Randomised controlled trial of intrapartum fetal heart rate monitoring

Abstract Objective : To compare effectiveness of different methods of monitoring intrapartum fetal heart rate. Design : Prospective randomised controlled trial. Setting : Referral maternity hospital, Harare,Zimbabwe. Subjects : 1255 women who were 37 weeks or more pregnant with singleton cephalic pr...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:BMJ 1994-02, Vol.308 (6927), p.497-500
Hauptverfasser: Mahomed, K, Nyoni, R, Mulambo, T, Kasule, J, Jacobus, E
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
container_end_page 500
container_issue 6927
container_start_page 497
container_title BMJ
container_volume 308
creator Mahomed, K
Nyoni, R
Mulambo, T
Kasule, J
Jacobus, E
description Abstract Objective : To compare effectiveness of different methods of monitoring intrapartum fetal heart rate. Design : Prospective randomised controlled trial. Setting : Referral maternity hospital, Harare,Zimbabwe. Subjects : 1255 women who were 37 weeks or more pregnant with singleton cephalic presentation and normal fetal heart rate before entry into study. Interventions : Intermittent monitoring of fetal heart rate by electronic monitoring, Doppler ultrasound, use of Pinard stethoscope by a research midwife, or routine use of Pinard stethoscope by attending midwife. Main outcome measures - Abnormal fetal heart rate patterns, need for operative delivery for fetal distress, neonatal mortality, Apgar scores, admission to neonatal unit, neonatal seizures, and hypoxic ischaemic encephalopathy. Results : Abnormalities in fetal heart rate were detected in 54% (172/318) of the electronic monitoring group, 32% (100/312) of the ultrasonography group, 15% (47/310) of the Pinard stethoscope group, and 9% (28/315) of the routine monitoring group. Caesarean sections were performed for 28% (89), 24% (76), 10% (32), and 15% (46) of the four groups respectively. Neonatal outcome was best in the ultrasonography group: hypoxic ischaemic encephalopathy occurred in two, one, seven, and 10 cases in the four groups respectively; neonatal seizures occurred only in the last two groups (six and nine cases respectively); and deaths occurred in eight,two, five, and nine cases respectively. Conclusions : Abnormalities in fetal heart rate were more reliably detected by Doppler ultrasonography than with Pinard stethoscope, and its use resulted in good perinatal outcome. The use ofrelatively cheap ultrasound monitors should be further evaluated and promoted in obstetric units caring for high risk pregnancies in developing countries with scarce resources.
doi_str_mv 10.1136/bmj.308.6927.497
format Article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>jstor_pubme</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_pubmedcentral_primary_oai_pubmedcentral_nih_gov_2542781</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><jstor_id>29722624</jstor_id><sourcerecordid>29722624</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-b547t-9f3d42d7ee7dfba3dde852182c84a05020cb10e17c2958fe015ec44e02dee9b63</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNqFkUuLFDEUhYMoY9PO3o1QIOhCqs37sRGGxlGh1WHwsQypyq2ZaqsqbZIS_fem6aZ9bGaV5J7vXs7NQegxwStCmHzZjNsVw3olDVUrbtQ9tCBc6lpoxu6jBTbC1Jow_RCdp7TFGFOmtJHiDJ2VspRSLNDltZt8GPsEvmrDlGMYhnLNsXdDFbqqLyW3czHPY9VBLsVbKK8qugzVGKY-h9hPN4_Qg84NCc6P5xJ9vnz9af223nx88259sakbwVWuTcc8p14BKN81jnkPWlCiaau5wwJT3DYEA1EtNUJ3gImAlnPA1AOYRrIlenWYu5ubEXwLe3uD3cV-dPGXDa63_ypTf2tvwg9LBaeqbL1Ez44DYvg-Q8q27N7CMLgJwpyskhxzKUwBn98BMsMxkaKQT_8jt2GOU_kGS5RS0hiMdaHwgWpjSClCdzJNsN3HaUuctsRp93HaEmdpefL3sqeGY3h_9G0qKZxkahSlkvKi1we9Txl-nnQXv1mpmBL2w5e13XxVV4RdX9n3hX9x4PdO7nT3GwGMwrc</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Open Access Repository</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>1777699008</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Randomised controlled trial of intrapartum fetal heart rate monitoring</title><source>Jstor Complete Legacy</source><source>MEDLINE</source><source>Alma/SFX Local Collection</source><creator>Mahomed, K ; Nyoni, R ; Mulambo, T ; Kasule, J ; Jacobus, E</creator><creatorcontrib>Mahomed, K ; Nyoni, R ; Mulambo, T ; Kasule, J ; Jacobus, E</creatorcontrib><description>Abstract Objective : To compare effectiveness of different methods of monitoring intrapartum fetal heart