A Randomized study to assess the efficacy of the amniotic fluid index as a fetal admission test
To determine whether there is a difference in the incidence of abdominal delivery for presumed fetal distress in women who have an intrapartum fluid index assessment and those who do not. Over a 7-month period, parturients at 26–42 weeks' gestation and in early labor were randomized to the stud...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | Obstetrics and gynecology (New York. 1953) 1995-07, Vol.86 (1), p.9-13 |
---|---|
Hauptverfasser: | , , , , , |
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | eng |
Schlagworte: | |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
container_end_page | 13 |
---|---|
container_issue | 1 |
container_start_page | 9 |
container_title | Obstetrics and gynecology (New York. 1953) |
container_volume | 86 |
creator | Chauhan, Suneet P. Washburne, Joseph F. Magann, Everett F. Perry, Kenneth G. Martin, James N. Morrison, John C. |
description | To determine whether there is a difference in the incidence of abdominal delivery for presumed fetal distress in women who have an intrapartum fluid index assessment and those who do not.
Over a 7-month period, parturients at 26–42 weeks' gestation and in early labor were randomized to the study (measured amniotic fluid index [AFI] on admission) or a control group (no sonographic assessment of amniotic fluid [AF] volume). The labor and delivery staff were aware of the AFI results of the study subjects. All patients had continuous electronic fetal monitoring, and none had an abnormal tracing on admission. Student
t test or
x
2 was used for statistical analysis.
P < .05 was considered significant.
The study (
N = 447) and control groups (
N = 436) had similar maternal demographics as well as medical and obstetric complications. In the study group, the incidence of abdominal delivery for fetal distress (29 of 447) was significantly higher than among controls (14 of 436) (
P = .02; relative risk 1.3, 95% confidence interval 1.1–1.7). Among parturients who had abdominal delivery for fetal distress, the decision-to-incision times (mean ± standard deviation) were similar for parturients who had undergone assessment of AFI and those who had not (38.5 ± 14.7 versus 32.5 ± 14.7 minutes, respectively;
P = .47). Mean birth weight, incidence of low birth weight, macrosomia, Apgar scores less than 7, and the number of admissions to the neonatal intensive care unit were not significantly different in the two groups.
Patients having an intrapartum assessment of AFI as a fetal admission test are significantly more likely to have abdominal delivery for presumed fetal distress. However, the decision-to-incision time is not decreased and the perinatal outcome is not improved if the status of AF volume is known for patients in early labor. |
doi_str_mv | 10.1016/0029-7844(95)00110-D |
format | Article |
fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_77342502</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><els_id>002978449500110D</els_id><sourcerecordid>77342502</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c3462-c22cc0ecbb78d7945d41b3b506d56eaa82080b9be40c3b53c539b148ae71f1a63</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp9UE1v1DAUtBCobAv_ACQfEIJD4NmO4_hSqWrLh1QJCYHEzXLsF60hiUvsUJZfj9NdLTdOT-_NzJvREPKMwRsGrHkLwHWl2rp-peVrAMagunpANqxVouJCfHtINkfKY3Ka0ncorEaLE3KiyrFgG2Iu6Gc7-TiGP-hpyovf0RypTQlTonmLFPs-OOt2NPb3ux2nEHNwtB-W4GmYPP4ufGppj9kO1PoxpBTiRDOm_IQ86u2Q8OlhnpGv766_XH6obj69_3h5cVM5UTe8cpw7B-i6TrVe6Vr6mnWik9B42aC1LYcWOt1hDa6chZNCd6xuLSrWM9uIM_Jy__d2jj-XYmxKCofDYCeMSzJKiZpL4IVY74lujinN2JvbOYx23hkGZu3VrKWZtTSjpbnv1VwV2fPD_6Ub0R9FhyIL_uKA2-Ts0M92ciEdaUIqriT8c7-LQ8Y5_RiWO5zNFu2Qt8UMoCkpK6a1BFW2aj2toc_3MiwV_gpFkVzAyaEPM7psfAz_j_8X1uWjUA</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>77342502</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>A Randomized study to assess the efficacy of the amniotic fluid index as a fetal admission test</title><source>MEDLINE</source><source>Journals@Ovid Complete</source><creator>Chauhan, Suneet P. ; Washburne, Joseph F. ; Magann, Everett F. ; Perry, Kenneth G. ; Martin, James N. ; Morrison, John C.</creator><creatorcontrib>Chauhan, Suneet P. ; Washburne, Joseph F. ; Magann, Everett F. ; Perry, Kenneth G. ; Martin, James N. ; Morrison, John C.</creatorcontrib><description>To determine whether there is a difference in the incidence of abdominal delivery for presumed fetal distress in women who have an intrapartum fluid index assessment and those who do not.
