胎儿体重预测常见方法比较及临床价值探讨

目的 分析临床公式法和超声测量胎儿生长参数预测胎儿体重的临床应用价值.方法 采取随机数字表法选取浙江省衢州市人民医院收治的距生产0~7天、单胎、足月、健康产妇150例作为研究对象,分别给予临床公式法、超声法、临床公式法联合超声法预测胎儿的体重,并将其与出生后胎儿实际体重进行对比,比较各种方法预测正常足月儿及巨大儿体重的准确率.结果 临床公式法、超声法及联合法预测正常新生儿体重、巨大儿体重差异比较无统计学意义(F值分别为0.56、0.45,均P>0.05).临床公式法、超声法及联合法预测正常新生儿体重和巨大儿体重的准确率比较差异无统计学意义(P>0.05),超声法与临床公式法相比预测正常新生儿体重及巨大儿体重的符合率均较高(χ2值分别为4.12、4.19,均P<0.05),联合法分别与超声法、临床公式法相比预测正常新生儿体重及巨大儿体重的符合率较高,差异具有统计学意义(χ2=4.13~5.31,均P<0.05).结论 临床公式法联合超声法预测胎儿的体重的准确率较单独应用临床公式法或超声法更高,具有临床应用价值.

Comparison of common fetal weight prediction methods and their clinical values

Objective To analyze the clinical application value of predicting fetal weight by clinical formula method and ultrasonic measurement of fetal growth parameters.Methods Altogether 150 healthy singleton term pregnant women at 0-7 days before delivery hospitalized in Quzhou People's Hospital of Zhejiang Province were randomly selected as study objects.Clinical formula method, ultrasonic method and clinical formula combined with ultrasonic method were used on them to predict fetal weight, and estimated fetal weight was compared to actual fetal birth weight to evaluate the accuracy of each method in predicting body weight of normal full term infant and macrosomia.Results Difference in prediction of normal infant weight and macrosomia weight among clinical formula method, ultrasonic method and combined method had no statistical significance (F value was 0.56 and 0.45, respectively, both P>0.05).Accuracy of clinical formula method, ultrasonic method and combined method in predicting weight of normal infant and macrosomia had no statistically significant difference (P>0.05).Compliance rate of ultrasonic method in predicting weight of normal infant and macrosomia was both higher than that of clinical formula method (χ2 value was 4.12 and 4.19, respectively, both P<0.05).Compliance rate of combined method in predicting weight of normal infant and macrosomia was higher than ultrasonic method and clinical formula method alone, and the difference was statistically significant (χ2 value ranged 4.13-5.31, all P<0.05).Conclusion Clinical formula combined with ultrasonic method is more accurate in predicting fetal weight than clinical formula or ultrasonic method alone and has great clinical application value.