Actual Birth Weight Research Articles

Diagnostic Accuracy of Ultrasonography for the Detection of Foetal Weight

Background: Ultrasonography is a very useful diagnostic tool for the detection of foetal weight. Objective: The purpose of the present study was to validate the ultrasonography for the detection of foetal weight. Methodology: This prospective cohort study was carried out in the Department of Obstetrics & Gynaecology at Rajshahi Medical Hospital, Rajshahi, Rajshahi, Bangladesh from July 2012 to June 2014 for a period of 2(two) years. Pregnant women with known gestational age at term (38 to 40 weeks of pregnancy), singleton pregnancy with longitudinal lie were included in this study. The patient was then taken to Dept. of Radiology & Imaging, RMCH. Ultrasonographic estimation of foetal weight was done from estimation of foetal abdominal circumference (AC), biparietal diameter (BPD) and foetal femur length (FL). Actual birth weights of babies were measured soon after their birth. The BPD, AC and FL were measured in centimetres and foetal weight was measured in grams. Actual birth weight is the first weight of now-born obtained after birth. This weight was measured within the first hour of life. Result: A total number of 245 pregnant women in term pregnancy were recruited as per inclusion and exclusion criteria. Majority of the women [91(37.1%)] belonged to the age group 19 to 29 years which was 174(71.0%) cases. Low birth weight was found in 12(4.9%) cases ultrasonographic examination and actual low birth weight was found in 15(6.0%) cases. Overweight was found in 13(5.2%) cases ultrasonographic examination and actual birth overweight was found in 9(3.7%) cases. The mean value and SD of foetal weight measured by USG was 2870.41 gms and 424.84 respectively. In case of actual birth weight, the mean and SD was 2936.20 gms and 456.71 respectively (p = 0.05). Conclusion: In conclusion estimation of foetal weight by ultrasonography is not significantly varied. Journal of National Institute of Neurosciences Bangladesh, January 2023;9(1):16-19

The Impact of the Active Stage of Labor on Estimate Fetal Weight: A Prospective Cohort Study

Objective: In the literature, there have been few data on ultrasound measurements during the active phase of labor. In this study, it was aimed to compare the accuracy of fetal weight estimation by ultrasound in terms of active phase of labor. Methods: This was a prospective cohort study at the obstetrics clinic of Esenler Gynecology and Children's Hospital in Istanbul. A total of 85 patients in active labor were included in the study. All pregnant women were evaluated for estimated fetal weight (EFW) by ultrasound evaluation, and cervical dilation and effacement measurements by pelvic examination, at most 24 hours before labor. Hadlock-4 formula was used for EFW. EFW and actual birth weight (ABW) and absolute errors of pregnant women in active labor were compared. Results: The mean EFW and ABW of the patients were 3161±482 and 3150±476 g, respectively. In terms of EFW and ABW, a finding in favor of the ultrasound was found. The error and error rates between EFW and ABW were found to be 234±191 g and 7.6±6.2, respectively. No significant difference was found in terms of these parameters (p>0.05). A significant and strong (0.80) correlation was found with estimated fetal weights and actual birth weights. Conclusion: Ultrasound can be used as a safe method to measure estimated fetal weight in the active phase of labor.

Accuracy of Johnson's Formula for Estimating Fetal Weight Compared to Actual Birth Weight: A Study of 600 Cases in Rangpur Medical College

