Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2000;1998(2):CD000944.
doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD000944.

Symphysis-fundal height measurement in pregnancy

J P Neilson  1
Affiliations

Symphysis-fundal height measurement in pregnancy

J P Neilson. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2000.

Abstract

Background: In many settings, symphysis-fundal height measurement has replaced clinical assessment of fetal size by abdominal palpation because the latter has been reported to perform poorly.

Objectives: The objective of this review was to assess the effects of routine use of symphysis-fundal height measurements (tape measurement of the distance from the pubic symphysis to the uterine fundus) during antenatal care on pregnancy outcome.

Search strategy: The Cochrane Pregnancy and Childbirth Group trials register was searched.

Selection criteria: Acceptably controlled trials comparing symphysis-fundal height measurement with assessment by abdominal palpation alone.

Data collection and analysis: One reviewer assessed trial quality and extracted data.

Main results: One trial involving 1639 women was included. No differences were detected in any of the outcomes measured.

Reviewer's conclusions: There is not enough evidence to evaluate the use of symphysis-fundal height measurements during antenatal care.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

None known

Figures

1.11
1.11. Analysis
Comparison 1 Routine symphysis‐fundal height measurement, Outcome 11 Perinatal mortality.
1.12
1.12. Analysis
Comparison 1 Routine symphysis‐fundal height measurement, Outcome 12 Apgar score < 4 (1 minute).
1.13
1.13. Analysis
Comparison 1 Routine symphysis‐fundal height measurement, Outcome 13 Apgar score < 4 (5 minutes).
1.14
1.14. Analysis
Comparison 1 Routine symphysis‐fundal height measurement, Outcome 14 Umbilical artery pH < 7.15.
1.15
1.15. Analysis
Comparison 1 Routine symphysis‐fundal height measurement, Outcome 15 Admission neonatal unit.
1.16
1.16. Analysis
Comparison 1 Routine symphysis‐fundal height measurement, Outcome 16 Antepartum hospitalization for 'IUGR'.
1.17
1.17. Analysis
Comparison 1 Routine symphysis‐fundal height measurement, Outcome 17 Labour induction for 'IUGR'.
1.18
1.18. Analysis
Comparison 1 Routine symphysis‐fundal height measurement, Outcome 18 Caesarean section for 'IUGR'.
1.19
1.19. Analysis
Comparison 1 Routine symphysis‐fundal height measurement, Outcome 19 Birthweight <10th centile.
See this image and copyright information in PMC

References

References to studies included in this review

Copenhagen 1990 {published data only}
    1. Lindhard A, Nielsen PV, Mouritsen LA, Zachariassen A, Sorensen HU, Roseno H. The implications of introducing the symphyseal‐fundal height‐measurement. A prospective randomized controlled trial. British Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology 1990;97:675‐80. - PubMed

Additional references

Bailey 1989
    1. Bailey SM, Sarmandal P, Grant JM. A comparison of three methods of assessing inter‐observer variation applied to measurement of the symphysis‐fundal height. British Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology 1989;96:1266‐71. - PubMed
Belizan 1978
    1. Belizan JM, Villar J, Nardin JC, Malamud J, Vicurna LS. Diagnosis of intrauterine growth retardation by a simple clinical method: measurement of uterine height. American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology 1978;131:643‐6. - PubMed
Hall 1980
    1. Hall M, Chng PK, MacGillivray I. Is routine antenatal care worthwhile?. Lancet 1980;ii:78‐80. - PubMed
Neilson 2003
    1. Neilson JP. Ultrasound for fetal assessment in early pregnancy. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews 1998, Issue 4. [CD000182. DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD000182] - PubMed
RevMan 2000 [Computer program]
    1. The Cochrane Collaboration. Review Manager (RevMan). Version 4.1 for Windows. Oxford, England: The Cochrane Collaboration, 2000.
Rosenberg 1982
    1. Rosenberg K, Grant JM, Hepburn M. Antenatal detection of growth retardation: actual practice in a large maternity hospital. British Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology 1982;89:12‐5. - PubMed

Publication types

LinkOut - more resources