4.6 Article

Measurement of symphysis fundal height for gestational age estimation in low-to-middle- income countries: A systematic review and meta-analysis

期刊

PLOS ONE
卷 17, 期 8, 页码 -

出版社

PUBLIC LIBRARY SCIENCE
DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0272718

关键词

-

资金

  1. Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation [OPP1130198]
  2. Harvard Catalyst | The Harvard Clinical and Translational Science Center (National Center for Advancing Translational Sciences, National Institutes of Health Award) [UL 1TR002541]
  3. Harvard University and its affiliated academic healthcare centers
  4. Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Health and Child Development [K23 HD091390-01]
  5. Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation [OPP1130198] Funding Source: Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This systematic review examines the methods and accuracy of symphysis fundal height (SFH) measurement for estimating gestational age (GA) in low- and middle-income countries. The findings suggest that SFH measurement is inaccurate and should not be used for GA dating. Improving access to quality ultrasound early in pregnancy is crucial for improving gestational age assessment in LMIC.
In low- and middle-income countries (LMIC), measurement of symphysis fundal height (SFH) is often the only available method of estimating gestational age (GA) in pregnancy. This systematic review aims to summarize methods of SFH measurement and assess the accuracy of SFH for the purpose of GA estimation. We searched PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane, Web of Science, POPLINE, and WHO Global Health Libraries from January 1980 through November 2021. For SFH accuracy, we pooled the variance of the mean difference between GA confirmed by ultrasound versus SFH. Of 1,003 studies identified, 37 studies were included. Nineteen different SFH measurement techniques and 13 SFH-to-GA conversion methods were identified. In pooled analysis of five studies (n = 5838 pregnancies), 71% (95% CI: 66-77%) of pregnancies dated by SFH were within +/- 14 days of ultrasound confirmed dating. Using the 1 cm SFH = 1 wk assumption, SFH underestimated GA compared with ultrasound-confirmed GA (mean bias: -14.0 days) with poor accuracy (95% limits of agreement [LOA]: +/- 42.8 days; n = 3 studies, 2447 pregnancies). Statistical modeling of three serial SFH measurements performed better, but accuracy was still poor (95% LOA +/- 33 days; n = 4 studies, 4391 pregnancies). In conclusion, there is wide variation in SFH measurement and SFH-to-GA conversion techniques. SFH is inaccurate for estimating GA and should not be used for GA dating. Increasing access to quality ultrasonography early in pregnancy should be prioritized to improve gestational age assessment in LMIC.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据