Was the u/s diagnosis of a Large baby correct? - Page 2 - Mothering Forums
Forum Jump: 
Reply
 
Thread Tools
#31 of 50 Old 05-09-2005, 11:43 PM
 
WinterBaby's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Posts: 885
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
My dd was estimated both with u/s and midwife measuring at near 10# and born at 9#15. I always thought she'd be a bit over 9#. Who's doing the u/s I think can affect accuracy - I think the sonographers in my perinatologists office who measure babies all day every day were certainly more accurate than my ob. I was being monitored regularly with u/s throughout pregnancy after an early check for a family genetic thing showed what appeared to be blood clotting in the placenta which led to testing that revealed I had an underlying clotting problem. To monitor placenta function, they'd check fetal growth (through estimated measurments) and cord circulation, and they seemed pretty accurate throughout. Which meant they were all pleased to see a fat, growing baby on the u/s. So maybe that's why I never got a whiff of negativity over dd's large size from any of the Dr.s ) Even the midwives just noted the baby was large and moved on. I had my share of birth related fears, but her size was never one of them
WinterBaby is offline  
#32 of 50 Old 05-09-2005, 11:57 PM
 
crazy_eights's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Nisht ahir un nish aher
Posts: 6,837
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by BlueStateMama
I've heard the margin of error is plus or minus 14 oz.
In Israel they will tell you that at term the margin of error is plus OR minus 1 kg - that is 2.2 lbs!
crazy_eights is offline  
#33 of 50 Old 05-10-2005, 12:04 AM
 
crazy_eights's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Nisht ahir un nish aher
Posts: 6,837
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nora'sMama
She did not use u/s, however; just external palpation. Does anyone have any thoughts on how accurate that is as compared to u/s? (I know there was one PP who said her OB's estimate using that method was accurate).
I think it just depends on the experience of whomever is doing it. The mw that attended me in labor with my first two guessed right on the money from external palapation. She was a Dutch mw in her late 60's with many, many years experience however! I've seen some people be really, really off (one OB in particular comes to mind that think anything but a premie is HUGE!) and some that are quite good.
crazy_eights is offline  
#34 of 50 Old 05-10-2005, 12:29 AM
 
doctorjen's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2003
Posts: 3,112
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
I think the ultrasound techs in my hospital are pretty good and are usually right on. They also are pretty good at telling when they are not getting good measurements and letting me know that they think an estimate is inaccurate. And before anybody gets mad at me, I don't do ultrasounds for size, just when I do need an ultrasound for some reason, they always give an estimated weigth, so I just sometimes get this info I don't need.

I recently had an interesting discussion with an OB. He did a colposcopy on a pregnant patient of mine and feels she should be induced 2 weeks early so she can get treatment done sooner (which in her case is debatable anyway, but not the point of this story.) I mentioned that I just didn't think the few days or weeks would really make much difference clinically for treatment for her, while it might make a difference for her risk in labor and delivery, and for her baby who might not be ready. Then he went on about the real reason he felt she should be induced early. "And anyway, her last baby was 9 1/2 lbs, so you surely don't want to face that again! It'll be big enough at 38 weeks." Then he suggested I just use cytotec if she got to 38 weeks and her cervix wasn't favorable. Yeah, because a 9 lb baby is such an emergency, I better use a non-FDA approved, possibly dangerous drug to get the baby out before it's ready - even though last time she pushed out a 9 lb 9 oz baby with no problem.
doctorjen is offline  
#35 of 50 Old 05-10-2005, 12:43 AM
 
applejuice's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: hunting the wild aebelskiever
Posts: 18,648
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 6 Post(s)
I often think that doctors use scare techniques on their patients.

Doctors hardly ever do palpatations, deciding to rely on machines and recordings that stand up in evidence in malpractice suits more easlily.

Unfortunately this is the standard of care today in American Obstetrics.

"The great enemy of the truth is very often not the lie, deliberate, contrived and dishonest, but the myth, persistent, persuasive and unrealistic."
applejuice is offline  
#36 of 50 Old 05-10-2005, 09:24 AM
 