Introduction: The estimation of fetal weight during pregnancy has a significant impact on the survival of newborns and some immediate and late sequelae of the life of newborns. Estimation of fetal weight also plays a paramount role in determining time, mode, and place of delivery. There are many methods to estimate fetal weight like the palpation method, fundal height measurement, and radio frequency volume reduction. Johnson's method is one of the clinical methods that require no expense and is easier to estimate the precise birth weight and fetal weight. This study aimed to analyze the accuracy of the Johnsons formula for estimating fetal weight compared to actual birth weight. Methods: This cross-sectional prospective study took place in the Gynecology and Obstetrics Department of Rangpur Medical College Hospital, Rangpur, between May 2015 to October 2015, six (06) months after approval. The sample size was 600 as per inclusion criteria. Data were collected through face-to-face interviews with the women by using a pre- design questionnaire after proper counseling and informed written consent. The purposive sampling method was used in the study. Data processing was consisting of registration schedule, editing, computerization, preparation of dummy table, analyzing & matching of data. Statistical analysis was carried out by using the Statistical Package for Social Sciences version 16.0 for Windows. The mean values were calculated for continuous variables. The quantitative observations were indicated by frequencies and percentages. Paired t-test was used for continuous variables. Pearson's correlation coefficients were used to test the relationship between the groups. P values <0.05 was considered statistically significant. Result: The mean age was found 24.5±5.1 years with a range from 18 to 38 years. The mean symphysio fundal height was found 32.4±2.0 cm with a range from 28 to 36 cm. The mean estimated fetal weight was found 3205.2±287.9 grams with a range from 2635 to 3875 grams. The mean actual birth weight after delivery was found 3019.0±359.0 grams with a range from 2200 to 3800 grams. The difference was statistically significant (p<0.05) between the two groups. A positive significant correlation (r=0.929; p=0.001) was found between actual birth weight and estimated fetal weight by Johnson's formula. A positive significant correlation (r=0.517; p=0.001) was found between actual birth weight and symphysio fundal height. A positive significant correlation (r=0.129; p=0.002) was also found between the actual birth weight neonate and the BMI of the mother. Conclusion: Antenatal and intranatal fetal weight can be estimated with reasonable accuracy, clinically using Johnson's formula. Ultrasound is not available in remote areas where Johnson's formula is easy and simple to calculate and can be included in the training program of medical and paramedical staff and birth attendants.

Comparative analysis of clinical and sonographic estimation of fetal weight in term pregnancy at a tertiary care hospital

Abstract Objectives: Determining fetal weight is crucial in effectively managing labor and delivery. It helps make informed decisions about the most suitable delivery method and also aids in identifying conditions such as low birth weight, macrosomia, and intrauterine growth restriction in the fetus. In settings where ultrasound may not be readily available due to limited resources, it becomes essential to assess how accurately fetal weight can be estimated clinically by comparing it to ultrasound measurements and the actual birth weight. This study aimed to assess fetal weight in full-term pregnancies using clinical and ultrasound methods and compare their accuracy while examining their correlation with birth weight. Materials and Methods: This cross-sectional observational and comparative study included 200 women in their full-term pregnancies. The study was conducted from November 2019 to October 2021. In this research, we calculated birth weight estimates using clinical methods (using Johnson’s and Dare’s formulas) and ultrasound (using Hadlock’s procedure). Subsequently, these estimated weights were compared to the actual birth weight data. Results: The findings of this study revealed that Hadlock’s ultrasound formula offered the most precise fetal weight estimates, with Dare’s clinical method following closely. Clinical and ultrasound estimations notably showed a significant positive correlation with birth weight. Conclusion: The ultrasound method is superior in accurately assessing birth weight compared to the clinical approach. Consequently, it is advisable to prioritize ultrasound whenever available and feasible.

Diagnostic Accuracy Of Placental Thickness Measured By Ultrasonography In The Detection Of Intrauterine Growth Restricted (IUGR) Babies Keeping Actual Birth Weight As Gold Standard

Diagnostic Accuracy Of Placental Thickness Measured By Ultrasonography In The Detection Of Intrauterine Growth Restricted (IUGR) Babies Keeping Actual Birth Weight As Gold Standard

Evaluating Ultrasonography Fetal Weight in Comparison to Actual Birth Weight in Term Pregnant Women at Tertiary Care Center Hospital

