Litigation related to intrapartum fetal surveillance

The role of intrapartum care including cardiotocography (CTG) monitoring in cases of perinatal neurological injury receives considerable debate in both clinical and medicolegal settings. The debate, however, has distracted attention from fundamental questions about the timing, mechanism, and prevent...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Best practice & research. Clinical obstetrics & gynaecology 2016-01, Vol.30, p.87-97
Hauptverfasser: Schifrin, Barry S., MD, Soliman, Mohamed, MD, Koos, Brian, MD, PhD
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
container_end_page 97
container_issue
container_start_page 87
container_title Best practice & research. Clinical obstetrics & gynaecology
container_volume 30
creator Schifrin, Barry S., MD
Soliman, Mohamed, MD
Koos, Brian, MD, PhD
description The role of intrapartum care including cardiotocography (CTG) monitoring in cases of perinatal neurological injury receives considerable debate in both clinical and medicolegal settings. The debate, however, has distracted attention from fundamental questions about the timing, mechanism, and preventability of perinatal injury. CTG tracings are used as a surrogate for asphyxia with the timing of intervention (“rescue”) predicated on the presumed severity of asphyxia. Using CTG in this way has prevented intrapartum stillbirth, but it has not reduced the long-term injury in part, because, contrary to popular belief, the majority of intrapartum fetal injuries are unassociated with severe hypoxia or severe neonatal depression. This article describes the timing and mechanisms, including mechanical factors, of intrapartum perinatal injury and the benefit of using the CTG, not for the purpose of “rescue”, but for identifying risk factors for fetal injury and keeping the fetus out of harm's way.
doi_str_mv 10.1016/j.bpobgyn.2015.06.007
format Article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_1760907220</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><els_id>S1521693415001236</els_id><sourcerecordid>1760907220</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c420t-278fd887a7648fefea86f851a3f7739ef256bf82cb8cd5125d20e9b7f3ab04303</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNqFkU-P1DAMxSMEYv_ARwD1yKXFcZqkuYDQChakkTgA5yhNnVWGTjsk6Urz7Wk1AwcunOzDs5_9e4y94tBw4OrtvumPc_9wmhoELhtQDYB-wq65FFhzI_Dp1iOvlRHtFbvJeQ8ghEH5nF2hQtTGmGvW7mKJD67EeaoSja7QUJW5ilNJ7uhSWQ5VoOLGKi_pkeI4usnTC_YsuDHTy0u9ZT8-ffx-97nefb3_cvdhV_sWodSouzB0nXZatV2gQK5ToZPciaC1MBRQqj506PvOD5KjHBDI9DoI10MrQNyyN-e9xzT_WigXe4jZ03YEzUu2XCswoBE3qTxLfZpzThTsMcWDSyfLwW7A7N5egNkNmAVlV2Dr3OuLxdIfaPg79YfQKnh_FtD66GOkZLOPtEIYYiJf7DDH_1q8-2eDH-MUvRt_0onyfl7StFK03Ga0YL9tqW2hcQnAUSjxG5jIk70</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>1760907220</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Litigation related to intrapartum fetal surveillance</title><source>MEDLINE</source><source>Elsevier ScienceDirect Journals</source><creator>Schifrin, Barry S., MD ; Soliman, Mohamed, MD ; Koos, Brian, MD, PhD</creator><creatorcontrib>Schifrin, Barry S., MD ; Soliman, Mohamed, MD ; Koos, Brian, MD, PhD</creatorcontrib><description>The role of intrapartum care including cardiotocography (CTG) monitoring in cases of perinatal neurological injury receives considerable debate in both clinical and medicolegal settings. The debate, however, has distracted attention from fundamental questions about the timing, mechanism, and preventability of perinatal injury. CTG tracings are used as a surrogate for asphyxia with the timing of intervention (“rescue”) predicated on the presumed severity of asphyxia. Using CTG in this way has prevented intrapartum stillbirth, but it has not reduced the long-term injury in part, because, contrary to popular belief, the majority of intrapartum fetal injuries are unassociated with severe hypoxia or severe neonatal depression. This article describes the timing and mechanisms, including mechanical factors, of intrapartum perinatal injury and the benefit of using the CTG, not for the purpose of “rescue”, but for identifying risk factors for fetal injury and keeping the fetus out of harm's way.