wendy1221's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: NC
Posts: 5,374
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by doctorjen
I recently had an interesting discussion with an OB. He did a colposcopy on a pregnant patient of mine and feels she should be induced 2 weeks early so she can get treatment done sooner (which in her case is debatable anyway, but not the point of this story.) I mentioned that I just didn't think the few days or weeks would really make much difference clinically for treatment for her, while it might make a difference for her risk in labor and delivery, and for her baby who might not be ready. Then he went on about the real reason he felt she should be induced early. "And anyway, her last baby was 9 1/2 lbs, so you surely don't want to face that again! It'll be big enough at 38 weeks." Then he suggested I just use cytotec if she got to 38 weeks and her cervix wasn't favorable. Yeah, because a 9 lb baby is such an emergency, I better use a non-FDA approved, possibly dangerous drug to get the baby out before it's ready - even though last time she pushed out a 9 lb 9 oz baby with no problem.
I think you are unfortunately a minority, Jen. My OB was casually throwing in comments about the size of the baby (from an u/s to check his enlarged kidneys) and how the size of the baby might call for more "things" being made necessary, whatever the heck that means. I wasn't worried at all about "the SIZE of the baby." Big babies run in my family, cesareans do not. I hate how so many OB's are so vague and and ominous. Not to mention treat you like you're either stupid and couldn't possible understand what they know or that you don't need to know. Hey! I carried some friends in college through o-chem who are now MD's, I think I might be able to understand. Grrr!

Anyway, I think her little coments caused me to A) go into labor 2 weeks early before they tried to force induction (he was 9lbs 4oz at 38w 1d and I pushed through 3 contractions and that was it. and he was asynclitic. I don't think I have to worry about any sized baby. ) and B) for my contractions to keep going but not finish dialating when I got to the hospital. I was too worried about what she was going to do to me after all that talk about my big baby and how things might need to be done to get him out. I was at 9 when I got to the hospital and stayed at 9 until I finally got an epidural 5 hours later. (And the epidural was traumatic for me. So I get really po'd when people roll their eyes when I tell them about my "horrible" hospital experience. "Oh you poor thing, had to get an epidural. That must have been AWFUL. (insert sarcasm)" Um, sorry, but not everyone likes the idea of having a needle stuck into their spine!)

And OB's wonder why women choose to have homebirths after what they consider to be "normal" hospital deliveries.

On the other hand, the OB I had w/ my first was WONDERFUL. SHe was very laid back and liked to leave things go their own way. I pushed for 2.5 hours w/ him, and she had me pushing in all kinds of positions to see what worked, some of them a little wacky. LOL! Her c-sec rate was les than 10%. So they're out there, you're not the only one. LOL!
wendy1221 is offline  
#37 of 50 Old 05-10-2005, 01:41 PM
 
cappuccinosmom's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: SW Pennsylvania
Posts: 5,628
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
With ds1, they were *way* off. At 37 weeks, I was being told he was going to be well over 8 lb if I got to "due date". He was born 39 wk 4 days, at 6 lb 14 oz.

This baby, at 37 weeks they told me he was 8 lb, and wanted to induce. I went to 42 wk 2 days, and he was 9 lb 15 oz. So, they were right that he was big, but totally wrong thinking I couldn't do it and trying to scare me into induction. He wasn't *that* big.
cappuccinosmom is offline  
#38 of 50 Old 05-11-2005, 01:55 PM
 
candipooh's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: San Bernardino, CA
Posts: 4,036
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Greaseball
My OB also guessed my baby's weight by external palpation alone, and was exactly right.

My family dr. with my first guessed right on. At 37 weeks her felt around and guessed "around 8 pounds" she was born 3 days later at 8 pounds 3 oz. and my midwife with my 3rd guessed right on as well. During labor she guessed (I asked her just for fun) and she said "between 8 pounds and 8 1/2 pounds" she was born a few hours later at 8 pounds 4 oz. I was measuring HUGE too. If we went my fundal height then we would have guessed 12 pounds (46 cm)
candipooh is offline  
#39 of 50 Old 05-11-2005, 02:48 PM
 
odenata's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 2,055
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
One of my pregnancy books sites a study that looked at the accuracy of predicting weights through ultrasound, by the OB, and by the mother. It found that the mother actually was more accurate at estimating the weight than either u/s or OBs. (I looked for an online link, but couldn't find one.)
odenata is offline  
#40 of 50 Old 05-11-2005, 05:28 PM
 
jessicafairy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Western Massachusetts
Posts: 487
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
You have the benefit of experience...Do you feel alot bigger? Do you think the baby is huge?
My first was 6lbs 10.75oz 20.75 inches long and induced because the ultrasound showed him as having lost weight (they thought he was only 5lbs)

My second was huge. 10lbs 9.5oz & 22.5 inches. His ultrasound said 8.5-9lbs. I could tell he was much larger long before they tried to tell me. I carried differently, he felt heavier and lots longer! Rely on your feelings, your body knows.

