Literature DB >> 3893132

The Dublin randomized controlled trial of intrapartum fetal heart rate monitoring.

D MacDonald, A Grant, M Sheridan-Pereira, P Boylan, I Chalmers.   

Abstract

In a randomized controlled trial involving 12,964 women, a policy of continuous electronic intrapartum fetal heart monitoring was compared with an alternative policy of intermittent auscultation, both policies including an option to measure fetal scalp blood pH. Women allocated to electronic fetal heart monitoring had shorter labors and received less analgesia. The caesarean delivery rates were 2.4% for electronic fetal heart monitoring and 2.2% for intermittent auscultation but this small difference arose from the identification of nearly twice as many fetuses with low scalp pH (less than 7.20) in the electronic fetal heart monitoring group. The forceps delivery rate was 8.2% in the electronic fetal heart monitoring group compared with 6.3% in the intermittent auscultation group, and this excess was explained by more instrumental deliveries prompted by fetal heart rate abnormalities. There were 14 stillbirths and neonatal deaths in each group, with a similar distribution of causes. There were no apparent differences in the rates of low Apgar scores, need for resuscitation, or transfer to the special care nursery. Cases of neonatal seizures and persistent abnormal neurological signs followed by survival were twice as frequent in the intermittent auscultation group, and this differential effect was related to duration of labor. Follow-up at 1 year of babies who survived neonatal seizures revealed three clearly abnormal infants in each group. The implications of these findings for both theory and practice are discussed.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1985        PMID: 3893132     DOI: 10.1016/0002-9378(85)90619-2

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Am J Obstet Gynecol        ISSN: 0002-9378            Impact factor:   8.661


  50 in total

1.  Continuous fetal heart rate monitoring.

Authors:  I Chalmers
Journal:  J R Soc Med       Date:  2001-05       Impact factor: 5.344

2.  Do we need an Apgar score?

Authors:  N Marlow
Journal:  Arch Dis Child       Date:  1992-07       Impact factor: 3.791

3.  Reducing risk in obstetrics.

Authors:  J Drife
Journal:  Qual Health Care       Date:  1995-06

Review 4.  Thirty years of electronic intrapartum fetal heart rate monitoring: discussion paper.

Authors:  H M Jenkins
Journal:  J R Soc Med       Date:  1989-04       Impact factor: 5.344

5.  General practice and the future of obstetric care.

Authors:  G L Young
Journal:  Br J Gen Pract       Date:  1991-07       Impact factor: 5.386

Review 6.  Continuous cardiotocography (CTG) as a form of electronic fetal monitoring (EFM) for fetal assessment during labour.

Authors:  Zarko Alfirevic; Declan Devane; Gillian Ml Gyte; Anna Cuthbert
Journal:  Cochrane Database Syst Rev       Date:  2017-02-03

7.  Mother-infant bonding : A scientific fiction.

Authors:  D E Eyer
Journal:  Hum Nat       Date:  1994-03

8.  Cerebral palsy and neonatal encephalopathy.

Authors:  G Gaffney; V Flavell; A Johnson; M Squier; S Sellers
Journal:  Arch Dis Child Fetal Neonatal Ed       Date:  1994-05       Impact factor: 5.747

9.  Electronic fetal monitoring: a Canadian survey.

Authors:  B L Davies; P A Niday; C A Nimrod; E R Drake; A E Sprague; M J Trépanier
Journal:  CMAJ       Date:  1993-05-15       Impact factor: 8.262

10.  The Scottish perinatal neuropathology study: clinicopathological correlation in early neonatal deaths.

Authors:  J C Becher; J E Bell; J W Keeling; N McIntosh; B Wyatt
Journal:  Arch Dis Child Fetal Neonatal Ed       Date:  2004-09       Impact factor: 5.747

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.