• Timothy P Young, Omar Washington, Andrew Flanery, Mindi Guptill, Ellen T Reibling, Lance Brown, and Besh Barcega.
• Division of Paediatric Emergency Medicine, Department of Emergency Medicine, Loma Linda University Medical Center and Children's Hospital, Loma Linda, CA, USA.
• Emerg Med Australas. 2015 Jun 1;27(3):239-44.

ObjectivesWe sought to evaluate commonly used paediatric weight estimation techniques in a sample of children in the Philippines.MethodsWe prospectively collected age, height and weight data for a sample of 207 children aged 1-9 years seen during a medical aid trip. Weights were estimated using the finger counting method, the Broselow method and four formulae. Bland-Altman analysis was performed to evaluate agreement with measured weight.ResultsMean difference and range of agreement in kilograms were as follows: 0.6 (95% CI 0.1-1.1) and 14.9 (95% CI 13.1-16.7) for the Broselow method; 1.1 (95% CI 0.5-1.7) and 17.3 (95% CI 15.2-19.3) for the traditional APLS formula; 3.1 (95% CI 2.4-3.7) and 18.6 (95% CI 16.4-20.8) for the finger counting method; 4.0 (95% CI 3.2-4.8) and 23.1 (95% CI 20.3-25.8) for the updated APLS method; 5.1 (95% CI 4.4-5.8) and 21.1 (95% CI 18.6-23.6) for the Luscombe formula; and 5.3 (95% CI 4.5-6.1) and 22.5 (95% CI 20-25.2) for the Best Guess formulae.ConclusionsThe Broselow tape and the traditional APLS formula performed best in our sample. The finger counting method also outperformed newer weight estimation formulae. 'Updated' age-based formulae created recently in developed countries should not be used in disaster relief efforts in the Philippines. Caution should be used when applying these formulae to other developing countries and in disaster response.© 2015 Australasian College for Emergency Medicine and Australasian Society for Emergency Medicine.

22 keywords...

hide…