Suppr超能文献

住院医师在分娩活跃期进行的三种胎儿体重估计方法的比较:一项前瞻性队列研究。

Comparison between Three Methods of Fetal Weight Estimation during the Active Stage of Labor Performed by Residents: A Prospective Cohort Study.

作者信息

Weiner Eran, Mizrachi Yossi, Fainstein Nataly, Elyashiv Osnat, Mevorach-Zussman Noa, Bar Jacob, Kovo Michal

机构信息

Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Wolfson Medical Center, Holon, Israel, affiliated with Sackler Faculty of Medicine, Tel Aviv University, Tel Aviv, Israel.

出版信息

Fetal Diagn Ther. 2017;42(2):117-123. doi: 10.1159/000450944. Epub 2016 Oct 29.

Abstract

OBJECTIVE

To compare the accuracy of ultrasonographic, calculated, and clinical methods for the estimation of fetal weight (EFW) performed during active labor by residents.

METHODS

Parturients in active labor underwent prospectively EFW by 3 methods: ultrasonographic, clinical, and calculated (extrapolating EFW from a previous scan). Three different blinded residents evaluated each woman. Background variables were examined for their effect on the accuracy of each method. Comparison of the methods for the detection of macrosomia and small for gestational age (SGA) was also performed.

RESULTS

Among the 405 women recruited, the rates of accuracy of ultrasonographic, clinical, and calculated EFW (within ±10%) was 72.5, 74.3, and 71.1%, respectively. The correlation coefficient between the methods and actual birth weight (ABW) were 0.702-0.611 (using 7 Hadlock formulas), 0.649, and 0.622, respectively (all p < 0.001). By logistic regression, epidural analgesia was associated with higher and second stage of labor with lower accuracy of ultrasonographic EFW. For the detection of macrosomia, clinical (p < 0.001) and calculated EFWs (p = 0.035) were superior to ultrasonographic EFW. For the detection of SGA, ultrasonographic EFW was superior to calculated (p < 0.001) and clinical (p < 0.001) EFWs.

CONCLUSION

All 3 methods performed by residents during labor correlated well with ABW. Clinical and calculated EFWs were superior for macrosomia detection, whereas ultrasonographic EFW was superior for SGA detection.

摘要

目的

比较住院医师在活跃期分娩时采用超声、计算法和临床方法估计胎儿体重(EFW)的准确性。

方法

对处于活跃期分娩的产妇前瞻性地采用三种方法进行EFW评估:超声、临床和计算法(根据先前的扫描结果推算EFW)。三名不同的不知情住院医师对每位产妇进行评估。研究背景变量对每种方法准确性的影响。还对三种方法检测巨大儿和小于胎龄儿(SGA)的情况进行了比较。

结果

在招募的405名女性中,超声、临床和计算法估计EFW(误差在±10%以内)的准确率分别为72.5%、74.3%和71.1%。三种方法与实际出生体重(ABW)的相关系数分别为0.702 - 0.611(使用7种哈德洛克公式)、0.649和0.622(均p < 0.001)。通过逻辑回归分析,硬膜外镇痛与超声估计EFW的较高准确性相关,而第二产程与之准确性较低相关。对于巨大儿的检测,临床法(p < 0.001)和计算法估计EFW(p = 0.035)优于超声法。对于SGA的检测,超声估计EFW优于计算法(p < 0.001)和临床法(p < 0.001)。

结论

住院医师在分娩期间采用的所有三种方法与ABW的相关性都很好。临床和计算法估计EFW在检测巨大儿时更具优势,而超声估计EFW在检测SGA时更具优势。

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验