Estimation of Fetal Size and Weight using Various Formulas

Abstract

Birth weight is an important factor in delivery management. Antenatal ultrasound has turned out to be one of the clinicians' most vital devices for surveying fetal age, growth and prosperity. Contrasted Physical examination of the pregnant uterus is the most precise strategy for evaluating fetal size and growth along with the utilization of ultrasound imaging and estimating of the different fetal parameters. Objective: To evaluates the antenatal assessments of fetal weight in pregnancies by using Johnson's formula, Hadlock's formula and Ultrasonography. Comparison of these different methods with the actual birth weight of these babies after delivered. Material and methods: Two hundred singleton term pregnancies within 48 hours were randomly selected to participate in this prospective cohort study. Variables included such as abdominal circumference, Biparietal diameter, and Femur length. (Parameters to obtain estimated fetal weight) Results: The mean birth weight of Hadlock formula is closest to the mean of actual birth weight. In the study population, more primigravida delivered babies with very low birth weight and more multigravida delivered babies of birth weight > 3500 gms. Johnson's and ultrasound-Hadlock's formula had a marked tendency to overestimate the fetal weight. Error was within 350 Gms in 84.7%, 70.8% and 84% of cases by Dare's, Johnson's and ultrasound-Hadlock's formula.

Estimation of Fetal Weight by Clinical Methods and Ultrasonography and Comparing With Actual Birth Weight

“…Also, in one study, Insler's formula less accurately predicted low birth weight babies [22]. In the fetal weight group between 2500-4000 gr, the abdominal palpation had the highest accuracy, consistent with some studies [23,24]. However, in many studies on the normal weight range, the ultrasound Insler's formula is a better method to estimate fetal weight which the results of the present study are not in line with those findings [22,25,26].…”

Comparison between clinical estimated fetal weights (CEFW) Versus Ultrasonographic estimated fetal weight (UEFW) for co-relation with actual birth weight (ABW) in 3rd Trimester of Pregnancy

“…Correlation between CEFW and ABW (r = 0.074) was insignificant and was almost showed no relationship while a significant correlation between UEFW and ABW (r = 0.782) (5). But another study reported that the correlation coefficient for the CEFW was 0.78 and UEFW was 0.74 and it was statistically demonstrated that both showed significant positive correlation (p<0.001) (6).…”