Mahin Kamalifard1, Shamsi Abbasalizadeh2, Morteza Ghojazadeh3, Fatemeh Ghatreh Samani4, Leila Rabiei1. 1. Department of Midwifery, Faculty of Nursing and Midwifery, Tabriz University of Medical Sciences, Tabriz, Iran. 2. Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology,Faculty of Medicine, Tabriz University of Medical Sciences, Tabriz, Iran. 3. Women's Reproductive Health Research Center, Tabriz University of Medical Sciences, Tabriz, Iran. 4. Department of Radiology, Faculty of Medicine, Tabriz University of Medical Sciences, Tabriz, Iran.
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Fetal movement counting is a method used by mother to quantify her baby's movements. However, the optimal number of movements and the ideal duration of counting them have not been recognized. The aim of this study was to determine the diagnostic value of the two common fetal movements counting methods by mother including "ten fetal movements counting in two hours" and "three fetal movements counting in one hour" and to compare the required mean time for counting fetal movements in the two methods. METHODS: 300 subjects were selected by random sampling among clients with complains of decreased fetal movements referring to AL-Zahra teaching hospital in Tabriz, Iran. Full training about how to perform the two methods of fetal movements counting and how to record in related tables was instructed by researcher. Immediately after counting movements, biophysical profile test was performed. RESULTS: Among 291 mothers in the two groups, 99.7% had active fetuses based on both methods of fetal movement counting. 96.9% of these active fetuses obtained score of 10 in biophysical profile. There was a statistically significant relation between the results of both two methods of fetal movement counting and the biophysical profile as the gold standard. Sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative predictive values of both methods were equally 100%, 96%, 10% and 100%, respectively.Mean time (SD) for ten movement counting was 22.1(4.6) and for three movementcounting was 8.0(2.8) minutes CONCLUSION: The findings of this study showed that fetal movement counting test can be used as an initial screening method in predicting fetal health.
INTRODUCTION: Fetal movement counting is a method used by mother to quantify her baby's movements. However, the optimal number of movements and the ideal duration of counting them have not been recognized. The aim of this study was to determine the diagnostic value of the two common fetal movements counting methods by mother including "ten fetal movements counting in two hours" and "three fetal movements counting in one hour" and to compare the required mean time for counting fetal movements in the two methods. METHODS: 300 subjects were selected by random sampling among clients with complains of decreased fetal movements referring to AL-Zahra teaching hospital in Tabriz, Iran. Full training about how to perform the two methods of fetal movements counting and how to record in related tables was instructed by researcher. Immediately after counting movements, biophysical profile test was performed. RESULTS: Among 291 mothers in the two groups, 99.7% had active fetuses based on both methods of fetal movement counting. 96.9% of these active fetuses obtained score of 10 in biophysical profile. There was a statistically significant relation between the results of both two methods of fetal movement counting and the biophysical profile as the gold standard. Sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative predictive values of both methods were equally 100%, 96%, 10% and 100%, respectively.Mean time (SD) for ten movement counting was 22.1(4.6) and for three movementcounting was 8.0(2.8) minutes CONCLUSION: The findings of this study showed that fetal movement counting test can be used as an initial screening method in predicting fetal health.
Authors: J Frederik Frøen; Alexander E P Heazell; Julie Victoria Holm Tveit; Eli Saastad; Ruth C Fretts; Vicki Flenady Journal: Semin Perinatol Date: 2008-08 Impact factor: 3.300
Authors: Julie Victoria Holm Tveit; Eli Saastad; Babill Stray-Pedersen; Per E Børdahl; J Frederik Frøen Journal: Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand Date: 2009 Impact factor: 3.636