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 The Accuracy of the Weight of the Fetal Agency Using Ultrasound Based on the Formula Hadlock Compared to the Birth of New Body Weight

2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Nurbaiti . ◽  
Sri Haryati Gofar ◽  
Samsun . ◽  
Guntur Winarno ◽  
Akhmadi .
Keyword(s):  
Body Weight ◽  
Birth Weight ◽  
T Test ◽  
Fetal Weight ◽  
Weight Estimation ◽  
Fetal Weight Estimation ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Fetal Birth Weight ◽  
Estimated Fetal Weight

The purpose of this study is to analyze the result of the calculation of fetal weight estimation based on Hadlock’s formula with baby birth weight. The design of this research is quantitative analytic. The data is analyzed by the t-test. The results of this study showed that the analysis of the average comparison between TBJ (Fetal Weight Estimation) and BBL (Fetal Birth Weight) is 2623,60 with 2946,67. There is a significant difference with the value of sig.(2-tailed) 0,000 <0,05, which means there is a significant difference between the estimated fetal weight based on Hadlock’s formula with baby birth weight. Based on the result of the study of fetal weight interpretation using Hadlock’s formula, an accuracy of 89,34% was seen.

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 Correlation of Actual Fetal Weight with Clinically and Ultrasonographically detected Macrosomia cases among Diabetic Mother

2019 ◽  
Vol 16 (2) ◽  
pp. 38-44
Author(s):  
Shamsun Nahar ◽  
Kashefa Khatun ◽  
Tahmina Khanum ◽  
TA Chowdhury ◽  
AS Mohiuddin
Keyword(s):  
Diabetes Mellitus ◽  
Birth Weight ◽  
Cross Sectional Study ◽  
Diabetic Mother ◽  
Fetal Weight ◽  
Cross Sectional ◽  
Clinical Method ◽  
The Mean ◽  
Diagnosed Diabetes ◽  
Estimated Fetal Weight

Background: Correlation of actual fetal weight with clinically and ultrasonographically detected macrosomia cases among diabetic mother is very essential for the management of the neonates. Objectives: The purpose of the present study was to correlate actual fetal weight with clinically and ultrasonographically detected macrosomia cases among diabetic mother. Methodology: This cross-sectional study was carried out in inpatient Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology and in outpatients Department of Radiology and Imaging, BIRDEM during the period of April 2005 to March 2007. Pregnant women with diagnosed diabetes mellitus (DM) or gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM) selected for caesarean section or induction of labour, gestational age 236 weeks having 23700 gm by clinical method were included in this study. First clinical estimation of fetal weight was done by the investigator then Radiologist estimated the fetal weight without knowing the EFW by clinical method. The actual birth weight was estimated after the birth of the babies. Result: The mean (+SD) age of the patients was 30.8±5.1 years ranged from 20 to 40 years. A significant correlation (r=0.5081; p<0.05) was found between clinically estimated fetal weight (gm) and actual birth weight (macrosomia) (gm). Significant correlation (r=0.6199; p<0.05) was found between sonographically estimated fetal weight (gm) and actual birth weight (macrosomia) (gm). Significant correlation (r=0.4863; p<0.05) was found between clinically estimated fetal weight (gm) and sonographically estimated fetal weight (gm). Conclusion: The study findings indicate that clinical method can be used instead of ultrasonography for prediction of macrosomia in diabetic mother Journal of Science Foundation 2018;16(2):38-44

Accuracy of Prediction of Birth Weight by Fetal Ultrasound

2020 ◽  
Vol 2 (2) ◽  
pp. 11-14
Author(s):  
Sumnima Acharya ◽  
Awadhesh Tiwari
Keyword(s):  
Birth Weight ◽  
Well Being ◽  
Cross Sectional Study ◽  
Fetal Weight ◽  
Weight Estimation ◽  
Fetal Ultrasound ◽  
Cross Sectional ◽  
Actual Weight ◽  
Medical College ◽  
Accuracy Of Prediction

Introduction: Fetal weight estimation using ultrasonography (USG) is beneficial for the better feto-maternal outcome. This study was done to determine the accuracy of prediction of birth weight by fetal ultrasound. Methods: This was a cross-sectional study carried out in the Department of Radio diagnosis, Lumbini Medical College and Teaching Hospital (LMCTH), Palpa, Nepal from1st June to 31st December 2018.Fetal weight was calculated by USG in 325 women using Hadlock’s formula and correlated with birth weight. Results: Our study showed that fetal ultrasound using Hadlock’s formula has error in estimation of fetal weight by 189gm (SD: 111 gm). In 91.3% of the cases, there was an error of estimation by less than 10% compared to actual weight. Conclusion: It can be concluded that sonographic estimation of birth weight can be recommended to yield a better prediction of birth weight and to further evaluate fetal well-being.  

scholarly journals Accuracy of sonographic fetal weight estimation in a tertiary care hospital in Bharatpur, Nepal

2017 ◽  
Vol 12 (4) ◽  
pp. 174-178 ◽  
Author(s):  
V Natraj Prasad ◽  
Pratik Poudel ◽  
Pramod Kumar Chhetry
Keyword(s):  
Birth Weight ◽  
Mean Absolute Percentage Error ◽  
Fetal Weight ◽  
Percentage Error ◽  
Strong Positive Correlation ◽  
Weight Estimation ◽  
Positive Correlation ◽  
Fetal Weight Estimation ◽  
Absolute Percentage Error ◽  
Estimated Fetal Weight

