fundal height - how accurate? measuring large....

[whocaresaboutyourintellect]

By over 6 weeks. They have referred me for a scan.

I am currently 28 + 6 but measuring 35cm

[Naetha]

It's not very accurate at all.

With DS I was measuring 42cm at 34 weeks - was referred for a growth scan and all that. By fundal height his estimated birth weight was 13lbs, by scan his ebw was 8lbs8oz, and he was born 8lbs10oz.

DC2 is also measuring huge for dates, but already had a scan (for placenta praevia) and estimated birth weight 8lbs10oz by scan.

The scan EBWs are very accurate because they measure the leg length, body length, tummy diameter and head size. Both of my DCs are very long, which makes them stick out more, hence huge fundal readings.

[duckyfuzz]

this reminds me of my consultant who had a trainee in with him, when he measured me at 34 weeks with twins - he didn;t tell her I was carrying twins then made her measure and come up with possible reasons for the extra in the end they weighed no more combined than a singleton, there are so many other factors to consider

[CarGirl]

I measured 38 when I was 42+2 with a singleton, she was 10lb 6oz, I had loads of fluid and a huge placenta (cord was like a rope!)

Means very little!

[Tidey]

I measured bigger than I should have been when pg with DD and was told she'd be over 9lb. She turned out to be 8lb 1. I don't think it's an exact science tbh.

[ILikeToMoveItMoveIt]

It is used as an indicator of growth (or lack of). But I really don't think it can be an accurate measure of weight.

With my 1st pg the same mw got 4 different measurements within the same appointment.

With my 2nd pg my mw (Ind) didn't measure the fundal height with a tape measure. She checked that it was roughly at the height you would expect for gestation.

Also I don't think one growth scan can tell you much either. I would have thought a series of scans over a period of time would give a better picture of what is going on. Plus weights from scans aren't always accurate.

[spicemonster]

I had polyhydramnios (too much amniotic fluid) so was huge. But they also said that the scans said my DS was enormous. He wasn't at all - he was under 7lbs and below average height. So I take scans with a big pinch of salt now

[sh77]

I had 4 serial growth scans. Week 38 scan, baby measured spot on (as with previous scans). Week 40 on EDD, MW measured my belly with the tape and had me as 4 cm too small and sent me for emergency scan. I freaked out and said it was probably because baby was engaged and low down but she was having none of it. She was right - turned out that my baby's growth had slowed and placental fluid dropped below 5th centile. Was immediately induced.

[Beanigan]

From personal experience - not very accurate! I was referred for an extra scan and consistently measuring a few weeks larger - estimated to be at least a 10lb baby. EVEN when my DS was born, the midwives were guessing him to be over 9lb - in fact he weighed 7lb 8oz. He was just long and skinny. Honestly, don't worry - it seems in a lot of cases the babies are completely normal!

[heth1980]

I don't think the tape measure or the growth scans give an accurate picture.......I had a growth scan and was told I'd have a 10lb baby but she was 7lb 12 - that's quite a difference!

[MrsJohnDeere]

I measured large with ds2, was measured a lot, had a couple of growth scans. Was told he'd be well over 9lb. He was born at 40+4 weighing just shy of 7lb.

[showmethemummy]

with my first dd, all measurements were pretty much what they expected, and no-one even mentioned the possibility of 'large' baby - at birth she weighed 9lbs (I'm only 5'1 /1.52m).

2nd same - she weighed 8lbs12.

just had GP antenatal appointment, at 30+2 her measuring came up at 33cms. She did however try to reassure me about the size by grabbing hold of some 'folds' around my waist and saying - that could be all you!!

i don't have much faith in it tbh.

[greenbeanie]

I measured around 5-6cms bigger with both of my ds's. They were both big babies, 9lb15 and 10lb7 but were healthy and delivery was normal. Growth monitoring can be very hit and miss though. I was told ds2 (who was 10lb7) was going to be around 8.5lb's. so slightly out!!

[EccentricaGallumbits]

a single one off measurement doesn't mean much. it's most accurate if done by the same person at more than one time.

it's most accurate if the pregnant woman finds her own pubic bone and the midwife measures from there up, rather than the midwife poking around for herself on top of your jeans.

[madwomanintheattic]

not v accurate lol. like growth scans.

i ended up with a planned cs as apparently dd1 was huge.

she was 8lb 6ox, the smallest of the three. the other two were vbac lol.

[madwomanintheattic]

6 ox lol. that would have been huge.

[TheChewyToffeeMum]

Not very in my case. Measured 7cm over from 36 weeks. Turned out baby was footling breech and this was probably why.

If you measure big on scan they will probably want you to have a glucose tolerance test to check for gestational diabetes.

I was warned baby would be 13ish pounds - thankfully was only 9.5.