Cargando…

Accuracy of Fetal Weight Estimation by Ultrasonographic Evaluation in a Northeastern Region of India

METHODS: The cross-sectional study included 100 pregnant women aged 20–45 years from the Kamrup district admitted to Guwahati Medical College and Hospital, Guwahati, Assam. The data were analyzed using Microsoft Excel and SPSS version 16. The EFW at term was calculated using Shepard's formula a...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Konwar, Ranjumoni, Basumatary, Bharati, Dutta, Malamoni, Mahanta, Putul
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Hindawi 2021
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8712185/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34966430
http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2021/9090338
_version_ 1784623512354291712
author Konwar, Ranjumoni
Basumatary, Bharati
Dutta, Malamoni
Mahanta, Putul
author_facet Konwar, Ranjumoni
Basumatary, Bharati
Dutta, Malamoni
Mahanta, Putul
author_sort Konwar, Ranjumoni
collection PubMed
description METHODS: The cross-sectional study included 100 pregnant women aged 20–45 years from the Kamrup district admitted to Guwahati Medical College and Hospital, Guwahati, Assam. The data were analyzed using Microsoft Excel and SPSS version 16. The EFW at term was calculated using Shepard's formula and Hadlock's formula. Differences in means are compared using the one-way ANOVA or Kruskal–Wallis test and paired t-test. The accuracy of the two procedures was evaluated using mean absolute error (MAE) and mean absolute percentage error (MAPE). A p value<0.05 was considered significant. RESULTS: The present study included 100 pregnant women aged 21–38 years with term or postterm pregnancies subjected to ultrasonographic evaluation within 72 hours of delivery. The mean (±s.d.) EFW by Shepard's formula was 2716.05 (±332.38) g and Hadlock's formula was 2740.44 (±353.23) g, respectively. For Hadlock's formula, MAE ± s.d. was found to be higher (overall 84.59 ± 76.54) specifically in the weight category less than 2500 (106.42 ± 88.11) as compared to Shepard's (overall MAE ± s.d = 79.86 ± 64.78, and among ABW < 2500 g, MAE ± s.d = 65.04 ± 61.02). The overall MAPE of Hadlock's formula was 3.14% and that for Shepard's formula was 2.91%, and the difference was not statistically significant. Both Shepard's formula and Hadlock's formula had a sensitivity of 92.85% in detecting IUGR, but Hadlock's method had higher specificity (66%), higher PPV (86.67%), and higher NPV (80%). CONCLUSION: The ultrasonographic evaluation of fetal weight helps predict fetal birth weight precisely and can influence obstetric management decisions concerning timing and route of delivery, thus reducing perinatal morbidity and mortality.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-8712185
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2021
publisher Hindawi
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-87121852021-12-28 Accuracy of Fetal Weight Estimation by Ultrasonographic Evaluation in a Northeastern Region of India Konwar, Ranjumoni Basumatary, Bharati Dutta, Malamoni Mahanta, Putul Int J Biomater Research Article METHODS: The cross-sectional study included 100 pregnant women aged 20–45 years from the Kamrup district admitted to Guwahati Medical College and Hospital, Guwahati, Assam. The data were analyzed using Microsoft Excel and SPSS version 16. The EFW at term was calculated using Shepard's formula and Hadlock's formula. Differences in means are compared using the one-way ANOVA or Kruskal–Wallis test and paired t-test. The accuracy of the two procedures was evaluated using mean absolute error (MAE) and mean absolute percentage error (MAPE). A p value<0.05 was considered significant. RESULTS: The present study included 100 pregnant women aged 21–38 years with term or postterm pregnancies subjected to ultrasonographic evaluation within 72 hours of delivery. The mean (±s.d.) EFW by Shepard's formula was 2716.05 (±332.38) g and Hadlock's formula was 2740.44 (±353.23) g, respectively. For Hadlock's formula, MAE ± s.d. was found to be higher (overall 84.59 ± 76.54) specifically in the weight category less than 2500 (106.42 ± 88.11) as compared to Shepard's (overall MAE ± s.d = 79.86 ± 64.78, and among ABW < 2500 g, MAE ± s.d = 65.04 ± 61.02). The overall MAPE of Hadlock's formula was 3.14% and that for Shepard's formula was 2.91%, and the difference was not statistically significant. Both Shepard's formula and Hadlock's formula had a sensitivity of 92.85% in detecting IUGR, but Hadlock's method had higher specificity (66%), higher PPV (86.67%), and higher NPV (80%). CONCLUSION: The ultrasonographic evaluation of fetal weight helps predict fetal birth weight precisely and can influence obstetric management decisions concerning timing and route of delivery, thus reducing perinatal morbidity and mortality. Hindawi 2021-12-20 /pmc/articles/PMC8712185/ /pubmed/34966430 http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2021/9090338 Text en Copyright © 2021 Ranjumoni Konwar et al. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Research Article
Konwar, Ranjumoni
Basumatary, Bharati
Dutta, Malamoni
Mahanta, Putul
Accuracy of Fetal Weight Estimation by Ultrasonographic Evaluation in a Northeastern Region of India
title Accuracy of Fetal Weight Estimation by Ultrasonographic Evaluation in a Northeastern Region of India
title_full Accuracy of Fetal Weight Estimation by Ultrasonographic Evaluation in a Northeastern Region of India
title_fullStr Accuracy of Fetal Weight Estimation by Ultrasonographic Evaluation in a Northeastern Region of India
title_full_unstemmed Accuracy of Fetal Weight Estimation by Ultrasonographic Evaluation in a Northeastern Region of India
title_short Accuracy of Fetal Weight Estimation by Ultrasonographic Evaluation in a Northeastern Region of India
title_sort accuracy of fetal weight estimation by ultrasonographic evaluation in a northeastern region of india
topic Research Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8712185/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34966430
http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2021/9090338
work_keys_str_mv AT konwarranjumoni accuracyoffetalweightestimationbyultrasonographicevaluationinanortheasternregionofindia
AT basumatarybharati accuracyoffetalweightestimationbyultrasonographicevaluationinanortheasternregionofindia
AT duttamalamoni accuracyoffetalweightestimationbyultrasonographicevaluationinanortheasternregionofindia
AT mahantaputul accuracyoffetalweightestimationbyultrasonographicevaluationinanortheasternregionofindia