</description><identifier>ISSN: 1521-6934</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1532-1932</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1016/j.bpobgyn.2015.06.007</identifier><identifier>PMID: 26227999</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Netherlands: Elsevier Ltd</publisher><subject>Birth Injuries - prevention &amp; control ; Cardiotocography - methods ; Cardiotocography - standards ; cerebral palsy ; Cerebral Palsy - prevention &amp; control ; CTG monitoring ; excessive uterine activity ; Female ; fetal asphyxia ; Fetal Hypoxia - diagnosis ; fetal ischemia ; Fetal Monitoring ; Humans ; Infant, Newborn ; Malpractice - legislation &amp; jurisprudence ; medical negligence ; Obstetrics and Gynecology ; Pregnancy ; Risk Assessment ; Time Factors</subject><ispartof>Best practice &amp; research. Clinical obstetrics &amp; gynaecology, 2016-01, Vol.30, p.87-97</ispartof><rights>Elsevier Ltd</rights><rights>2015 Elsevier Ltd</rights><rights>Copyright © 2015 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c420t-278fd887a7648fefea86f851a3f7739ef256bf82cb8cd5125d20e9b7f3ab04303</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c420t-278fd887a7648fefea86f851a3f7739ef256bf82cb8cd5125d20e9b7f3ab04303</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1521693415001236$$EHTML$$P50$$Gelsevier$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,776,780,3537,27901,27902,65306</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26227999$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Schifrin, Barry S., MD</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Soliman, Mohamed, MD</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Koos, Brian, MD, PhD</creatorcontrib><title>Litigation related to intrapartum fetal surveillance</title><title>Best practice &amp; research. Clinical obstetrics &amp; gynaecology</title><addtitle>Best Pract Res Clin Obstet Gynaecol</addtitle><description>The role of intrapartum care including cardiotocography (CTG) monitoring in cases of perinatal neurological injury receives considerable debate in both clinical and medicolegal settings. The debate, however, has distracted attention from fundamental questions about the timing, mechanism, and preventability of perinatal injury. CTG tracings are used as a surrogate for asphyxia with the timing of intervention (“rescue”) predicated on the presumed severity of asphyxia. Using CTG in this way has prevented intrapartum stillbirth, but it has not reduced the long-term injury in part, because, contrary to popular belief, the majority of intrapartum fetal injuries are unassociated with severe hypoxia or severe neonatal depression. This article describes the timing and mechanisms, including mechanical factors, of intrapartum perinatal injury and the benefit of using the CTG, not for the purpose of “rescue”, but for identifying risk factors for fetal injury and keeping the fetus out of harm's way.</description><subject>Birth Injuries - prevention &amp; control</subject><subject>Cardiotocography - methods</subject><subject>Cardiotocography - standards</subject><subject>cerebral palsy</subject><subject>Cerebral Palsy - prevention &amp; control</subject><subject>CTG monitoring</subject><subject>excessive uterine activity</subject><subject>Female</subject><subject>fetal asphyxia</subject><subject>Fetal Hypoxia - diagnosis</subject><subject>fetal ischemia</subject><subject>Fetal Monitoring</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>Infant, Newborn</subject><subject>Malpractice - legislation &amp; jurisprudence</subject><subject>medical negligence</subject><subject>Obstetrics and Gynecology</subject><subject>Pregnancy</subject><subject>Risk Assessment</subject><subject>Time Factors</subject><issn>1521-6934</issn><issn>1532-1932</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2016</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><recordid>eNqFkU-P1DAMxSMEYv_ARwD1yKXFcZqkuYDQChakkTgA5yhNnVWGTjsk6Urz7Wk1AwcunOzDs5_9e4y94tBw4OrtvumPc_9wmhoELhtQDYB-wq65FFhzI_Dp1iOvlRHtFbvJeQ8ghEH5nF2hQtTGmGvW7mKJD67EeaoSja7QUJW5ilNJ7uhSWQ5VoOLGKi_pkeI4usnTC_YsuDHTy0u9ZT8-ffx-97nefb3_cvdhV_sWodSouzB0nXZatV2gQK5ToZPciaC1MBRQqj506PvOD5KjHBDI9DoI10MrQNyyN-e9xzT_WigXe4jZ03YEzUu2XCswoBE3qTxLfZpzThTsMcWDSyfLwW7A7N5egNkNmAVlV2Dr3OuLxdIfaPg79YfQKnh_FtD66GOkZLOPtEIYYiJf7DDH_1q8-2eDH-MUvRt_0onyfl7StFK03Ga0YL9tqW2hcQnAUSjxG5jIk70</recordid><startdate>20160101</startdate><enddate>20160101</enddate><creator>Schifrin, Barry S., MD</creator><creator>Soliman, Mohamed, MD</creator><creator>Koos, Brian, MD, PhD</creator><general>Elsevier Ltd</general><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7X8</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20160101</creationdate><title>Litigation related to intrapartum fetal surveillance</title><author>Schifrin, Barry