Meet the Other Phone. A phone that grows with your child.

Meet the Other Phone.
A phone that grows with your child.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Childbirth

Share experiences and get support around labour, birth and recovery.

if you had a growth scan at 37 weeks, how accurate was it and what weight was the baby compared to estimate?

64 replies

tori32 · 08/03/2008 00:25

I just wondered how accurate these were. Most sonographers say allow a lb each way. I had a scan today which estimated baby is 9lb now at 37+5. Wondered how much weight they will put on up to the birth.

OP posts:
worley · 12/03/2008 21:53

scanned at 36 weeks and induced that eve, had ds2 2 days later and he was 5lb3.5oz they estimated 5lb so after scan went straight to mothercare and brough tinybaby clothes and went back to the hospital for induction!

ds1 was scanned at 36 weeks and was estimated 6lb he was 5lb13oz.

i had severe pre eclampsia with them both adn induced with them both

tori32 · 12/03/2008 22:08

With the exception of floria then, all within the lb either way on the last few posts.

OP posts:
maxbear · 13/03/2008 12:55

Merryberry, you had a baby today, 11lb 110z?WOW

becaroo · 13/03/2008 13:52

Floria...

wb · 13/03/2008 14:20

I had a scan to check size and amount water at 38 weeks - told all was 'fine' - size 8/9lb.

Well, it was fine but baby was 10 8oz and there was gallons of water (waters had to be broken when I started to push them out - we trashed the delivery room, as doctor later slipped on them and dropped the placenta . Cleaners sent in after where just .

Quote from my midwife later 'if you have another baby we'll send you for a scan at 38 weeks and hopefully this time they'll pay more attention to the results'

So I assume that scans can be more accurate though obviously in my case they weren't.

dizietsma · 13/03/2008 16:12

No, no, no, no they were extremely inaccurate for me and have a reputation for being very inaccurate in the 3rd trimester. 60% accurate is the official figure, I believe.

At a scan at 36 weeks I was told DD was on the 99th centile.

4 weeks later she was born (right on due date) and weighed exactly on the 50th centile. There's no way the first scan was correct, I think they saw me (I'm a big lady) and thought "fat mother, fat baby".

Objective measurement is often difficult for healthcare professionals because (in my experience) they see so many people in a day that they don't see an individual, they see a commonly encountered stereotype of patient. I think this is a big problem in OB/GYN (to use an Americanism) and their related professions.

EiWishFor3MoreWishes · 13/03/2008 16:27

i was measuring HUGE all the way through the preg and requested a scan at 41+1 as i was terrified at the thought of birthing this enormous 2year old sized baby and had a strop at the MW appointment they measured DD to be around 6lb 7oz and i had excess water so expaining the huge bump, they were right on the water side of things but when DD arrived 2 days later i was surprised to find an 8lb 12 oz baby instead of the diddy 6lb 7 i was promised... nothing is 100% accurate as is shown on here
xx ei xx

tori32 · 13/03/2008 23:07

I absolutely agree that scans are not 100% accurate. Its just interesting though I am going off past experience as well with dd1 who was 9lb 12oz (first baby). There are so many factors to consider with the scans. It is quite easy to get crossed wires. i.e. sonographer says its about 9lb and someone may assume thats birth weight (which they should not try to predict because babies don't grow at a standard rate.) Or they might forget to say it can be a lb out either way etc. Looking at most posts that does hold true except florias friend. I suppose as well it doesn't take account of problems with the placenta etc.

OP posts:
SusieHughsie · 13/03/2008 23:11

I had a scan at 39 weeks where I was told my baby would be at most 7lb. Little girl born 2 weeks later a whopping 8lb 10oz.

tori32 · 13/03/2008 23:19

See the pound thing still holds though suzie because if baby could be 7lb with 1 wk to go and they average an oz a day your baby would have been spot on at 8lb IYSWIM but they were 10oz out. Or 7lb 7oz at 40wks (7 days later) so they would have been 1/2lb out IYSWIM.

OP posts:
Leahheaton · 16/03/2018 09:37

Hi everyone im 37weeks pregnant and have been having growth scans, i had one yesterday and they've said my babies measuring below average and if he continues to lose weight rather than put it on they will induce me, does anyone know why a baby tends to measure below average?

Shaunieh95 · 16/03/2018 13:58

@Leahheaton I've been having growth scans since 28 weeks due to low Papp-a (plental protein) my baby's growth has started tailing off and I now have to have a Doppler scan to check the blood flow between the baby and the placenta every week and am in for monitorings of his heart every other day.

I am getting induced in a week and a few days (I am 37 weeks) due to his growth.

Some babies there is no explanation for why they are small they are just born this way! Xx

Leahheaton · 16/03/2018 21:21

Thank u that helps alot and good luck with ur induction, they've told me if he's still loosing weight in two weeks they all induce me xx

lovelsa · 19/03/2018 15:53

36 week scan said baby was going to be close to 10lbs! I was PETRIFIED and considered asking for an elective c section because mentally I was like "No way that is happening!" He ended up being 8lbs even.

Not close at all!

New posts on this thread. Refresh page