Format

Send to

Choose Destination
Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2009 Apr;200(4):409.e1-6. doi: 10.1016/j.ajog.2008.11.025. Epub 2009 Feb 14.

Intrauterine growth restriction: comparison of American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists practice bulletin with other national guidelines.

Author information

1
Aurora Health Care, Milwaukee, WI.

Abstract

OBJECTIVE:

The objective of the study was to compare national guidelines regarding small for gestational age (SGA).

STUDY DESIGN:

Along with American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (ACOG) practice bulletin on abnormal growth, guidelines from England, Canada, Australia, and New Zealand were reviewed.

RESULTS:

There are no guidelines on SGA from Canada, Australia, and New Zealand. The Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists (RCOG) guideline agrees with ACOG's definition of abnormal growth, but there are noticeable variances in the diagnosis and management of SGA. RCOG has more recommendations than ACOG (18 vs 4, respectively). The articles referenced varied, with only 13 similar articles being cited by the both committees.

CONCLUSION:

The differences in the 2 guidelines suggest that there is variance in how 2 committees synthesize the literature and issue recommendations.

PMID:
19217594
DOI:
10.1016/j.ajog.2008.11.025
[Indexed for MEDLINE]

Supplemental Content

Full text links

Icon for Elsevier Science
Loading ...
Support Center