DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.18203/2320-1770.ijrcog20183796

An observational study to determine accuracy of various methods used to assign gestational age and correlate with outcome

Neha Singhal, Alka S. Gupta

Abstract


Background: Appropriate estimation of gestational age is paramount in obstetric care. Uncertain gestational age may lead to adverse pregnancy outcome like low birth weight, spontaneous or iatrogenic preterm delivery and perinatal mortality independent of maternal characteristics. In India, seeking of early medical attention in pregnancy is still not the norm. Three methods to estimate the estimated date of delivery are available, namely, menstrual history, clinical examination and by ultrasound.  This study attempts to analyse the accuracy of the three methods used and their correlation with maternal and fetal outcome.

Methods: 260 patients presenting to the outpatient department were enrolled irrespective of the gestational age but as soon as they got registered. Ultrasonography was advised if the patient did not have one. EDD was calculated by various methods and was recorded. If significant discrepancy existed, EDD was reassigned. Patients were followed up till the time of their delivery. After the delivery of the baby gestational age was assessed by the neonatologist and was compared with the gestational age at the time of delivery by the three methods. Maternal and fetal outcomes were compared in the form of avoided inductions and maturity of the baby at the time of delivery by all the three methods.

Results: The kappa coefficient for the agreement between dating by ultrasound scan and neonatologist was 0.415 whereas for menstrual dates and clinical examination it was 0.197 and 0.369 respectively thus it can be interpreted that the accuracy of ultrasonography may be slightly better than menstrual dates and clinical examination. 75 patients required reassigning of EDD, Induction of labor for supposed post-term pregnancy was avoided in 13% of the patients.

Conclusions: Ultrasonography was found to be accurate for determination of term /preterm/ post-term births followed by clinical examination and then the menstrual EDD. Induction of labor for supposed post-term pregnancy was avoided in 13% of the patients in whom EDD was ”assigned” thus stressing that EDD should be reassigned when there is discrepancy between menstrual EDD, Ultrasonography EDD and EDD by clinical examination.


Keywords


Gestational age, EDD, Ultrasound

Full Text:

PDF

References


Gagliardi L. On the importance and unimportance of gestational age. Acta Paediatr. 2015;104(6):544-6.

van Baaren GJ, Peelen MJ, Schuit E, van der Post JA, Mol BW, Kok M. Preterm birth in singleton and multiple pregnancies: evaluation of costs and perinatal outcomes. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol. 2015; 186:34-41.

Enabudoso EJ, Obhielo E. Socio-demographic and obstetric determinants ofgestational age at booking at the University of Benin Teaching Hospital: adescriptive survey. Niger Postgrad Med J. 2012;19(3):149-52.

Honest H, Forbes CA, Durée KH, Norman G, Duffy SB, Tsourapas A, et al. Screening to prevent spontaneous preterm birth: systematic reviews of accuracy and effectiveness literature with economic modelling. Health Technol Assess. 200913(43):1-627.

Medeiros MNL, Cavalcante NCN, Mesquita FJA, Batista RLF, Simões VMF, Cavalli R de C, et al. Validity of pre and post-term birth rates based on the date of last menstrual period compared to early obstetric ultrasonography. Cad saúde pública.2015;31(4):885-90.

Rosenberg RE, Ahmed AS, Ahmed S, Saha SK, Chowdhury MA, Black RE, Santosham M, et al, et al. Determining gestational age in a low-resource setting: validity of last menstrual period. J Health Popul Nutr. 2009;27(3):332-8.

Neufeld LM, Haas JD, Grajeda R, Martorell R. Last menstrual period provides the best estimate of gestation length for women in rural Guatemala. Paediatr Perinat Epidemiol. 2006;20(4):290-8.

Deeluea J, Sirichotiyakul S, Weerakiet S, Arora R, Patumanond J. Fundalheight growth curve for underweight and overweight and obese pregnant women in Thai population. ISRN Obstet Gynecol 2013;2013:657692.

White LJ, Lee SJ, Stepniewska K, Simpson JA, Dwell SLM, Arunjerdja R, et al. Estimation of gestational age from fundal height: a solution for resource-poor settings. J R Soc Interface. 2012; 9(68):503-10.

Challis K, Osman NB, Nordahl G, BergströmS. The impact of adjustment forparity and mid-upper-arm circumference on sensitivity of symphysis-fundus height measurements to predict SGA foetuses in Mozambique. Trop Med IntHealth. 2003;8(2):168-73.

Peter JR, Ho JJ, Valliapan J, Sivasangari S. Symphysial fundal height (SFH) measurement in pregnancy for detecting abnormal fetal growth. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2015;(9):CD008136.

Ananth C V. Menstrual versus clinical estimate of gestational age dating in the United States: temporal trends and variability in indices of perinatal outcomes. Paediatr Perinat Epidemiol. 2007; 21(S2):22-30.

Hoffman CS, Messer LC, Mendola P, Savitz DA, Herring AH, Hartmann KE. Comparison of gestational age at birth based on last menstrual period and ultrasound during the first trimester. Paediatr Perinat Epidemiol. 2008;22(6):587-96.

Ambrose CS, Caspard H, Rizzo C, Stepka EC, Keenan G. Standard methods based on last menstrual period dates misclassify and overestimate US preterm births. J Perinatol. 2015;35(6):411-4.