rate. Design : Prospective randomised controlled trial. Setting : Referral maternity hospital, Harare,Zimbabwe. Subjects : 1255 women who were 37 weeks or more pregnant with singleton cephalic presentation and normal fetal heart rate before entry into study. Interventions : Intermittent monitoring of fetal heart rate by electronic monitoring, Doppler ultrasound, use of Pinard stethoscope by a research midwife, or routine use of Pinard stethoscope by attending midwife. Main outcome measures - Abnormal fetal heart rate patterns, need for operative delivery for fetal distress, neonatal mortality, Apgar scores, admission to neonatal unit, neonatal seizures, and hypoxic ischaemic encephalopathy. Results : Abnormalities in fetal heart rate were detected in 54% (172/318) of the electronic monitoring group, 32% (100/312) of the ultrasonography group, 15% (47/310) of the Pinard stethoscope group, and 9% (28/315) of the routine monitoring group. Caesarean sections were performed for 28% (89), 24% (76), 10% (32), and 15% (46) of the four groups respectively. Neonatal outcome was best in the ultrasonography group: hypoxic ischaemic encephalopathy occurred in two, one, seven, and 10 cases in the four groups respectively; neonatal seizures occurred only in the last two groups (six and nine cases respectively); and deaths occurred in eight,two, five, and nine cases respectively. Conclusions : Abnormalities in fetal heart rate were more reliably detected by Doppler ultrasonography than with Pinard stethoscope, and its use resulted in good perinatal outcome. The use ofrelatively cheap ultrasound monitors should be further evaluated and promoted in obstetric units caring for high risk pregnancies in developing countries with scarce resources.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0959-8138</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1468-5833</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1756-1833</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1136/bmj.308.6927.497</identifier><identifier>PMID: 8136665</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>England: British Medical Journal Publishing Group</publisher><subject>Acceleration ; Babies ; Cesarean section ; Childbirth &amp; labor ; Developing countries ; Electronic monitoring ; Female ; Fetal distress ; Fetal heart rate ; Fetal monitoring ; Fetal Monitoring - methods ; Fetal Monitoring - standards ; Heart rate ; Heart Rate, Fetal ; Humans ; Hypertension ; Labor, Obstetric ; LDCs ; Methods ; Midwifery ; Morbidity ; Mortality ; Obstetrics ; Pregnancy ; Pregnancy Outcome ; Prenatal Care ; Sample size ; Stethoscopes ; Ultrasonic imaging ; Ultrasonography ; Ultrasonography, Prenatal</subject><ispartof>BMJ, 1994-02, Vol.308 (6927), p.497-500</ispartof><rights>1994 BMJ Publishing Group Ltd.</rights><rights>Copyright 1994 British Medical Journal</rights><rights>Copyright: 1994 (c) 1994 BMJ Publishing Group Ltd.</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-b547t-9f3d42d7ee7dfba3dde852182c84a05020cb10e17c2958fe015ec44e02dee9b63</citedby></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://www.jstor.org/stable/pdf/29722624$$EPDF$$P50$$Gjstor$$H</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://www.jstor.org/stable/29722624$$EHTML$$P50$$Gjstor$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>230,314,776,780,799,881,27901,27902,57992,58225</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/8136665$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Mahomed, K</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Nyoni, R</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Mulambo, T</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Kasule, J</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Jacobus, E</creatorcontrib><title>Randomised controlled trial of intrapartum fetal heart rate monitoring</title><title>BMJ</title><addtitle>BMJ</addtitle><description>Abstract Objective : To compare effectiveness of different methods of monitoring intrapartum fetal heart rate. Design : Prospective randomised controlled trial. Setting : Referral maternity hospital, Harare,Zimbabwe. Subjects : 1255 women who were 37 weeks or more pregnant with singleton cephalic presentation and normal fetal heart rate before entry into study. Interventions : Intermittent monitoring of fetal heart rate