Over a 7-month period, parturients at 26–42 weeks' gestation and in early labor were randomized to the study (measured amniotic fluid index [AFI] on admission) or a control group (no sonographic assessment of amniotic fluid [AF] volume). The labor and delivery staff were aware of the AFI results of the study subjects. All patients had continuous electronic fetal monitoring, and none had an abnormal tracing on admission. Student
t test or
x
2 was used for statistical analysis.
P < .05 was considered significant.
The study (
N = 447) and control groups (
N = 436) had similar maternal demographics as well as medical and obstetric complications. In the study group, the incidence of abdominal delivery for fetal distress (29 of 447) was significantly higher than among controls (14 of 436) (
P = .02; relative risk 1.3, 95% confidence interval 1.1–1.7). Among parturients who had abdominal delivery for fetal distress, the decision-to-incision times (mean ± standard deviation) were similar for parturients who had undergone assessment of AFI and those who had not (38.5 ± 14.7 versus 32.5 ± 14.7 minutes, respectively;
P = .47). Mean birth weight, incidence of low birth weight, macrosomia, Apgar scores less than 7, and the number of admissions to the neonatal intensive care unit were not significantly different in the two groups.
Patients having an intrapartum assessment of AFI as a fetal admission test are significantly more likely to have abdominal delivery for presumed fetal distress. However, the decision-to-incision time is not decreased and the perinatal outcome is not improved if the status of AF volume is known for patients in early labor.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0029-7844</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1873-233X</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1016/0029-7844(95)00110-D</identifier><identifier>PMID: 7784029</identifier><identifier>CODEN: OBGNAS</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>New York, NY: Elsevier Inc</publisher><subject>Adult ; Amniotic Fluid - diagnostic imaging ; Biological and medical sciences ; Cesarean Section - statistics & numerical data ; Diagnostic Tests, Routine ; Diseases of mother, fetus and pregnancy ; Female ; Fetal Distress - diagnostic imaging ; Gynecology. Andrology. Obstetrics ; Humans ; Incidence ; Medical sciences ; Pregnancy ; Pregnancy Complications - epidemiology ; Pregnancy. Fetus. Placenta ; Ultrasonography</subject><ispartof>Obstetrics and gynecology (New York. 1953), 1995-07, Vol.86 (1), p.9-13</ispartof><rights>1995 The American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists</rights><rights>1995 INIST-CNRS</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c3462-c22cc0ecbb78d7945d41b3b506d56eaa82080b9be40c3b53c539b148ae71f1a63</citedby></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><link.rule.ids>314,780,784,27924,27925</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttp://pascal-francis.inist.fr/vibad/index.php?action=getRecordDetail&idt=3572750$$DView record in Pascal Francis$$Hfree_for_read</backlink><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/7784029$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Chauhan, Suneet P.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Washburne, Joseph F.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Magann, Everett F.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Perry, Kenneth G.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Martin, James N.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Morrison, John C.</creatorcontrib><title>A Randomized study to assess the efficacy of the amniotic fluid index as a fetal admission test</title><title>Obstetrics and gynecology (New York. 1953)</title><addtitle>Obstet Gynecol</addtitle><description>To determine whether there is a difference in the incidence of abdominal delivery for presumed fetal distress in women who have an intrapartum fluid index assessment and those who do not.
Over a 7-month period, parturients at 26–42 weeks' gestation and in early labor were randomized to the study (measured amniotic fluid index [AFI] on admission) or a control group (no sonographic assessment of amniotic fluid [AF] volume). The labor and delivery staff were aware of the AFI results of the study subjects. All patients had continuous electronic fetal monitoring, and none had an abnormal tracing on admission. Student
t test or
x
2 was used for statistical analysis.
P < .05 was considered significant.
