. Results: Ultrasound assessment of fetal weight showed better performance than the clinical method regarding absolute errors and error percentages. Ultrasound assessment showed better sensitivity and specificity in detecting fetal weight > 3500 gm. Moreover, it showed less bias on Bland–Altman plot analysis. Conclusions: Ultrasound assessment of fetal weight is safe, reliable and sensitive method of fetal weight estimation.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document