Background & Objectives: Among the various methods used in the estimation of intrauterine fetal weight, sonographic fetal weight estimation is the one and has become an important component of antenatal care. The study was conducted with objective to assess the accuracy and reliability of ultrasound estimation of fetal weight in women with a singleton term pregnancy. Materials & Methods: This was a prospective cross-sectional study of 120 women with singleton term pregnancies. Ultrasound estimated fetal weight was calculated by measuring the biparietal diameter and abdominal circumference. The estimated fetal weight was compared to the actual birth weight post delivery. The correlation between estimated fetal weight and actual birth weight was assessed by Pearson's correlation coefficient and the accuracy of sonographic fetal weight estimation was measured using mean error, mean absolute error, mean percentage error, mean absolute percentage error and proportion of estimates within 10% of actual birth weight. Results were tested at error level set at p ≤ 0.05.Results: Mean estimated and actual birth weights were 2863.5 ± 441.9 g and 2822.5 ± 407.7 g respectively. There was a strong positive correlation between estimated fetal weight and actual birth weight (r= 0.71, p <0.001). The mean percentage error and mean absolute percentage error of ultrasound fetal weight estimations were 1.9 ± 11.4% and 8.8 ± 7.5% respectively. Conclusion: Sonographically estimated fetal weight had strong positive correlation with actual birth weight and thus sonography can be used in the estimation of fetal weight for the better perinatal outcome. 

scholarly journals Comparison of Johnson’s Method with Hadlock’s Method for Estimation of Fetal Weight in Term Pregnancies

2019 ◽  
Vol 17 (2) ◽  
pp. 228-232
Author(s):  
Peru Pradhan ◽  
Binita Neupane ◽  
Sona Shrestha ◽  
Ganesh Dangal
Keyword(s):  
Birth Weight ◽  
Maternal Age ◽  
Fetal Weight ◽  
Weight Estimation ◽  
Singleton Pregnancy ◽  
Fetal Weight Estimation ◽  
High Risk Factors ◽  
The Mean ◽  
Convenience Sampling ◽  
Estimated Fetal Weight

Background: Fetal weight estimation is of utmost need to determine the course of labour and complications for its management. This study intents to compare the fetal weight determined through Johnson’s method and Hadlock’s method with actual birth weight in term pregnancies. Methods: This is an observational study carried out over a period of six months in Kirtipur Hospital among 200 samples of term, singleton pregnancy with cephalic presentation using convenience sampling technique.Results: The mean maternal age was 25.9±4.3 years whereas mean gestational age was 39.1 weeks. Less than half (49.1%) of the babies’ weight ranged between 3.0 - 3.5 kgs. The mean error of estimated weight by Johnson’s method was less compared to Hadlock’s method 185.1±191.1 grams and 355.8±225.7 grams respectively. It was also observed that estimation of fetal weight by Johnson’s method was closer to the actual birth weight than by Hadlock’s method.Conclusions: Johnson’s method requires some basic skills and knowledge with flexibility to apply as and where needed beyond the health facilities irrespective of the availability of the equipment. Furthermore, it was also observed to be slightly more specific in its estimation of birth weight among the term pregnancies compared to Hadlock’s method. Hence, it should be promoted widely among the clinicians. However, Hadlock’s method is equally important for detection of anomalies and high-risk factors coupled with confirmation of the estimation made through Johnson’s method.Keywords: Actual birth weight; estimated fetal weight; hadlock’s method; johnson’s method.

scholarly journals Comparison of ultrasonographic estimated fetal weight and actual birth weight.

2021 ◽  
Vol 28 (10) ◽  
pp. 1428-1432
Author(s):  
Summan Hameed ◽  
Zobia Saleem ◽  
Mehwish Rauf ◽  
Tayyaba Aslam ◽  
Aqsa Hafeez ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Birth Weight ◽  
Pregnant Women ◽  
Cross Sectional Study ◽  
Fetal Weight ◽  
P Value ◽  
Cross Sectional ◽  
Actual Weight ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Minimum Age ◽  
Estimated Fetal Weight

Objective: To determine the accuracy of estimated fetal weight by ultrasound compared with actual birth weight. Study Design: Cross Sectional study. Setting: Department of Radiology, Fatima Memorial Hospital, Lahore. Period: September 2017 to January 2018. Material & Methods: A sample of 139 pregnant women who fulfilled the inclusion and exclusion criteria were included in this study Ultrasonography of full term pregnant women was performed to determine the comparison and accuracy with the actual weight of baby at birth. Results: In a sample of 139 pregnant women, the mean age was 27.8±4.2 years (with minimum age of 20 years and maximum age of 40 years). Ultrasonographic estimated fetal weight and actual birth weight was compared by using paired t-test. No significant difference was found between estimated fetal weight and actual birth weight with P-value 0.237. Conclusion: Ultrasound is highly sensitive, good, reliable, safe and accurate modality for estimation of fetal weight. There is no significant difference between fetal weight and actual birth weight.

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 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.

Ultrasonography for Fetal Weight Estimation: The Birnholz Equation

1987 ◽  
Vol 9 (3) ◽  
pp. 195-202 ◽  
Author(s):  
David B. Acker ◽  
Benjamin P. Sachs ◽  
Bernard J. Ransil ◽  
Emanuel A. Friedman
Keyword(s):  
Birth Weight ◽  
Standard Error ◽  
Selection Criteria ◽  
Fetal Weight ◽  
Weight Estimation ◽  
Live Births ◽  
Fetal Weight Estimation ◽  
The Mean ◽  
Large Standard Error ◽  
Estimated Fetal Weight

In the population of 563 normal live births, subject to the selection criteria of this study, the mean ultrasonographically-estimated fetal weight calculated using the Birnholz equation accurately predicts the mean true birth weight with less than 1 percent error. However, on a pairwise basis, the error was found to be systematic (rather than random) with a large standard error of the estimate (± 300 g). The equation consistently underestimated the mean birth weight between 1500–3750 g and consistently overestimated it thereafter.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document