Background: Prenatal mortality is very high in Pakistan. One of the most reasons is low birth weight and preterm babies. Hence, estimating the baby's weight is paramount in antennal care. Birth weight refers to the body weight of a newborn. Multiple elements, like genetics epigenetics, nutritional and environmental factors can influence fetal weight. Ultrasonography is an important non-invasive tool for fetal weight estimation in normal and high-risk pregnancies. The role of ultrasound as a safe and non-invasive measurement for fetal growth and weight in pregnancy is well established. Objective: To determine the relationship between Sonographic fetal weight estimation in the prenatal period and definite birth weight in pregnant women in a multidisciplinary hospital set up Study design: A comparative study Place and Duration: Study was conducted in Department of Radiology, Chiniot General Hospital Korangi Karachi from January 2022 to June 2022 for six months duration. Methodology: The sample size is 50. Expecting mothers were taken in this study. These women were booked and they underwent an ultrasound examination of fetal weight in a prenatal period which was then correlated to actual fetal weight after birth by a pediatrician. Fetal weight was estimated and noted. It was measured by using. Hadlock's formula: log (10) birth weight = 1.335-0.0034(abdominal circumference) (femur length) + 0.0316 (Biparietal diameter) +0.0457(abdominal circumference) +0.1623(femur length). Results: Most of our patients were between 20-30 year age brackets. There was a strong linear relationship between ultrasound fetal weight and real birth weight. The mean age of females was 26.12±5.65 years, and the mean BMI of patients was 26.17±4.19kg/m2. A strong positive correlation (r=0.575, p<0.05) was found between the fetal weight estimation on USG and actual birth weight. Conclusion: This study shows that ultrasound can be a valuable method of assessing fetal weight in pregnant women. Hence ultrasound can be used for informed decision-making for birthing decisions in expecting mothers. Keywords: Correlation, Ultrasonography, Birth Weight, Fetal

Comparison of Ultrasonographic Estimated Fetal Weight at Term with Actual Birth Weight in Punjab

Background: The fetus is thought to have an inherent growth potential that under normal circumstances, yields a healthy newborn of appropriate size. Knowledge of weight of fetus in intrauterine life is important for the obstetrician to decide the management plan for delivery whether it would be vaginal or cesarean section. Aim: To compare estimated fetal weight on ultrasound at term with actual birth weight in Bahawalnagar Punjab. Methodology: A cross sectional analytical study was conducted at Tahir Medical Complex Haroon Abad district Bahawalnagar. Data of 200 participants were designated done suitable sample method. SPSS version 21.0 was used for data analysis. Results: out of total number of 200 pregnant women, mean±S. D of estimated fetal weight were 3245.8150±17.53151, Mean ±S. D of actual birth weight were 3260.7700±17.80643. Mean±S.D of Biparietal diameter were 9.2325±0.23428. The minimum and maximum values were 8.70 and 9.76 respectively. Two hundred pregnant females were included in this study. Conclusion: This study indicates that estimation of Birth weight clearly has a role in management of labor and delivery in a term pregnancy. Among term singleton cephalic pregnancies studied, fetal weight estimation using Hadlock’s formula is comparable to ultrasound estimates for predicting the actual birth weight within 10%. This study also revealed the mean estimated weight through ultrasound were similar to actual weight. Our results indicated the diagnostic accuracy of ultrasound in estimation of birth weight to be considerably significant therefore it is a reliable modality for estimating fetal weight using the Biparietal diameter, femur length and abdominal circumference as compared to actual birth weight. Keywords: Expected Fetal weight, actual fetal weight, Biparietal diameter, abdominal circumferences, femur length.

Prediction of birthweight and risk of macrosomia in pregnancies complicated by diabetes

