Repository logo
  • English
  • Català
  • Čeština
  • Deutsch
  • Español
  • Français
  • Gàidhlig
  • Italiano
  • Latviešu
  • Magyar
  • Nederlands
  • Polski
  • Português
  • Português do Brasil
  • Srpski (lat)
  • Suomi
  • Svenska
  • Türkçe
  • Tiếng Việt
  • Қазақ
  • বাংলা
  • हिंदी
  • Ελληνικά
  • Српски
  • Yкраї́нська
  • Log In
    New user? Click here to register. Have you forgotten your password?
Repository logo
  • Communities & Collections
  • All of DSpace
  • English
  • Català
  • Čeština
  • Deutsch
  • Español
  • Français
  • Gàidhlig
  • Italiano
  • Latviešu
  • Magyar
  • Nederlands
  • Polski
  • Português
  • Português do Brasil
  • Srpski (lat)
  • Suomi
  • Svenska
  • Türkçe
  • Tiếng Việt
  • Қазақ
  • বাংলা
  • हिंदी
  • Ελληνικά
  • Српски
  • Yкраї́нська
  • Log In
    New user? Click here to register. Have you forgotten your password?
  1. Home
  2. Browse by Author

Browsing by Author "Kumbakumba, Fadhil S."

Now showing 1 - 1 of 1
Results Per Page
Sort Options
  • Loading...
    Thumbnail Image
    Item
    Accuracy of obstetric ultrasound versus Johnson and Dare’s clinical methods to estimate fetal weight in fullterm pregnancy in regional referral hospitals, Dar es Salaam, from march to May 2024
    (Kairuki University, 2024) Kumbakumba, Fadhil S.
    Introduction: Fetal weight is among the determinants of birth outcomes for both the mother and the neonate. Various techniques have been used to estimate births with inconclusive results. This study has been done to compare the accuracy in estimating birth weight using the clinical methods and ultrasonography. Methods: This was a cross sectional, study that consisted of using interviews, consultation of medical record and assessment of 100 pregnant mother and neonatal in antenatal and postpartum period. Descriptive statistics, t paired sample test, were used for data analysis. Results: ultrasonography was the best technic observed to estimate birth weight with no significant difference (t=1.4, p value >0.05) with actual birth weight. The study found a low accuracy in estimating birth weight when using the Dares formula which have shown significant difference with actual birth weight (t=12.7, p value <0.05). However, there was no significant difference (t=2.1,p value >0.05) between estimating birth weight using the Johnson formula and actual birth weight with high accuracy. On the other side, there was a significant difference (t=12.5, p value < 0.05) in birth weight when estimating birth weight using ultrasonography and the clinical technique based on Dares formula. In contrast, there was no discernible difference (t=2.2;p value > 0.05) when the Johnson formula and ultrasound estimation were used. Conclusion: Ultrasonography and Johnson formula provided the best estimates of the birth weight before delivery compared to the Dares formula. Therefore, in absence of ultrasonography services, the use of the Johnson's clinical methods for estimating the birth weight should be encouraged.

DSpace software copyright © 2002-2025 LYRASIS

  • Cookie settings
  • Privacy policy
  • End User Agreement
  • Send Feedback