![Sample our Medicine, Dentistry, Nursing & Allied Health journals, sign in here to start your FREE access for 14 days]({"type":"image" , "src" : "/sda/5944/TOC-Subject-Sample-2021-Medicine-Dentistry-Nursing-Allied-Health.jpg"})
Abstract
Objective: We aimed to characterize gestational age assessment and fetal growth evaluation among obstetricians.
Methods: Observational, cross-sectional study. We applied a questionnaire to obstetrics specialists and residents, during a national congress on obstetrics.
Results: Almost all 179 respondents correct gestational age in the first trimester by ultrasound, but 63% only if there is a difference of 2–9 days. Ultrasound at 11–13 weeks was considered more accurate than at 8–10 weeks by 81%, with a higher proportion of specialists choosing correctly the last answer (p = 0.05). One-third of the respondents did not correctly point the error associated with the ultrasound estimation of fetal weight (EFW). Of the 88% who use a growth table, only 32% were able to identify it by publication/author. Ninety-eight percent identify fetal growth restriction risk (FGR) with centiles (10th in 76%) and 73% of doctors diagnose FGR without other pathological findings (10th in 49%). 44% finds that a low EFW centile maintenance (4th to 3rd) is more worrisome than the crossing of two quartiles (75th to 24th).
Conclusions: The role of ultrasound in gestational age assessment and use of EFW use for FGR classification was disparate among participants. EFW and respective centiles may be over relied upon.
Acknowledgements
The authors would like to thank professor Nuno Montenegro, for his suggestions and assistance and to Sociedade Portuguesa de Medicina Materno Fetal for providing assistance with the optimal conditions for the survey.
Declaration of interest
The authors state no conflicts of interest. The authors would like to thank Federação das Sociedades Portuguesas de Obstetrícia e Ginecologia for financial support.