by electronic monitoring, Doppler ultrasound, use of Pinard stethoscope by a research midwife, or routine use of Pinard stethoscope by attending midwife. Main outcome measures - Abnormal fetal heart rate patterns, need for operative delivery for fetal distress, neonatal mortality, Apgar scores, admission to neonatal unit, neonatal seizures, and hypoxic ischaemic encephalopathy. Results : Abnormalities in fetal heart rate were detected in 54% (172/318) of the electronic monitoring group, 32% (100/312) of the ultrasonography group, 15% (47/310) of the Pinard stethoscope group, and 9% (28/315) of the routine monitoring group. Caesarean sections were performed for 28% (89), 24% (76), 10% (32), and 15% (46) of the four groups respectively. Neonatal outcome was best in the ultrasonography group: hypoxic ischaemic encephalopathy occurred in two, one, seven, and 10 cases in the four groups respectively; neonatal seizures occurred only in the last two groups (six and nine cases respectively); and deaths occurred in eight,two, five, and nine cases respectively. Conclusions : Abnormalities in fetal heart rate were more reliably detected by Doppler ultrasonography than with Pinard stethoscope, and its use resulted in good perinatal outcome. The use ofrelatively cheap ultrasound monitors should be further evaluated and promoted in obstetric units caring for high risk pregnancies in developing countries with scarce resources.</description><subject>Acceleration</subject><subject>Babies</subject><subject>Cesarean section</subject><subject>Childbirth &amp; labor</subject><subject>Developing countries</subject><subject>Electronic monitoring</subject><subject>Female</subject><subject>Fetal distress</subject><subject>Fetal heart rate</subject><subject>Fetal monitoring</subject><subject>Fetal Monitoring - methods</subject><subject>Fetal Monitoring - standards</subject><subject>Heart rate</subject><subject>Heart Rate, Fetal</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>Hypertension</subject><subject>Labor, Obstetric</subject><subject>LDCs</subject><subject>Methods</subject><subject>Midwifery</subject><subject>Morbidity</subject><subject>Mortality</subject><subject>Obstetrics</subject><subject>Pregnancy</subject><subject>Pregnancy Outcome</subject><subject>Prenatal Care</subject><subject>Sample size</subject><subject>Stethoscopes</subject><subject>Ultrasonic imaging</subject><subject>Ultrasonography</subject><subject>Ultrasonography, Prenatal</subject><issn>0959-8138</issn><issn>1468-5833</issn><issn>1756-1833</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>1994</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><sourceid>8G5</sourceid><sourceid>BENPR</sourceid><sourceid>GUQSH</sourceid><sourceid>M2O</sourceid><recordid>eNqFkUuLFDEUhYMoY9PO3o1QIOhCqs37sRGGxlGh1WHwsQypyq2ZaqsqbZIS_fem6aZ9bGaV5J7vXs7NQegxwStCmHzZjNsVw3olDVUrbtQ9tCBc6lpoxu6jBTbC1Jow_RCdp7TFGFOmtJHiDJ2VspRSLNDltZt8GPsEvmrDlGMYhnLNsXdDFbqqLyW3czHPY9VBLsVbKK8qugzVGKY-h9hPN4_Qg84NCc6P5xJ9vnz9af223nx88259sakbwVWuTcc8p14BKN81jnkPWlCiaau5wwJT3DYEA1EtNUJ3gImAlnPA1AOYRrIlenWYu5ubEXwLe3uD3cV-dPGXDa63_ypTf2tvwg9LBaeqbL1Ez44DYvg-Q8q27N7CMLgJwpyskhxzKUwBn98BMsMxkaKQT_8jt2GOU_kGS5RS0hiMdaHwgWpjSClCdzJNsN3HaUuctsRp93HaEmdpefL3sqeGY3h_9G0qKZxkahSlkvKi1we9Txl-nnQXv1mpmBL2w5e13XxVV4RdX9n3hX9x4PdO7nT3GwGMwrc</recordid><startdate>19940219</startdate><enddate>19940219</enddate><creator>Mahomed, K</creator><creator>Nyoni, R</creator><creator>Mulambo, T</creator><creator>Kasule, J</creator><creator>Jacobus, E</creator><general>British Medical Journal Publishing Group</general><general>British Medical Association</general><general>BMJ Publishing Group LTD</general><general>BMJ Group</general><scope>BSCLL</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>3V.</scope><scope>7X7</scope><scope>7XB</scope><scope>88I</scope><scope>8AF</scope><scope>8FE</scope><scope>8FH</scope><scope>8FI</scope><scope>8FJ</scope><scope>8FK</scope><scope>8G5</scope><scope>ABUWG</scope><scope>AFKRA</scope><scope>ASE</scope><scope>AZQEC</scope><scope>BBNVY</scope><scope>BENPR</scope><scope>BHPHI</scope><scope>BTHHO</scope><scope>CCPQU</scope><scope>DWQXO</scope><scope>FPQ</scope><scope>FYUFA</scope><scope>GHDGH</scope><scope>GNUQQ</scope><scope>GUQSH</scope><scope>HCIFZ</scope><scope>K6X</scope><scope>K9.