Antenatal detection of accelerated fetal growth and macrosomia in pregnancies complicated by diabetes mellitus is important for patient counseling and management. Sonographic fetal weight estimation is the most commonly used tool to predict birthweight and macrosomia. However, the predictive accuracy of sonographic fetal weight estimation for these outcomes is limited. In addition, an up-to-date sonographic fetal weight estimation is often unavailable before birth. This may result in a failure to identify macrosomia, especially in pregnancies complicated by diabetes mellitus where care providers might underestimate fetal growth rate. Therefore, there is a need for better tools to detect and alert care providers to the potential risk of accelerated fetal growth and macrosomia. This study aimed to develop and validate prediction models for birthweight and macrosomia in pregnancies complicated by diabetes mellitus. This was a completed retrospective cohort study of all patients with a singleton live birth at ≥36 weeks of gestation complicated by preexisting or gestational diabetes mellitus observed at a single tertiary center between January 2011 and May 2022. Candidate predictors included maternal age, parity, type of diabetes mellitus, information from the most recent sonographic fetal weight estimation (including estimated fetal weight, abdominal circumference z score, head circumference-to-abdomen circumference z score ratio, and amniotic fluid), fetal sex, and the interval between ultrasound examination and birth. The study outcomes were macrosomia (defined as birthweights >4000 and >4500 g), large for gestational age (defined as a birthweight >90th percentile for gestational age), and birthweight (in grams). Multivariable logistic regression models were used to estimate the probability of dichotomous outcomes, and multivariable linear regression models were used to estimate birthweight. Model discrimination and predictive accuracy were calculated. Internal validation was performed using the bootstrap resampling technique. A total of 2465 patients met the study criteria. Most patients had gestational diabetes mellitus (90%), 6% of patients had type 2 diabetes mellitus, and 4% of patients had type 1 diabetes mellitus. The overall proportions of infants with birthweights >4000 g, >4500 g, and >90th percentile for gestational age were 8%, 1%, and 12%, respectively. The most contributory predictor variables were estimated fetal weight, abdominal circumference z score, ultrasound examination to birth interval, and type of diabetes mellitus. The models for the 3 dichotomous outcomes had high discriminative accuracy (area under the curve receiver operating characteristic curve, 0.929-0.979), which was higher than that achieved with estimated fetal weight alone (area under the curve receiver operating characteristic curve, 0.880-0.931). The predictive accuracy of the models had high sensitivity (87%-100%), specificity (84%-92%), and negative predictive values (84%-92%). The predictive accuracy of the model for birthweight had low systematic and random errors (0.6% and 7.5%, respectively), which were considerably smaller than the corresponding errors achieved with estimated fetal weight alone (-5.9% and 10.8%, respectively). The proportions of estimates within 5%, 10%, and 15% of the actual birthweight were high (52.3%, 82.9%, and 94.9%, respectively). The prediction models developed in the current study were associated with greater predictive accuracy for macrosomia, large for gestational age, and birthweight than the current standard of care that includes estimated fetal weight alone. These models may assist care providers in counseling patients regarding the optimal timing and mode of delivery.

Determination of fetal weight by ultrasonographic evaluation of fetal mid-thigh soft-tissue thickness in late third trimester

Background: Estimation of fetal weight is of utmost importance in the planning and management of uneventful labor. This study was done to compare the estimated fetal weight determined by Hadlock’s method and Scioscia’s formula (using femur length and mid-thigh soft-tissue thickness [MTSTT]) to the actual birth weight (ABW). Aims and Objectives: The objectives of this study were as follows: (1) To estimate fetal weight by Hadlock’s method and ultrasonographic evaluation of fetal MTSTT in late third trimester. (2) To correlate fetal weight derived by Hadlock’s method and ultrasonographic evaluation of fetal MTSTT with ABW. Materials and Methods: The study was conducted during the period November 2022–January 2023, at Sri Devaraj Urs Medical College, Tamaka, Kolar. Seventy-six pregnant ladies at term (between 37 and 40 weeks) were included in the study. Results: This study assessed validity of Hadlock formulae and Scioscia’s formulae for detecting fetal weight. For detection of fetal weight by Hadlock’s method, area under curve (AUC) was 0.961 and according to Scioscia’s formulae, AUC was 0.965. This study showed good agreement between fetal weight derived by Hadlock formulae and actual fetal weight (Kappa value – 0.725). There was also good agreement between fetal weight derived by Scioscia’s formulae and actual fetal weight (Kappa value – 0.745). Conclusion: The fetal weight derived by Scioscia’s formula was comparable to the actual fetal weight allowing us to rely on Scioscia’s formulae to detect fetal weight. Calculating fetal weight by measurement of fetal MTSTT serves as an additional tool for estimation of fetal weight along with the existing parameters, thereby increasing the likelihood for accurate fetal weight estimation.

