International Journal of Infertility & Fetal Medicine

Register      Login

VOLUME 14 , ISSUE 1 ( January-April, 2023 ) > List of Articles


Estimation of Fetal Weight at Term by Clinical Method Using Symphysio Fundal Height and Abdominal Girth and Ultrasound Using Hadlock Formula and Its Correlation with Actual Birth Weight

Lubna Mukhtar, M Lakshmidevi, B Gowthami

Keywords : Abdominal girth, Actual birth weight, Fetal weight estimation, Hadlock formula, Symphysio fundal height

Citation Information : Mukhtar L, Lakshmidevi M, Gowthami B. Estimation of Fetal Weight at Term by Clinical Method Using Symphysio Fundal Height and Abdominal Girth and Ultrasound Using Hadlock Formula and Its Correlation with Actual Birth Weight. Int J Infertil Fetal Med 2023; 14 (1):8-11.

DOI: 10.5005/jp-journals-10016-1305

License: CC BY-NC 4.0

Published Online: 28-04-2023

Copyright Statement:  Copyright © 2023; The Author(s).


In prenatal care, labor management and preparation, particularly when deciding on the mode of delivery, the accuracy of fetal weight predictions is crucial. At both extremes of birth weight, perinatal complications are higher, so it is also necessary to develop conceptual strategies to reduce the rate of unwanted pregnancy outcomes. The purpose of this study was to estimate the fetal weight during term pregnancy using clinical and ultrasonic methods, as well as to correlate the actual birth weight with the estimated weight. Materials and methods: A prospective observational study of all term pregnant women who came for antenatal checkup and patients admitted to the obstetric ward fulfilling the inclusion criteria. The patients were subjected to clinical evaluation and investigations, and data was collected in a predesigned pro forma. All the measurements were routinely documented in the antenatal visit of pregnancy, and the estimated weight was calculated by using the formula abdominal girth (AG) × symphysio fundal height (SFH) and Hadlock method and both were compared with the weight of the fetus after delivery. Results: A total of 500 pregnant women with singleton pregnancies were studied. The average actual birth weight was 2758.19 ± 341.25. The mean weight estimated by AG × SFH was 2862.67 ± 327.37, and that by the Hadlock method was 2902.11 ± 336.35. The p-value of the estimated fetal weight (EFW) by AG × SFH was 0.699, whereas for the Hadlock method, it was 0.669. The average error was 104.50 gm with AG × SFH and 143.9 gm with the Hadlock method. The mean percentage error was 3.8% in AG × SFH and 5.1% by the Hadlock method. The standard deviation (SD) was found to be the smallest with AG × SFH (197.85), followed by ultrasound (USG) (219.61). Correlation analysis showed a significant positive relationship between the weight of the fetus at birth and the estimated birth weight for both methods. Conclusion: From the present study, we conclude that the estimation of fetal weight at term by a clinical method is as accurate as the USG estimation of fetal weight. It can be routinely used at term gestation. It is of more practical use at peripheries where USG machines or trained personnel for doing USG are not available.

PDF Share
  1. Lanowski JS, Lanowski G, Schippert C, et al. Ultrasound versus clinical examination to estimate fetal weight at term. Geburtshilfe und Frauenheilkunde 2017;77(3):276–283. DOI: 10.1055/s-0043-102406
  2. Bernstein IM, Horbar JD, Badger GJ, et al. Morbidity and mortality among very-low-birth-weight neonates with intrauterine growth restriction. The Vermont Oxford Network. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2000;182(1 Pt 1):198–206. DOI: 10.1016/s0002-9378(00)70513-8
  3. Raman S, Urquhart R, Yusof M. Clinical versus ultrasound estimation of fetal weight. Aust N Z J Obstet Gynaecol 1992;32(3):196–199. DOI: 10.1111/j.1479-828x.1992.tb01944.x
  4. Bhandari AA, Pinto PJ, Shetty AP. Comparative study of various methods of fetal weight estimation at term pregnancy. J Obstet Gynecol Ind 2004;54(4):336–339. DOI: 10.18203/2320-1770.ijrcog20181363
  5. Siddiqua SA, Deepthi, Bharath A. Comparative study of various methods of fetal weight estimation at term pregnancy. J Med Sci Clin Res 2014;2(10):2737–2744. DOI:10.5005/JP-JOURNALS-10006-1213
  6. Raghuvanshi T, Pawar M, Patil A. Comparative study of fetal weight estimation by various methods among term pregnancies at rural tertiary care centre, Maharashtra. J Evol Med Dent Sci 2014;3(41):10291–10296. DOI: 10.14260/jemds/2014/3336
  7. Dare FO, Adernowore AS. The value of symphysio-fundal height/abdominal girth measurements in predicting fetal weight. J Gynecol Obstet 1990;31(3):243–248.
  8. Aruna S, Yalla S, Yellayi ASS, et al. Estimation of fetal weight by clinical methods and ultrasound and correlating its accuracy with actual birth weight in term pregnancies. Int J Sci Study 2017;5(4):265–269. DOI: 10.17354/ijss/2017/376
  9. Roy AG, Kathaley MH. Comparison of estimation of fetal weight by clinical method, ultrasonography and its correlation with actual birth weight in term pregnancy. MVP J Med Sci 2018;5(1):75–81. DOI: 10.18311/mvpjms.v5i1.10077
  10. Thombarapu U, Agrawal P. Comparative evaluation between two clinical methods of foetal weight estimation with actual birth weight – a prospective study. Int J Sci Res 2015;4(6):1491–1494. DOI:
  11. Sharma R, Singh S, Bhartiya V, et al. Product of symphysio-fundal height and abdominal circumference: a predictor of estimated fetal weight at birth. Int J Sci Stud 2015;3(9):125–127.
PDF Share
PDF Share

© Jaypee Brothers Medical Publishers (P) LTD.