Premium
Improving the assessment of gestational age in a Zimbabwean population
Author(s) -
Feresu S.A,
Gillespie B.W,
Sowers M.F,
Johnson T.R.B,
Welch K,
Harlow S.D
Publication year - 2002
Publication title -
international journal of gynecology and obstetrics
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 0.895
H-Index - 97
eISSN - 1879-3479
pISSN - 0020-7292
DOI - 10.1016/s0020-7292(02)00094-2
Subject(s) - medicine , gestational age , population , pediatrics , small for gestational age , obstetrics , gestation , pregnancy , genetics , environmental health , biology
Objectives: To evaluate the performance and the utility of using birthweight‐adjusted scores of Dubowitz and Ballard methods of estimating gestational age in a Zimbabwean population. Method: The Dubowitz and the Ballard methods of estimating gestational age were administered to 364 African newborn infants with a known last menstrual period (LMP) at Harare Maternity Hospital. Results: Both methods were good predictors of gestational age useful in differentiating term from pre‐term infants. Our regression line was Y (LMP gestational age) =23.814+0.301*score for the Dubowitz and Y (LMP gestational age) =24.493+0.420*score for the Ballard method. Addition of birthweight to the regression models improved prediction of gestational age; Y (LMP gestational age) =23.512+0.219*score+0.0015*grams for Dubowitz and Y (LMP gestational age) =24.002+0.292*score+0.0016*grams for Ballard method. Conclusions: We recommend the use of our birthweight‐adjusted maturity scales; the Dubowitz for studies of prematurity, and the Ballard for routine clinical practice.