Self-administered measurement of symphysis-fundus heights

7Citations
Citations of this article
18Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

This article is free to access.

Abstract

Background. Antenatal identification of infants small for gestational age (SGA) improves their perinatal outcome. Repeated measurement of symphysis-fundus (SF) heights performed by midwives is the most widespread screening method for detection of SGA. However, the inefficiency of this method necessitates improved practices. Earlier start and more frequent SF measurements, which could be accomplished by self-administered measurements, might improve the ability to detect deviant growth. The present study was set up to evaluate whether pregnant women can reliably perform SF measurements by themselves. Method. Forty healthy women with singleton and ultrasound-dated pregnancies from 2 antenatal clinics in Uppsala, Sweden, were asked to perform 4 consecutive SF measurements once every week, from 20 to 25 weeks of gestation until delivery. The self-administered SF measurements were recorded and systematically compared with midwives' SF measurements. Results. Thirty-three pregnant women performed self-administered SF measurements over a 14-week period (range: 1-21). The SF curves constructed from self-administered SF measurements had the same shape as previously constructed population-based reference curves. The variance for self-administered SF measurements was higher than that of the midwives. Conclusions. Pregnant women are capable of measuring SF heights by themselves, but with higher individual variance than midwives. Repeated measurements at each occasion can compensate for the higher variance. The main advantage of self-administered SF measurements is the opportunity to follow fetal growth earlier and more frequently. © 2007 Taylor & Francis.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Bergman, E., Kieler, H., Petzold, M., Sonesson, C., & Axelsson, O. (2007). Self-administered measurement of symphysis-fundus heights. Acta Obstetricia et Gynecologica Scandinavica, 86(6), 671–677. https://doi.org/10.1080/00016340701258867

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free