Accuracy of Clinical and Ultrasonographic Assessment of Fetal Weight in Obese Pregnant Women | ||
| Evidence Based Women's Health Journal | ||
| Volume 15, Issue 15, January 2025, Pages 1-6 PDF (271.98 K) | ||
| Document Type: Original Article | ||
| DOI: 10.21608/ebwhj.2024.324241.1361 | ||
| Authors | ||
| Nada Kamal* ; Ahmed M Maged; Ahmed Sami Ali; Sarah Mohsen Ali; Fatma M. Atta | ||
| Obstetrics and Gynecology Department, Faculty of Medicine, Cairo University, Egypt | ||
| Abstract | ||
| Objective: To assess the accuracy of clinical and ultrasonographic estimated fetal weight (EFW) at term pregnancy in predicting the actual birth weight (ABW) in different classes of obesity. Patients and Methods: The study was conducted on 170 obese pregnant women who were divided into three groups according to body mass index (BMI) categories: Obesity class I (n= 102), Obesity class II (n= 38), and Obesity class III (n= 30). All cases underwent predelivery ultrasonographic fetal biometry to get the EFW. Clinical assessment of the abdominal girth and symphysis-fundal height was also done, and then the EFW was calculated using Dare’s and Johnson’s formulas. After delivery, the ABW was compared with EFW, which was obtained by ultrasound and clinical assessment using Dare’s and Johnson’s formulas. Results: We found the mean differences of EFW by ultrasound and ABW were 19.87, -86.05, and -176.80gm (in obesity class I, II, and III, respectively). While with clinical assessment, the mean differences of EFW and ABW were -15.98, -50.34, and -93.57gm when using Dare’s formula, and 340.26, 438.03, and 297.67gm when using Johnson’s formula (in obesity class I, II, and III, respectively). Conclusion: Ultrasonographic assessment and Dare’s formulas are more accurate than Johnson’s formula in assessing fetal weight among all women with different obesity classes. | ||
| Keywords | ||
| BMI; birth weight; estimated fetal weight; obesity | ||
|
Statistics Article View: 2 |
||
