Open AccessHigher Concordance in Clinical Assessment versus Ultrasound to Estimate Fetal Weight when it compares with Birth Weight in Full-Term Newborns
Author(s) -
Eliana Velastegui-Ayala,
Fabricio González-Andrade
Publication year - 2021
Publication title -
revista ecuatoriana de pediatría
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
eISSN - 2737-6494
pISSN - 1390-3497
DOI - 10.52011/0077
Subject(s) - concordance , medicine , birth weight , ultrasound , gestational age , fetal weight , obstetrics , fetus , cohort , cohort study , epidemiology , pregnancy , pediatrics , radiology , genetics , biology
the aim of this trial was to estimate fetal weight by clinical and ultrasound methods and to compare with the weight at birth in full-term newborns.Methods: This is an epidemiological, observational, cross-sectional study of a cohort of healthy full-term newborns. The sample size was 102 neonates born at the Pablo Arturo Suarez Hospital, in Quito, Ecuador, from November 2019 to January 2020.Results: In full-term neonates, the estimate on ultrasound was 80.00%, while in the clinical assessment was 72.29%. The profile of newborn analyzed is man, mestizo, Ecuadorian, born in the highlands region, with a mean gestational age of 38.67 weeks and a mean birth weight of 3,023 grams, in whom it estimated the fetal weight through ultrasound and clinical assessment. The estimation of the absolute error in both methods analyzed was 2.43% to ultrasound and -4.65% to clinical assessment, and both showed moderate concordance, 78.2% to ultrasound, and 85.6% to clinical assessment. Multivariate analysis showed the neonates with modified weight by ultrasound are 13.44 times more likely to show altered weight at birth, while neonates with modified weight by the clinical assessment are 11.95 times more likely to show altered weight at birth.Conclusions: Accuracy in the clinical assessment was always higher than in the ultrasound method, especially in low weight newborns.