The study (
N = 447) and control groups (
N = 436) had similar maternal demographics as well as medical and obstetric complications. In the study group, the incidence of abdominal delivery for fetal distress (29 of 447) was significantly higher than among controls (14 of 436) (
P = .02; relative risk 1.3, 95% confidence interval 1.1–1.7). Among parturients who had abdominal delivery for fetal distress, the decision-to-incision times (mean ± standard deviation) were similar for parturients who had undergone assessment of AFI and those who had not (38.5 ± 14.7 versus 32.5 ± 14.7 minutes, respectively;
P = .47). Mean birth weight, incidence of low birth weight, macrosomia, Apgar scores less than 7, and the number of admissions to the neonatal intensive care unit were not significantly different in the two groups.
Patients having an intrapartum assessment of AFI as a fetal admission test are significantly more likely to have abdominal delivery for presumed fetal distress. However, the decision-to-incision time is not decreased and the perinatal outcome is not improved if the status of AF volume is known for patients in early labor.</description><subject>Adult</subject><subject>Amniotic Fluid - diagnostic imaging</subject><subject>Biological and medical sciences</subject><subject>Cesarean Section - statistics & numerical data</subject><subject>Diagnostic Tests, Routine</subject><subject>Diseases of mother, fetus and pregnancy</subject><subject>Female</subject><subject>Fetal Distress - diagnostic imaging</subject><subject>Gynecology. Andrology. Obstetrics</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>Incidence</subject><subject>Medical sciences</subject><subject>Pregnancy</subject><subject>Pregnancy Complications - epidemiology</subject><subject>Pregnancy. Fetus. Placenta</subject><subject>Ultrasonography</subject><issn>0029-7844</issn><issn>1873-233X</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>1995</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><recordid>eNp9UE1v1DAUtBCobAv_ACQfEIJD4NmO4_hSqWrLh1QJCYHEzXLsF60hiUvsUJZfj9NdLTdOT-_NzJvREPKMwRsGrHkLwHWl2rp-peVrAMagunpANqxVouJCfHtINkfKY3Ka0ncorEaLE3KiyrFgG2Iu6Gc7-TiGP-hpyovf0RypTQlTonmLFPs-OOt2NPb3ux2nEHNwtB-W4GmYPP4ufGppj9kO1PoxpBTiRDOm_IQ86u2Q8OlhnpGv766_XH6obj69_3h5cVM5UTe8cpw7B-i6TrVe6Vr6mnWik9B42aC1LYcWOt1hDa6chZNCd6xuLSrWM9uIM_Jy__d2jj-XYmxKCofDYCeMSzJKiZpL4IVY74lujinN2JvbOYx23hkGZu3VrKWZtTSjpbnv1VwV2fPD_6Ub0R9FhyIL_uKA2-Ts0M92ciEdaUIqriT8c7-LQ8Y5_RiWO5zNFu2Qt8UMoCkpK6a1BFW2aj2toc_3MiwV_gpFkVzAyaEPM7psfAz_j_8X1uWjUA</recordid><startdate>199507</startdate><enddate>199507</enddate><creator>Chauhan, Suneet P.</creator><creator>Washburne, Joseph F.</creator><creator>Magann, Everett F.</creator><creator>Perry, Kenneth G.</creator><creator>Martin, James N.</creator><creator>Morrison, John C.</creator><general>Elsevier Inc</general><general>The American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists</general><general>Elsevier Science</general><scope>IQODW</scope><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>199507</creationdate><title>A Randomized study to assess the efficacy of the amniotic fluid index as a fetal admission test</title><author>Chauhan, Suneet P. ; Washburne, Joseph F. ; Magann, Everett F. ; Perry, Kenneth G. ; Martin, James N. ; Morrison, John C.</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c3462-c22cc0ecbb78d7945d41b3b506d56eaa82080b9be40c3b53c539b148ae71f1a63</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>1995</creationdate><topic>Adult</topic><topic>Amniotic Fluid - diagnostic imaging</topic><topic>Biological and medical sciences</topic><topic>Cesarean Section - statistics & numerical data</topic><topic>Diagnostic Tests, Routine</topic><topic>Diseases of mother, fetus and pregnancy</topic><topic>Female</topic><topic>Fetal Distress - diagnostic imaging</topic><topic>Gynecology. Andrology. Obstetrics</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>Incidence</topic><topic>Medical sciences</topic><topic>Pregnancy</topic><topic>Pregnancy Complications - epidemiology</topic><topic>Pregnancy. Fetus. Placenta</topic><topic>Ultrasonography</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Chauhan, Suneet P.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Washburne, Joseph F.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Magann, Everett F.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Perry, Kenneth G.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Martin, James N.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Morrison, John C.</creatorcontrib><collection>Pascal-Francis</collection><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>Obstetrics and gynecology (New York. 1953)</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Chauhan, Suneet P.</au><au>Washburne, Joseph F.</au><au>Magann, Everett F.</au><au>Perry, Kenneth G.</au><au>Martin, James N.</au><au>Morrison, John C.</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>A Randomized study to assess the efficacy of the amniotic fluid index as a fetal admission test</atitle><jtitle>Obstetrics and gynecology (New York. 1953)</jtitle><addtitle>Obstet Gynecol</addtitle><date>1995-07</date><risdate>1995</risdate><volume>86</volume><issue>1</issue><spage>9</spage><epage>13</epage><pages>9-13</pages><issn>0029-7844</issn><eissn>1873-233X</eissn><coden>OBGNAS</coden><abstract>To determine whether there is a difference in the incidence of abdominal delivery for presumed fetal distress in women who have an intrapartum fluid index assessment and those who do not.