A descriptive study to assess the difference between estimated fetal weight using Johnsons formula and the actual birth weight of newborn babies born to women availing maternity services in a tertiary care hospital, Haryana

Introduction: Knowledge about weight of the fetus in-utero is important for the health care professionals to decide upon the antepartum as well as intrapartum initiatives and thereby reducing fetal complications. Johnson’s formula is one of the important and easiest methods of clinical estimation of fetal weight. The aim of the study was to assess the difference between estimated fetal weight calculated by Johnson’s formula and actual birth weight of newborns, to associate and correlate selected maternal and fetal variables with the estimated fetal weight and actual birth weight. Methods: The study sample was 110 term pregnant women in labour and their just born babies. Research approach - quantitative non-experimental descriptive. Tool - data sheet. Data analyzed using descriptive and inferential statistics.Result: The difference between estimated fetal weight and Actual birth weight had a mean of 774.9 and SD ± 403.21. Study revealed that the estimated fetal weight using Johnson’s formula had a difference in comparison with the actual birth weight of babies (371.69 to 1178.1).Discussion: Obstetric Score (OS) Mean 1.59 SD ± 0.76, Period of Gestation (POG) Mean 39 SD ± 1.2. Pre-delivery Weight Mean 64.5 SD ± 9.839. Post-delivery Weight Mean 61.4 SD ± 9.28. Estimated fetal weights (EFW) range 2945 to 4340gms. (Mean 3800.7 SD ± 295.9), Actual birth weight (ABW) range 2120gms to 4145gms (Mean 3025.8 SD± 388.5). Placental Weight Mean 516 SD ± 112.7. Chi square test revealed that there was no association between obstetric score, period of gestation and estimated fetal weight. Similarly Fisher’s exact test revealed that there was no association between obstetric score, period of gestation and actual birth weight.

A descriptive study to assess the difference between estimated fetal weight using Johnsons formula and the actual birth weight of newborn babies born to women availing maternity services in a tertiary care hospital, Haryana

Introduction: Knowledge about weight of the fetus in-utero is important for the health care professionals to decide upon the antepartum as well as intrapartum initiatives and thereby reducing fetal complications. Johnson’s formula is one of the important and easiest methods of clinical estimation of fetal weight. The aim of the study was to assess the difference between estimated fetal weight calculated by Johnson’s formula and actual birth weight of newborns, to associate and correlate selected maternal and fetal variables with the estimated fetal weight and actual birth weight. Methods: The study sample was 110 term pregnant women in labour and their just born babies. Research approach - quantitative non-experimental descriptive. Tool - data sheet. Data analyzed using descriptive and inferential statistics.Result: The difference between estimated fetal weight and Actual birth weight had a mean of 774.9 and SD ± 403.21. Study revealed that the estimated fetal weight using Johnson’s formula had a difference in comparison with the actual birth weight of babies (371.69 to 1178.1).Discussion: Obstetric Score (OS) Mean 1.59 SD ± 0.76, Period of Gestation (POG) Mean 39 SD ± 1.2. Pre-delivery Weight Mean 64.5 SD ± 9.839. Post-delivery Weight Mean 61.4 SD ± 9.28. Estimated fetal weights (EFW) range 2945 to 4340gms. (Mean 3800.7 SD ± 295.9), Actual birth weight (ABW) range 2120gms to 4145gms (Mean 3025.8 SD± 388.5). Placental Weight Mean 516 SD ± 112.7. Chi square test revealed that there was no association between obstetric score, period of gestation and estimated fetal weight. Similarly Fisher’s exact test revealed that there was no association between obstetric score, period of gestation and actual birth weight.

Estimation of Fetal Weight at Term by Clinical Method Using Symphysio Fundal Height and Abdominal Girth and Ultrasound Using Hadlock Formula and Its Correlation with Actual Birth Weight

Estimation of Fetal Weight at Term by Clinical Method Using Symphysio Fundal Height and Abdominal Girth and Ultrasound Using Hadlock Formula and Its Correlation with Actual Birth Weight

Intrauterine Growth Restriction-Prediction and Peripartum Data on Hospital Care.

