Volume 200, Issue 4 , Pages 409.e1-409.e6, April 2009
Intrauterine growth restriction: comparison of American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists practice bulletin with other national guidelines
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.
Key words: American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists, national guidelines, recommendations, Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists, small for gestational age
Reprints not available from the authors.
Cite this article as: Chauhan SP, Gupta LM, Hendrix NW, et al. Intrauterine growth restriction: comparison of American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists practice bulletin with other national guidelines. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2009;200:409.e1-409.e6.
PII: S0002-9378(08)02244-8
doi:10.1016/j.ajog.2008.11.025
© 2009 Mosby, Inc. All rights reserved.
Volume 200, Issue 4 , Pages 409.e1-409.e6, April 2009

