Clinician Bias in Fundal Height Measurement

To establish whether the degree of clinician bias in fundal height measurement is affected by patient body mass index (BMI) or provider experience. Singleton, ultrasound-dated pregnancies between 24 weeks and 40 weeks underwent fundal height measurements (n=103) by two providers, each using one blan...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Obstetrics and gynecology (New York. 1953) 2007-10, Vol.110 (4), p.892-899
Hauptverfasser: Jelks, Andrea, Cifuentes, Rodrigo, Ross, Michael G.
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
container_end_page 899
container_issue 4
container_start_page 892
container_title Obstetrics and gynecology (New York. 1953)
container_volume 110
creator Jelks, Andrea
Cifuentes, Rodrigo
Ross, Michael G.
description To establish whether the degree of clinician bias in fundal height measurement is affected by patient body mass index (BMI) or provider experience. Singleton, ultrasound-dated pregnancies between 24 weeks and 40 weeks underwent fundal height measurements (n=103) by two providers, each using one blank and one marked measuring tape. Outcomes were the differences between the blank and marked measurements (bias) and between fundal height and gestational age for blank and marked tapes. Mixed models for repeated measures (provider and tape type) were used to estimate outcomes and compare them according to provider experience level and for patient background and anthropometric characteristics. Bias increased with patient BMI, although only among providers with less than 2 years of experience (juniors, P=.004) and not for those with more experience (seniors, P=.38). Similarly, bias decreased over the study enrollment period among junior, but not senior providers. Providers of all levels were more likely to measure a fundal height within 3 cm of gestational age using a marked tape than a blank tape (odds ratio 1.83, 95% confidence interval 1.41-2.38). Clinicians are biased in their fundal height measurements by knowledge of gestational age and use of a marked measuring tape. This tendency increases with higher patient BMI and with less provider experience.
doi_str_mv 10.1097/01.AOG.0000282758.28533.d9
format Article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_68339749</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>68339749</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c3925-572c8bb7eb5929c431d5255339a1904b5a7c325512812b0a07e2d4356418dba53</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNpFkMtKAzEUhoMotlZfQQZBNzJjrpPEnRZthUo3Cu5CJpPaaDqtyQzFtze9YLMJOfnOfw4fAFcIFghKfgdR8TAdFTAdLDBnosCCEVLU8gj0keAkx4R8HIN--pc5F5T2wFmMX4lHpSSnoIe4hCXErA9uh941zjjdZI9Ox8w12XPX1NpnY-s-5232anXsgl3Ypj0HJzPto73Y3wPw_vz0Nhznk-noZfgwyQ2RmOWMYyOqituKSSwNJahmmKUFpUYS0oppbkgqICwQrqCG3OKaElZSJOpKMzIAN7vcVVj-dDa2auGisd7rxi67qEqRsjiVCbzfgSYsYwx2plbBLXT4VQiqjSoFkUqq1EGV2qpS9ab5cj-lqxa2PrTu3STgeg_oaLSfBd0YF_85nBJJSXHi6I5bL31rQ_z23doGNbfat_Pt6BIzmGMIOdq88s0yjPwBmul-mA</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>68339749</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Clinician Bias in Fundal Height Measurement</title><source>MEDLINE</source><source>Journals@Ovid Ovid Autoload</source><creator>Jelks, Andrea ; Cifuentes, Rodrigo ; Ross, Michael G.</creator><creatorcontrib>Jelks, Andrea ; Cifuentes, Rodrigo ; Ross, Michael G.</creatorcontrib><description>To establish whether the degree of clinician bias in fundal height measurement is affected by patient body mass index (BMI) or provider experience. Singleton, ultrasound-dated pregnancies between 24 weeks and 40 weeks underwent fundal height measurements (n=103) by two providers, each using one blank and one marked measuring tape. Outcomes were the differences between the blank and marked measurements (bias) and between fundal height and gestational age for blank and marked tapes. Mixed models for repeated measures (provider and tape type) were used to estimate outcomes and compare them according to provider experience level and for patient background and anthropometric characteristics. Bias increased with patient BMI, although only among providers with less than 2 years of experience (juniors, P=.004) and not for those with more experience (seniors, P=.38). Similarly, bias decreased over the study enrollment period among junior, but not senior providers. Providers of all levels were more likely to measure a fundal height within 3 cm of gestational age using a marked tape than a blank tape (odds ratio 1.83, 95% confidence interval 1.41-2.38). Clinicians are biased in their fundal height measurements by knowledge of gestational age and use of a marked measuring tape. This tendency increases with higher patient BMI and with less provider experience.