Background and Objectives: We aimed to prospectively obtain data on pregnancies complicated with intrauterine growth restriction (IUGR) in the Prenatal Diagnosis Unit of the Emergency County Hospital of Craiova. We collected the demographic data of mothers, the prenatal ultrasound (US) features, the intrapartum data, and the immediate postnatal data of newborns. We aimed to assess the detection rates of IUGR fetuses (the performance of the US in estimating the actual neonatal birth weight), to describe the prenatal care pattern in our unit, and to establish predictors for the number of total hospitalization days needed postnatally. Materials and Methods: Data were collected from cases diagnosed with IUGR undergoing prenatal care in our hospital. We compared the percentile of estimated fetal weight (EFW) using the Hadlock 4 technique with the percentile of weight at birth. We retrospectively performed a regression analysis to correlate the variables predicting the number of hospitalization days. Results: Data on 111 women were processed during the period of 1 September 2019-1 September 2022. We confirmed the significant differences in US features between early- (Eo) and late-onset (Lo) IUGR cases. The detection rates were higher if the EFW was lower, and Eo-IUGR was associated with a higher number of US scans. We obtained a mathematical formula for estimating the total number of hospitalization days needed postnatally. Conclusion: Early- and late-onset IUGR have different US features prenatally and different postnatal outcomes. If the US EFW percentile is lower, a prenatal diagnosis is more likely to be made, and a closer follow-up is offered in our hospital. The total number of hospitalization days may be predicted using intrapartum and immediate postnatal data in both groups, having the potential to optimize the final financial costs and to organize the neonatal department efficiently.

The Most Accurate Way of Predicting Birth Weight in China: Zhuo’s Formula

Background: Pregnancy body mass index (BMI) influences fetal weight, yet no studies focused on the comparison of formulas’ predictive accuracy after considering it. Objective: This study aimed to find out the most accurate formula for predicting birth weight, especially in different BMI pregnant women. Methods: It is a prospective observational study. Using a convenient sampling, the participants who met the criteria for inclusion were recruited in a tertiary hospital from January to March 2019. BMI was calculated according to the pregnant woman’s weight and height at the first obstetric visit. The estimated birth weights were predicted by five formulas based on participants’ uterine height and abdominal circumference of the last obstetric examination. The actual birth weight was scaled in the delivery room. The root mean square error (RMSE), empirical cumulative distribution map (ECDP) and Bland–Altman plot were used to determine the accuracy of the formulas in predicting birth weight. Results: A total of 1197 pregnant women were recruited. The RMSE, median value and difference of Zhuo’s formula in predicting the actual birth weight were the smallest (348.7), the closest to 0 (20.0) g, and the smallest (-0.141 ± 11.511) g, respectively. In subgroup analysis, the RMSE of Zhuo’s formula was the smallest in the low and normal BMI groups, and the difference of Zhuo’s formula by Bland- Altman plot was the smallest (only 0.729±10.440) g in the overweight and obese group. Conclusion: Zhuo’s formula for predicting birth weight has the highest accuracy in different BMI groups. Thus, it is worth recommending for clinical use.

Correlation of Fetal Anterior Abdominal Wall Thickness and Other Standard Biometric Ultrasound Measurements to Predict Fetal Macrosomia in Gestational Diabetes.

Gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM) is one of the most common medical conditions affecting pregnancy and significantly increasing the risk for maternal and perinatal complications. The aim of the present study is to study the correlation of fetal anterior abdominal wall thickness (FAAWT) and other standard fetal biometric parameters measured by ultrasound between 36 and 39 weeks of gestation with neonatal birth weight in pregnancies complicated by GDM. Prospective cohort study in a tertiary care center including 100 singleton pregnancies with GDM were subjected to ultrasound between 36 and 39 weeks of gestation. Standard fetal biometry (Biparietal diameter, Head Circumference, Abdominal circumference [AC], and Femur Length) and estimated fetal weight were calculated. FAAWT was measured at AC section and actual neonatal birth weights were recorded after delivery. Macrosomia was defined as an absolute birth weight more than 4000 g regardless of the gestational age. Statistical analysis was done and 95% confidence level was considered significant. Among 100 neonates, 16 were macrosomic (16%) and third trimester mean FAAWT was significantly higher in macrosomic babies (6.36 ± 0.5 mm) as compared to nonmacrosomic babies (5.54 ± 0.61 mm) (P < 0.0001). FAAWT >6 mm (Receiver operating characteristic curve derived) provided a sensitivity of 87.5%, specificity of 75%, positive predictive value of 40%, and negative predictive value (NPV) of 96.9% for prediction of macrosomia. While other standard fetal biometric parameters did not correlate well with actual birth weight in macrosomic neonates, only FAAWT was found to have statistically significant correlation (correlation coefficient of 0.626, P = 0.009). The FAAWT was the only sonographic parameter to have a significant correlation with neonatal birth weight in macrosomic neonates of GDM mothers. We found a high sensitivity (87.5%), specificity (75%), and NPV (96.9%) suggesting that FAAWT < 6 mm can rule out macrosomia in pregnancies with GDM.

