Literature DB >> 11408301

Randomised controlled trial of cardiotocography versus Doppler auscultation of fetal heart at admission in labour in low risk obstetric population.

G Mires1, F Williams, P Howie.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To compare the effect of admission cardiotocography and Doppler auscultation of the fetal heart on neonatal outcome and levels of obstetric intervention in a low risk obstetric population.
DESIGN: Randomised controlled trial.
SETTING: Obstetric unit of teaching hospital PARTICIPANTS: Pregnant women who had no obstetric complications that warranted continuous monitoring of fetal heart rate in labour. INTERVENTION: Women were randomised to receive either cardiotocography or Doppler auscultation of the fetal heart when they were admitted in spontaneous uncomplicated labour. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The primary outcome measure was umbilical arterial metabolic acidosis. Secondary outcome measures included other measures of condition at birth and obstetric intervention.
RESULTS: There were no significant differences in the incidence of metabolic acidosis or any other measure of neonatal outcome among women who remained at low risk when they were admitted in labour. However, compared with women who received Doppler auscultation, women who had admission cardiotocography were significantly more likely to have continuous fetal heart rate monitoring in labour (odds ratio 1.49, 95% confidence interval 1.26 to 1.76), augmentation of labour (1.26, 1.02 to 1.56), epidural analgesia (1.33, 1.10 to 1.61), and operative delivery (1.36, 1.12 to 1.65).
CONCLUSIONS: Compared with Doppler auscultation of the fetal heart, admission cardiotocography does not benefit neonatal outcome in low risk women. Its use results in increased obstetric intervention, including operative delivery.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2001        PMID: 11408301      PMCID: PMC32308          DOI: 10.1136/bmj.322.7300.1457

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  BMJ        ISSN: 0959-8138


  25 in total

1.  Antenatal cardiotocogram quality and interpretation using computers.

Authors:  G S Dawes; M Lobb; M Moulden; C W Redman; T Wheeler
Journal:  Br J Obstet Gynaecol       Date:  1992-10

2.  Description, evaluation and clinical decision making according to various fetal heart rate patterns. Inter-observer and regional variability.

Authors:  O Lidegaard; L M Bøttcher; T Weber
Journal:  Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand       Date:  1992-01       Impact factor: 3.636

Review 3.  Statistical aspects of research methodology.

Authors:  G D Murray
Journal:  Br J Surg       Date:  1991-07       Impact factor: 6.939

Review 4.  The task of a statistical referee.

Authors:  G D Murray
Journal:  Br J Surg       Date:  1988-07       Impact factor: 6.939

5.  Reliability and reproducibility of nonstress test readings.

Authors:  L Borgatta; P E Shrout; M Y Divon
Journal:  Am J Obstet Gynecol       Date:  1988-09       Impact factor: 8.661

Review 6.  Fetal heart rate monitoring during labour--too frequent intervention, too little benefit?

Authors:  A Prentice; T Lind
Journal:  Lancet       Date:  1987-12-12       Impact factor: 79.321

7.  The rising caesarean section rate--a matter of concern?

Authors:  G M McIlwaine; S K Cole; M C Macnaughton
Journal:  Health Bull (Edinb)       Date:  1985-11

8.  Intra- and inter-observer variability in the assessment of intrapartum cardiotocograms.

Authors:  P V Nielsen; B Stigsby; C Nickelsen; J Nim
Journal:  Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand       Date:  1987       Impact factor: 3.636

9.  Relationship of early intrapartum fetal heart rate patterns to subsequent patterns and fetal outcome.

Authors:  A P Sarno; J P Phelan; M O Ahn
Journal:  J Reprod Med       Date:  1990-03       Impact factor: 0.142

10.  Screening of the fetal heart rate in early labour.

Authors:  L C Pello; G S Dawes; J Smith; C W Redman
Journal:  Br J Obstet Gynaecol       Date:  1988-11
View more
  8 in total

1.  Cardiotocography v Doppler auscultation. Guidelines highlight gaps in research evidence.

Authors:  Jane Thomas; Shantini Paranjothy; Tony Kelly; Josephine Kavanagh
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  2002-02-23

2.  Electronic fetal monitoring. Is not necessary for low risk labours.

Authors:  R Goddard
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  2001-06-16

3.  Admission Cardiotocography: A Predictor of Neonatal Outcome.

Authors:  Vishnu Bhartiya; Richa Sharma; Anand Kumar; Himsweta Srivastava
Journal:  J Obstet Gynaecol India       Date:  2016-06-14

Review 4.  Cardiotocography versus intermittent auscultation of fetal heart on admission to labour ward for assessment of fetal wellbeing.

Authors:  Declan Devane; Joan G Lalor; Sean Daly; William McGuire; Anna Cuthbert; Valerie Smith
Journal:  Cochrane Database Syst Rev       Date:  2017-01-26

5.  Asymptomatic Bacteriuria in Pregnant Women in Outpatient Facilities.

Authors:  Maral G Nogayeva; Svetlana A Tuleutayeva
Journal:  Cent Asian J Glob Health       Date:  2015-02-19

6.  Elevated umbilical cord arterial lactate at birth and electronic fetal monitoring characteristics on admission and in the active phase.

Authors:  Joshua I Rosenbloom; Molly J Stout; Methodius G Tuuli; Julia D López; George A Macones; Alison G Cahill
Journal:  J Perinatol       Date:  2019-01-28       Impact factor: 2.521

Review 7.  Intermittent Auscultation in Labor: Could It Be Missing Many Pathological (Late) Fetal Heart Rate Decelerations? Analytical Review and Rationale for Improvement Supported by Clinical Cases.

Authors:  Shashikant L Sholapurkar
Journal:  J Clin Med Res       Date:  2015-10-23

8.  Admission Test and Pregnancy Outcome.

Authors:  Setareh Akhavan; Parvaneh Lak; Fatemeh Rahimi-Sharbaf; Seyed Rahim Mohammadi; Mahboobeh Shirazi
Journal:  Iran J Med Sci       Date:  2017-07
  8 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.