Over a 7-month period, parturients at 26–42 weeks' gestation and in early labor were randomized to the study (measured amniotic fluid index [AFI] on admission) or a control group (no sonographic assessment of amniotic fluid [AF] volume). The labor and delivery staff were aware of the AFI results of the study subjects. All patients had continuous electronic fetal monitoring, and none had an abnormal tracing on admission. Student
t test or
x
2 was used for statistical analysis.
P < .05 was considered significant.
The study (
N = 447) and control groups (
N = 436) had similar maternal demographics as well as medical and obstetric complications. In the study group, the incidence of abdominal delivery for fetal distress (29 of 447) was significantly higher than among controls (14 of 436) (
P = .02; relative risk 1.3, 95% confidence interval 1.1–1.7). Among parturients who had abdominal delivery for fetal distress, the decision-to-incision times (mean ± standard deviation) were similar for parturients who had undergone assessment of AFI and those who had not (38.5 ± 14.7 versus 32.5 ± 14.7 minutes, respectively;
P = .47). Mean birth weight, incidence of low birth weight, macrosomia, Apgar scores less than 7, and the number of admissions to the neonatal intensive care unit were not significantly different in the two groups.
Patients having an intrapartum assessment of AFI as a fetal admission test are significantly more likely to have abdominal delivery for presumed fetal distress. However, the decision-to-incision time is not decreased and the perinatal outcome is not improved if the status of AF volume is known for patients in early labor.</abstract><cop>New York, NY</cop><pub>Elsevier Inc</pub><pmid>7784029</pmid><doi>10.1016/0029-7844(95)00110-D</doi><tpages>5</tpages></addata></record> |
fulltext | fulltext |
identifier | ISSN: 0029-7844 |
ispartof | Obstetrics and gynecology (New York. 1953), 1995-07, Vol.86 (1), p.9-13 |
issn | 0029-7844 1873-233X |
language | eng |
recordid | cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_77342502 |
source | MEDLINE; Journals@Ovid Complete |
subjects | Adult Amniotic Fluid - diagnostic imaging Biological and medical sciences Cesarean Section - statistics & numerical data Diagnostic Tests, Routine Diseases of mother, fetus and pregnancy Female Fetal Distress - diagnostic imaging Gynecology. Andrology. Obstetrics Humans Incidence Medical sciences Pregnancy Pregnancy Complications - epidemiology Pregnancy. Fetus. Placenta Ultrasonography |
title | A Randomized study to assess the efficacy of the amniotic fluid index as a fetal admission test |
url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2024-12-29T08%3A50%3A37IST&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=A%20Randomized%20study%20to%20assess%20the%20efficacy%20of%20the%20amniotic%20fluid%20index%20as%20a%20fetal%20admission%20test&rft.jtitle=Obstetrics%20and%20gynecology%20(New%20York.%201953)&rft.au=Chauhan,%20Suneet%20P.&rft.date=1995-07&rft.volume=86&rft.issue=1&rft.spage=9&rft.epage=13&rft.pages=9-13&rft.issn=0029-7844&rft.eissn=1873-233X&rft.coden=OBGNAS&rft_id=info:doi/10.1016/0029-7844(95)00110-D&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E77342502%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=77342502&rft_id=info:pmid/7784029&rft_els_id=002978449500110D&rfr_iscdi=true |