S., MD ; Soliman, Mohamed, MD ; Koos, Brian, MD, PhD</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c420t-278fd887a7648fefea86f851a3f7739ef256bf82cb8cd5125d20e9b7f3ab04303</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2016</creationdate><topic>Birth Injuries - prevention &amp; control</topic><topic>Cardiotocography - methods</topic><topic>Cardiotocography - standards</topic><topic>cerebral palsy</topic><topic>Cerebral Palsy - prevention &amp; control</topic><topic>CTG monitoring</topic><topic>excessive uterine activity</topic><topic>Female</topic><topic>fetal asphyxia</topic><topic>Fetal Hypoxia - diagnosis</topic><topic>fetal ischemia</topic><topic>Fetal Monitoring</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>Infant, Newborn</topic><topic>Malpractice - legislation &amp; jurisprudence</topic><topic>medical negligence</topic><topic>Obstetrics and Gynecology</topic><topic>Pregnancy</topic><topic>Risk Assessment</topic><topic>Time Factors</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Schifrin, Barry S., MD</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Soliman, Mohamed, MD</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Koos, Brian, MD, PhD</creatorcontrib><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><jtitle>Best practice &amp; research. Clinical obstetrics &amp; gynaecology</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Schifrin, Barry S., MD</au><au>Soliman, Mohamed, MD</au><au>Koos, Brian, MD, PhD</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Litigation related to intrapartum fetal surveillance</atitle><jtitle>Best practice &amp; research. Clinical obstetrics &amp; gynaecology</jtitle><addtitle>Best Pract Res Clin Obstet Gynaecol</addtitle><date>2016-01-01</date><risdate>2016</risdate><volume>30</volume><spage>87</spage><epage>97</epage><pages>87-97</pages><issn>1521-6934</issn><eissn>1532-1932</eissn><abstract>The role of intrapartum care including cardiotocography (CTG) monitoring in cases of perinatal neurological injury receives considerable debate in both clinical and medicolegal settings. The debate, however, has distracted attention from fundamental questions about the timing, mechanism, and preventability of perinatal injury. CTG tracings are used as a surrogate for asphyxia with the timing of intervention (“rescue”) predicated on the presumed severity of asphyxia. Using CTG in this way has prevented intrapartum stillbirth, but it has not reduced the long-term injury in part, because, contrary to popular belief, the majority of intrapartum fetal injuries are unassociated with severe hypoxia or severe neonatal depression. This article describes the timing and mechanisms, including mechanical factors, of intrapartum perinatal injury and the benefit of using the CTG, not for the purpose of “rescue”, but for identifying risk factors for fetal injury and keeping the fetus out of harm's way.</abstract><cop>Netherlands</cop><pub>Elsevier Ltd</pub><pmid>26227999</pmid><doi>10.1016/j.bpobgyn.2015.06.007</doi><tpages>11</tpages></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 1521-6934
ispartof Best practice & research. Clinical obstetrics & gynaecology, 2016-01, Vol.30, p.87-97
issn 1521-6934
1532-1932
language eng
recordid cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_1760907220
source MEDLINE; Elsevier ScienceDirect Journals
subjects Birth Injuries - prevention & control
Cardiotocography - methods
Cardiotocography - standards
cerebral palsy
Cerebral Palsy - prevention & control
CTG monitoring
excessive uterine activity
Female
fetal asphyxia
Fetal Hypoxia - diagnosis
fetal ischemia
Fetal Monitoring
Humans
Infant, Newborn
Malpractice - legislation & jurisprudence
medical negligence
Obstetrics and Gynecology
Pregnancy
Risk Assessment
Time Factors
title Litigation related to intrapartum fetal surveillance
url https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-31T23%3A54%3A31IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Litigation%20related%20to%20intrapartum%20fetal%20surveillance&rft.jtitle=Best%20practice%20&%20research.%20Clinical%20obstetrics%20&%20gynaecology&rft.au=Schifrin,%20Barry%20S.,%20MD&rft.date=2016-01-01&rft.volume=30&rft.spage=87&rft.epage=97&rft.pages=87-97&rft.issn=1521-6934&rft.eissn=1532-1932&rft_id=info:doi/10.1016/j.bpobgyn.2015.06.007&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E1760907220%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=1760907220&rft_id=info:pmid/26227999&rft_els_id=S1521693415001236&rfr_iscdi=true