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0029-7844</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1873-233X</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1097/01.AOG.0000282758.28533.d9</identifier><identifier>PMID: 17906025</identifier><identifier>CODEN: OBGNAS</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>New York, NY: by The American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists. Published by Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. All rights reserved</publisher><subject>Adolescent ; Adult ; Anthropometry - instrumentation ; Anthropometry - methods ; Biological and medical sciences ; Body Mass Index ; Body Weight ; Clinical Competence ; Female ; Gestational Age ; Gynecology. Andrology. Obstetrics ; Humans ; Medical sciences ; Observer Variation ; Organ Size ; Pregnancy - statistics &amp; numerical data ; Prenatal Care - methods ; Prenatal Care - statistics &amp; numerical data ; Uterus - anatomy &amp; histology</subject><ispartof>Obstetrics and gynecology (New York. 1953), 2007-10, Vol.110 (4), p.892-899</ispartof><rights>by The American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists. Published by Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. All rights reserved.</rights><rights>2008 INIST-CNRS</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c3925-572c8bb7eb5929c431d5255339a1904b5a7c325512812b0a07e2d4356418dba53</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c3925-572c8bb7eb5929c431d5255339a1904b5a7c325512812b0a07e2d4356418dba53</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><link.rule.ids>314,780,784,27924,27925</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttp://pascal-francis.inist.fr/vibad/index.php?action=getRecordDetail&amp;idt=20283642$$DView record in Pascal Francis$$Hfree_for_read</backlink><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17906025$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Jelks, Andrea</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Cifuentes, Rodrigo</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Ross, Michael G.</creatorcontrib><title>Clinician Bias in Fundal Height Measurement</title><title>Obstetrics and gynecology (New York. 1953)</title><addtitle>Obstet Gynecol</addtitle><description>To establish whether the degree of clinician bias in fundal height measurement is affected by patient body mass index (BMI) or provider experience. Singleton, ultrasound-dated pregnancies between 24 weeks and 40 weeks underwent fundal height measurements (n=103) by two providers, each using one blank and one marked measuring tape. Outcomes were the differences between the blank and marked measurements (bias) and between fundal height and gestational age for blank and marked tapes. Mixed models for repeated measures (provider and tape type) were used to estimate outcomes and compare them according to provider experience level and for patient background and anthropometric characteristics. Bias increased with patient BMI, although only among providers with less than 2 years of experience (juniors, P=.004) and not for those with more experience (seniors, P=.38). Similarly, bias decreased over the study enrollment period among junior, but not senior providers. Providers of all levels were more likely to measure a fundal height within 3 cm of gestational age using a marked tape than a blank tape (odds ratio 1.83, 95% confidence interval 1.41-2.38). Clinicians are biased in their fundal height measurements by knowledge of gestational age and use of a marked measuring tape. This tendency increases with higher patient BMI and with less provider experience.</description><subject>Adolescent</subject><subject>Adult</subject><subject>Anthropometry - instrumentation</subject><subject>Anthropometry - methods</subject><subject>Biological and medical sciences</subject><subject>Body Mass Index</subject><subject>Body Weight</subject><subject>Clinical Competence</subject><subject>Female</subject><subject>Gestational Age</subject><subject>Gynecology. Andrology. Obstetrics</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>Medical sciences</subject><subject>Observer Variation</subject><subject>Organ Size</subject><subject>Pregnancy - statistics &amp; numerical data</subject><subject>Prenatal Care - methods</subject><subject>Prenatal Care - statistics &amp; numerical data</subject><subject>Uterus - anatomy &amp; histology</subject><issn>0029-7844</issn><issn>1873-233X</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2007</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><recordid>eNpFkMtKAzEUhoMotlZfQQZBNzJjrpPEnRZthUo3Cu5CJpPaaDqtyQzFtze9YLMJOfnOfw4fAFcIFghKfgdR8TAdFTAdLDBnosCCEVLU8gj0keAkx4R8HIN--pc5F5T2wFmMX4lHpSSnoIe4hCXErA9uh941zjjdZI9Ox8w12XPX1NpnY-s-5232anXsgl3Ypj0HJzPto73Y3wPw_vz0Nhznk-noZfgwyQ2RmOWMYyOqituKSSwNJahmmKUFpUYS0oppbkgqICwQrqCG3OKaElZSJOpKMzIAN7vcVVj-dDa2auGisd7rxi67qEqRsjiVCbzfgSYsYwx2plbBLXT4VQiqjSoFkUqq1EGV2qpS9ab5cj-lqxa2PrTu3STgeg_oaLSfBd0YF_85nBJJSXHi6I5bL31rQ_z23doGNbfat_Pt6BIzmGMIOdq88s0yjPwBmul-mA</recordid><startdate>20071001</startdate><enddate>20071001</enddate><creator>Jelks, Andrea</creator><creator>Cifuentes, Rodrigo</creator><creator>Ross, Michael G.