Comparison of Estimation Fetal Weight (EFW) using the Niswander Method and the Risanto Formula on Birth Weight

Fetal growth monitoring can be observed by measuring the Symphysis-Fundal Height (SFH). To determine fetal growth, the SFH measurement is calculated into the Estimation Fetal Weight (EFW) formula. EFW formulas using SFH measurements include the Niswander method and the Risanto formula. This study aims to compare the results of the calculation of the EFW formula which is closest to the birth weight of the baby. This study is a comparative descriptive study with a cross-sectional design, which measures the SFH and weighs the baby's birth weight directly. The population of this research is pregnant women who will give birth at RSUD Soewondo Kendal. A total of 176 samples were taken using a consecutive sampling technique. The results of the independent t-test showed that the Risanto formula had no difference in the birth weight of the baby, while the Niswander method had a significant difference in the actual birth weight of the baby.

Comparative Study for Estimation of Fetal Weight by Various Clinical Methods and its Correlation with Actual Birth Weight

Introduction:Fetal weight, in conjunction with gestational age, is an important indicator of pregnancy outcome.Accurate estimation of fetal weight is of paramount importance in the management of labor and delivery and it also help in avoidance of complications associated with fetal excessive or low-birth-weight babies, thereby decreasing perinatal morbidity and mortality. Various clinical formulae like Johnson’s formula &amp; Dare’s formula are in use for fetal weight estimation. Aim of the study was to assess the fetal weight in term pregnancy by various clinical methods- Dare’s formula &amp; Johnson’s formula and its comparison and correlation with actual birth weight.Materials &amp; Method: It was a prospective observational study of 334 women at term pregnancy at GMERS medical college &amp; Hospital, Vadnagar from April 2021 to July 2021. The formulas used in this study were: Johnson’s formula and Dare’s formula. The measurements were compared with actual birth weight after the birth of baby.Results: The mean actual birth weight was 2759.07±466.15 grams. The mean estimated birth weight by Dare’s and Johnson’s method was 2845.79±453.43 grams and grams 2990.81±413.68respectively. Dare’s method was more accurate and had least maximum and minimum error than Johnson’s method.Conclusion: Dare’s formula is an inexpensive method for fetal birth weight estimation. It can be used on large scale because of its low cost, ease of use, and need for little training as the setup for ultra sonographic evaluation is not readily available in rural setups. Keywords: Abdominal Girth, Actual birth weight, Dare’s formula, Estimated birth weight, Johnson’s formula, Symphysio-fundal height.

A STUDY ON ROLE OF ULTRASOUND IN ANTENATAL FETAL WEIGHT ASSESEMENT AND CORRELATION WITH POSTNATAL WEIGHT

Background: The assessment of fetal growth is a critical component of prenatal care, enabling identication of fetuses at risk of perinatal morbidities and mortality. The fetal weight determination using ultrasound is one of the best indicators of fetal growth, however its accuracy is still questionable as it is affected by multiple anthropometric and genetic factors. Very little information is available regarding the effectiveness of the currently used western population-based models in calculation of fetal weight in Indian scenario. Our study aimed to evaluate the accuracy of Aim: prenatal ultrasound in calculation of estimated fetal weight in third trimester using pre-natal ultrasound at a tertiary care center in Rajasthan, India. Materials and Methods: Descriptive type of observational study was done at a tertiary care hospital in Rajasthan. 73 pregnant females were evaluated with estimated fetal weight (EFW) calculation using Hadlock 2 (AC, BPD, FL) formula and compared with actual birth weight. Results: Positive correlation existed between EFW and ABW with spearman's rho coefcient=0.615, p value &lt;0.001. This difference in weight by ultrasound and actual weight was found to be statistically signicant (t=3.094, Df=144, p value&lt;0.002). Our study was one of the very Conclusion: few studies which demonstrated that statistically signicant differences existed between the estimated fetal weight on USG and the actual birth weight on the basis of the currently used fetal weight estimation formulas which are based on foreign populations. High percentage error was noted in the calculation of fetal weight which may be due to a lot of factors like- fetal head position in pelvis , machine quality, maternal obesity, maternal restlessness during scan, excess fetal movements, subjective variations etc.