Jess, mom to Phelan Quinn (9/23/95), Wiley Rogue (10/29/03), and Victor Xerxes (9/10/08) and still married to my giant!
jessicafairy is offline  
#41 of 50 Old 05-11-2005, 05:45 PM
 
wasabi's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: LA
Posts: 2,355
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
With #3 I had a u/s at 38 weeks that estimated her birthweight would be 11-11.5lbs if I went on time. I was told that in my case they felt sure it was accurate within a half a pound. She was born the day after my EDD at 9lb13oz. Yes that's good sized but by no means 11.5 lbs and I had already birthed a 10lb 2.3oz baby with no problems (that baby was guessed to be 8.5lbs just visually and externally). Unfortuantely I think this fear of this enormous baby I was going to have caused a lot of problems. I did have a natural labor but the oncall medwife totally took over the actual birth/pushing in her attempts to avoid shoulder distocia which she then swore had still occurred even though I think it was a tight shoulders at best.

With my most recent pg I told my new midwives upfront that I was not going to be accepting any lateterm u/s. Strangely enough one of them spent most of the pg telling me she was sure this was going to be my smallest baby. I never measured more than 2cms ahead vs 4-6cms ahead with #3. I only gained 36lbs etc. I felt this baby was going to be around the size of my others and couldn't believe I'd have an 8.5lber like she thought (my smallest was 9lbs). Sure enough #4 was 10lbs 7oz and 22.5 inches long. The midwife who predicted the small baby was in attendance and had to laugh at how wrong she was though she tried to say I'd said I thought she was small too. Um no. Anyway external palpitation or u/s either way I think is just a guess at best. There's just too much that can throw everything off like the baby's position and the amount of fluid etc. My mom's babies were all big too so I've never been particularly afraid of big babies. I will note however that #4 did get stuck briefly like her big sister. My midwife got her out very quickly but she was a mild SD. Yes fat does squish but shoulders don't. I think the key is having a caregiver who isn't afraid of big babies. If they're ok with it you shouldn't really ahve a problem.
wasabi is offline  
#42 of 50 Old 05-11-2005, 05:56 PM
 
girlndocs's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: discreet, my @ss
Posts: 4,265
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Here's yet another thread where I get to recommend Ina May's Guide To Childbirth :LOL Maybe I should just put it in my sig or something ...

What are the alleged risks of having big babies? Is it just that they will supposedly never come out? PuhLEEZE. There was a time when upper-class women avoided the sun so rigorously they got rickets, which commonly deforms the pelvis. So at that time cephalopelvic disproportion was a real worry, although I'm pretty sure that with a deformed pelvis even the smallest of babies would have trouble, YK?
girlndocs is offline  
#43 of 50 Old 05-12-2005, 11:36 AM
 
leosmama20's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Posts: 555
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
My u/s said the baby was 9lbs 3 oz. When I was induced 5 days later, she was born at 9lbs 12oz. So, I would say the u/s was pretty accurate. I had a very VERY difficult time birthing such a large baby (despite being 6 feet tall myself). Personally, I wish they had induced me a couple weeks earlier (they induced at just past 40 weeks). If I am dialated early again, I am definitely going to try and get things going...

Just my two cents.
leosmama20 is offline  
#44 of 50 Old 05-12-2005, 02:42 PM
 
mightymoo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Mass. Confusion
Posts: 10,940
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Henci Goer has a great online article about big babies as predicted by u/s & inductions / cesareans : http://parenting.ivillage.com/pregna...,,8nbq,00.html

I wish I knew what the u/s said about my daughter. We had a fetal assessment at 42 weeks and at the time no one mentioned size to me. I knew its terribly inaccurate and I didn't want to know anyway, but in restrospect, I really would like to know what it said! My daughter was born at 10lbs 8oz by c/s (there was a lot more going on to cause that than her size though) and while I was on laying on my back on the operating table getting prepped, this huge mound of belly - the doctors and nurses were all guessing the size of the baby - I think the largest guess was like 9lbs 10oz or so, no one thought she was that big!

I am actually secretly hoping this one is as big as his sister, though I don't hope he goes as long - I loved having a big strong baby adn I'd love to VBAC a 10 pounder so that I don't have to ever deal with that 'oh, 10lbs, must have been a c/s huh' crap again!