</creator><general>by The American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists. Published by Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. All rights reserved</general><general>Elsevier Science</general><scope>IQODW</scope><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7X8</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20071001</creationdate><title>Clinician Bias in Fundal Height Measurement</title><author>Jelks, Andrea ; Cifuentes, Rodrigo ; Ross, Michael G.</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c3925-572c8bb7eb5929c431d5255339a1904b5a7c325512812b0a07e2d4356418dba53</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2007</creationdate><topic>Adolescent</topic><topic>Adult</topic><topic>Anthropometry - instrumentation</topic><topic>Anthropometry - methods</topic><topic>Biological and medical sciences</topic><topic>Body Mass Index</topic><topic>Body Weight</topic><topic>Clinical Competence</topic><topic>Female</topic><topic>Gestational Age</topic><topic>Gynecology. Andrology. Obstetrics</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>Medical sciences</topic><topic>Observer Variation</topic><topic>Organ Size</topic><topic>Pregnancy - statistics &amp; numerical data</topic><topic>Prenatal Care - methods</topic><topic>Prenatal Care - statistics &amp; numerical data</topic><topic>Uterus - anatomy &amp; histology</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Jelks, Andrea</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Cifuentes, Rodrigo</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Ross, Michael G.</creatorcontrib><collection>Pascal-Francis</collection><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><jtitle>Obstetrics and gynecology (New York. 1953)</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Jelks, Andrea</au><au>Cifuentes, Rodrigo</au><au>Ross, Michael G.</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Clinician Bias in Fundal Height Measurement</atitle><jtitle>Obstetrics and gynecology (New York. 1953)</jtitle><addtitle>Obstet Gynecol</addtitle><date>2007-10-01</date><risdate>2007</risdate><volume>110</volume><issue>4</issue><spage>892</spage><epage>899</epage><pages>892-899</pages><issn>0029-7844</issn><eissn>1873-233X</eissn><coden>OBGNAS</coden><abstract>To establish whether the degree of clinician bias in fundal height measurement is affected by patient body mass index (BMI) or provider experience. Singleton, ultrasound-dated pregnancies between 24 weeks and 40 weeks underwent fundal height measurements (n=103) by two providers, each using one blank and one marked measuring tape. Outcomes were the differences between the blank and marked measurements (bias) and between fundal height and gestational age for blank and marked tapes. Mixed models for repeated measures (provider and tape type) were used to estimate outcomes and compare them according to provider experience level and for patient background and anthropometric characteristics. Bias increased with patient BMI, although only among providers with less than 2 years of experience (juniors, P=.004) and not for those with more experience (seniors, P=.38). Similarly, bias decreased over the study enrollment period among junior, but not senior providers. Providers of all levels were more likely to measure a fundal height within 3 cm of gestational age using a marked tape than a blank tape (odds ratio 1.83, 95% confidence interval 1.41-2.38). Clinicians are biased in their fundal height measurements by knowledge of gestational age and use of a marked measuring tape. This tendency increases with higher patient BMI and with less provider experience.</abstract><cop>New York, NY</cop><pub>by The American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists. Published by Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. All rights reserved</pub><pmid>17906025</pmid><doi>10.1097/01.AOG.0000282758.28533.d9</doi><tpages>8</tpages></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 0029-7844
ispartof Obstetrics and gynecology (New York. 1953), 2007-10, Vol.110 (4), p.892-899
issn 0029-7844
1873-233X
language eng
recordid cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_68339749
source MEDLINE; Journals@Ovid Ovid Autoload
subjects Adolescent
Adult
Anthropometry - instrumentation
Anthropometry - methods
Biological and medical sciences
Body Mass Index
Body Weight
Clinical Competence
Female
Gestational Age
Gynecology. Andrology. Obstetrics
Humans
Medical sciences
Observer Variation
Organ Size
Pregnancy - statistics & numerical data
Prenatal Care - methods
Prenatal Care - statistics & numerical data
Uterus - anatomy & histology
title Clinician Bias in Fundal Height Measurement
url https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-05T06%3A37%3A08IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Clinician%20Bias%20in%20Fundal%20Height%20Measurement&rft.jtitle=Obstetrics%20and%20gynecology%20(New%20York.%201953)&rft.au=Jelks,%20Andrea&rft.date=2007-10-01&rft.volume=110&rft.issue=4&rft.spage=892&rft.epage=899&rft.pages=892-899&rft.issn=0029-7844&rft.eissn=1873-233X&rft.coden=OBGNAS&rft_id=info:doi/10.1097/01.AOG.0000282758.28533.d9&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E68339749%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=68339749&rft_id=info:pmid/17906025&rfr_iscdi=true