Literature DB >> 453276

A controlled trial of the differential effects of intrapartum fetal monitoring.

A D Haverkamp, M Orleans, S Langendoerfer, J McFee, J Murphy, H E Thompson.   

Abstract

A controlled prospective study of the differential effects of intrapartum fetal monitoring on mothers and infants has been conducted at Denver General Hospital, Denver, Colorado. A total of 690 high-risk obstetric patients in labor were randomly assigned to one of three monitoring groups--auscultation, electronic fetal monitoring alone, or electronic monitoring with the option to scalp sample. There were no differences in immediate infant outcomes in any measured category (Apgar scores, cord blood gases, neonatal death, neonatal morbidity, nursery course) among the three groups. There were no differences in rates of infant or maternal infections. The cesarean section rate was markedly increased in the electronically monitored groups, especially in the electronically monitored alone (18%) as compared with the auscultated (6%) (P less than 0.005). In this controlled trial electronic monitoring did not improve neonatal outcomes and the mothers were at increased risk of cesarean section.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1979        PMID: 453276     DOI: 10.1016/s0002-9378(16)33082-4

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


  38 in total

1.  The safety of home birth: the farm study.

Authors:  A M Duran
Journal:  Am J Public Health       Date:  1992-03       Impact factor: 9.308

2.  Two trends in middle-class birth in the United States.

Authors:  V L Katz
Journal:  Hum Nat       Date:  1993-12

Review 3.  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

4.  Electronic fetal heart rate monitoring: retrospective reflections on a twentieth-century technology.

Authors:  R G Kennedy
Journal:  J R Soc Med       Date:  1998-05       Impact factor: 5.344

5.  Electronic fetal monitoring in a small hospital. Part 2: intrapartum use.

Authors:  R I Casson
Journal:  Can Fam Physician       Date:  1984-10       Impact factor: 3.275

6.  Inappropriate diabetes screening.

Authors:  S Roedde; J McLeod
Journal:  Can Fam Physician       Date:  1989-06       Impact factor: 3.275

7.  The electronic fetal monitor: should every mother have one?

Authors:  A S Dixon
Journal:  Can Fam Physician       Date:  1981-06       Impact factor: 3.275

8.  Periodic health examination, 1989 update: 4. Intrapartum electronic fetal monitoring and prevention of neonatal herpes simplex. Canadian Task Force on the Periodic Health Examination.

Authors: 
Journal:  CMAJ       Date:  1989-12-15       Impact factor: 8.262

9.  Electronic fetal monitoring in relation to cesarean section delivery, for live births and stillbirths in the U.S., 1980.

Authors:  P J Placek; K G Keppel; S M Taffel; T L Liss
Journal:  Public Health Rep       Date:  1984 Mar-Apr       Impact factor: 2.792

10.  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

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.