Mightymoo - Mom to DD (6) and DS (4)
mightymoo is offline  
#45 of 50 Old 05-12-2005, 10:27 PM
 
heathenmom's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: On the Homestead
Posts: 2,080
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
At 36 weeks they did an u/s because I was measuring big. They said at that point she was already at least 8 lbs. and offered me an induction/elective cs on the spot. : They continued to pressure me for an induction/cs at every visit until I hit 39 weeks, when they informed me that they weren't going to let me go past 40 weeks. Really? Didn't know it was their decision ... they were a little surprised to find out that it wasn't. At 40 weeks, they insisted that I set a date for an induction (I did ... 12 days past my edd), AND that I come in every other day for an NST or u/s. DD was born at 40w6d and was 10 lbs. 9 oz. So ... long story, well, long , for us the u/s was pretty accurate. Still, it had no bearing on me being able to deliver her vaginally. I did just fine ... my first words to the midwife after Fiona was out were, "I TOLD you I could do it."

hippie.gif+reading.gif= Peanut (2004), Pumpkin (2007) and Butter Bean!! (2011)

heathenmom is offline  
#46 of 50 Old 05-12-2005, 11:44 PM
 
Marieke's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Westchester Co. NY
Posts: 163
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by reader
My mantra: FAT IS SQUISHY! BIRTHING A BIG BABY ISN'T NECESSARILY HARDER!
Not only is fat squishy, but baby heads mould, and pelvises stretch. It's not like you're trying to push something of a fixed size through something else of a fixed size. Nature is pretty smart that way



Marieke

Mama to Dashiell (July '05) and Matilda (March '08)
Marieke is offline  
#47 of 50 Old 05-15-2005, 06:59 PM
e&r
 
e&r's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Washington State
Posts: 228
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
I didn't read everyone's answers, but my own experience is:

Only ultrasound I had was just a few hours before my ds was born. OB, who was tired and wanted to go home, said that the baby was "over 9 lbs" and would "never fit through your pelvis."

Well, I didn't like him, didn't trust him so ignored him. My ds was born vaginally just a few hours later and was exactly 7 pounds.

My cousin was induced at 38 weeks with a baby they were "sure" was 8 lbs. Her baby was just a smidgen over 6 lbs.

My friend had an "emergency" c-section for a baby that was "over 11 lbs" and had low fluid. Her baby was 8 lbs. 11 oz. and had normal fluid. She just had her second baby, a wonderful home birth after CS!

Ellen
e&r is offline  
#48 of 50 Old 05-15-2005, 07:19 PM
 
musicmaj's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Connecticut
Posts: 954
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
My second baby was a c-section because he was 11.5 - 12 lbs according to ultrasound. NOPE - they were wrong and the c-section was not necessary. He was 8'14' at 39 weeks, just like his sister that I birthed vaginally with no problems at all. lol
musicmaj is offline  
#49 of 50 Old 05-16-2005, 05:44 AM
 
flapjack's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: England, easily locatable by Google
Posts: 13,647
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
My eldest was estimated at around 8-9 lbs on an ultrasound at 36 weeks, 7-8 lbs on one at 37 weeks. ( Both were to check presentation- he was a transverse lie at this point.) He was born 6 weeks later- which was 43.5 weeks by LMP, 42 weeks to the day by one of the early U/S scans- at 14 lbs 2 oz, the 5th largest baby born in the UK. We think he may be the largest homebirthed baby born in the UK since people started geeking out on these things...and NOBODY predicted his size accurately.

Going off on a tangent- I'm expecting another one. 14 lb for the first, 1 lb 8 for my daughter (at 24 weeks- and we were positive on dates.) 8 lb 13 at 38 weeks for my younger son- BUT this one has a different dad. Anyone care to speculate on how the 50% different genetics are likely to kick in?

Helen mum to five and mistress of mess and mayhem, making merry and mischief til the sun goes down.
flapjack is offline  
#50 of 50 Old 05-16-2005, 07:35 AM
 
Treasuremapper's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 3,718
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4 Post(s)
Fourteen pounds two ounces??????

First baby? Home birth?

I gotta read your birth story, where is it? Were there any newspaper articles I can access and read? Will you post links?

Holy Moly.
Treasuremapper is online now  
Reply

Quick Reply
Message:
Drag and Drop File Upload
Drag files here to attach!
Upload Progress: 0
Options

Register Now

In order to be able to post messages on the Mothering Forums forums, you must first register.
Please enter your desired user name, your email address and other required details in the form below.
User Name:
If you do not want to register, fill this field only and the name will be used as user name for your post.
Password
Please enter a password for your user account. Note that passwords are case-sensitive.
Password:
Confirm Password:
Email Address
Please enter a valid email address for yourself.
Email Address:

Log-in

Human Verification

In order to verify that you are a human and not a spam bot, please enter the answer into the following box below based on the instructions contained in the graphic.



User Tag List

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page


Forum Jump: 

Posting Rules  
You may post new threads
You may post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off