Frequency of Correct Fetal Weight Estimation by Clinical and Ultrasound Methods in Pregnant Women

Objective: To determine the frequency of correct fetal weight estimation by clinical and ultrasound methods in pregnant women. Study Design: A cross-sectional study. Place and Duration: Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Nishtar Hospital Multan, From February 2021 to July 2022. Methodology: A total of 383 women with singleton pregnancy, gestational age between 37 to 40 weeks and who underwent labor induction or elective cesarean section were included. Fetal weight estimation was done by clinical and ultrasound methods in pregnant women. Following delivery, “actual birth weight” of neonate was measured and data recorded in the shape of correct fetal weight estimation by both studied methods. Results: In a total of 383 women, the mean age was 29.50±2.22 years ranging between 18-35 years while the mean gestational age was 38.09±0.91 weeks. The mean mother’s weight was 70.19±10.56 kg, mean clinical weight estimation 3127.03±561.38 grams, mean ultrasound weight estimation 3137.25±658.05 grams and mean actual weight was 3157.63±648.33 grams. Correct clinical weight estimation was reported in 49.6% cases while correct ultrasound weight estimation was noted in 80.9%. Practical Implications: Accuracy in fetal weight estimation can be achieved by applying Dare’s method in the clinical setting. Conclusion: Fetal weight estimation adopting Dare's formula was found to be comparable to ultrasound estimation for the prediction of actual birth weight within 10%. Keywords: Fetal weight, gestational age, singleton, ultrasound.

Factors Affecting Clinical over and Underestimation of Fetal Weight-A Retrospective Cohort.

Clinical estimation of fetal weight is an integral component of obstetric care that might dictate the timing and mode of delivery. Inaccurate fetal weight estimation might result in unnecessary interventions or in underestimating potential risks, resulting in inappropriate intrapartum care. This retrospective study assessed factors associated with under- or overestimation of birthweight and evaluated the obstetric implications. It included singleton births ≥24 w with clinically estimated fetal weight (EFW) up to 1 week before delivery, during 2014-2020. Estimates &gt;±10% of the actual birthweight were considered inaccurate and categorized as overestimation (&gt;10% heavier than the actual birthweight) or underestimation (&gt;10% smaller than the birthweight). Multivariable logistic regression was performed to reveal factors associated with inaccurate EFW. Maternal characteristics and obstetric outcomes were compared. The primary outcomes for the overestimation group were the neonatal composite adverse outcome, induction of labor and cesarean delivery rates. The primary outcomes for the underestimation group were rates of shoulder dystocia, 3rd- or 4th-degree perineal lacerations, and failed vacuum extraction. Among 38,615 EFW, 5172 (13.4%) were underestimated, 6695 (17.3%) were overestimated and 27,648 (69.3%) accurate. Multivariable logistic regression found increasing gestational age as an independent risk-factor for underestimation (odds ratio (OR) 1.15 for every additional week, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.12-1.2). Major factors independently associated with overestimation were nulliparity (OR 1.95, CI 1.76-2.16), maternal obesity (OR 1.52, CI 1.33-1.74), smoking (OR 1.6, CI 1.33-1.93), and oligohydramnios (OR 1.92, CI 1.47-2.5). Underestimation was an independent risk-factor for shoulder dystocia (OR 1.61, CI 1.05-2.46) and 3rd- or 4th-degree perineal lacerations (OR 1.59, CI 1.05-2.43). Overestimation was an independent risk-factor for neonatal composite adverse outcome (OR 1.15, CI 1.02-1.3), induced labor (OR 1.30, CI 1.21-1.40) and cesarean delivery (OR 1.59, CI 1.41-1.79). Clinicians should be aware of factors and adverse obstetric implications associated with over- or underestimation of birthweight.