</scope><scope>LK8</scope><scope>M2O</scope><scope>M2P</scope><scope>M7P</scope><scope>MBDVC</scope><scope>PQEST</scope><scope>PQQKQ</scope><scope>PQUKI</scope><scope>PRINS</scope><scope>Q9U</scope><scope>7X8</scope><scope>5PM</scope></search><sort><creationdate>19940219</creationdate><title>Randomised controlled trial of intrapartum fetal heart rate monitoring</title><author>Mahomed, K ; Nyoni, R ; Mulambo, T ; Kasule, J ; Jacobus, E</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-b547t-9f3d42d7ee7dfba3dde852182c84a05020cb10e17c2958fe015ec44e02dee9b63</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>1994</creationdate><topic>Acceleration</topic><topic>Babies</topic><topic>Cesarean section</topic><topic>Childbirth &amp; labor</topic><topic>Developing countries</topic><topic>Electronic monitoring</topic><topic>Female</topic><topic>Fetal distress</topic><topic>Fetal heart rate</topic><topic>Fetal monitoring</topic><topic>Fetal Monitoring - methods</topic><topic>Fetal Monitoring - standards</topic><topic>Heart rate</topic><topic>Heart Rate, Fetal</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>Hypertension</topic><topic>Labor, Obstetric</topic><topic>LDCs</topic><topic>Methods</topic><topic>Midwifery</topic><topic>Morbidity</topic><topic>Mortality</topic><topic>Obstetrics</topic><topic>Pregnancy</topic><topic>Pregnancy Outcome</topic><topic>Prenatal Care</topic><topic>Sample size</topic><topic>Stethoscopes</topic><topic>Ultrasonic imaging</topic><topic>Ultrasonography</topic><topic>Ultrasonography, Prenatal</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Mahomed, K</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Nyoni, R</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Mulambo, T</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Kasule, J</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Jacobus, E</creatorcontrib><collection>Istex</collection><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Corporate)</collection><collection>Health &amp; Medical Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>Science Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>STEM Database</collection><collection>ProQuest SciTech Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Natural Science Collection</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni) (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>Research Library (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central UK/Ireland</collection><collection>British Nursing Index</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Essentials</collection><collection>Biological Science Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>Natural Science Collection</collection><collection>BMJ Journals</collection><collection>ProQuest One Community College</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Korea</collection><collection>British Nursing Index (BNI) (1985 to Present)</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection (Alumni)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Student</collection><collection>Research Library Prep</collection><collection>SciTech Premium Collection</collection><collection>British Nursing Index</collection><collection>ProQuest Health &amp; Medical Complete (Alumni)</collection><collection>ProQuest Biological Science Collection</collection><collection>Research Library</collection><collection>Science Database</collection><collection>Biological Science Database</collection><collection>Research Library (Corporate)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic Eastern Edition (DO NOT USE)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic UKI Edition</collection><collection>ProQuest Central China</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Basic</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><collection>PubMed Central (Full Participant titles)</collection><jtitle>BMJ</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Mahomed, K</au><au>Nyoni, R</au><au>Mulambo, T</au><au>Kasule, J</au><au>Jacobus, E</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Randomised controlled trial of intrapartum fetal heart rate monitoring</atitle><jtitle>BMJ</jtitle><addtitle>BMJ</addtitle><date>1994-02-19</date><risdate>1994</risdate><volume>308</volume><issue>6927</issue><spage>497</spage><epage>500</epage><pages>497-500</pages><issn>0959-8138</issn><eissn>1468-5833</eissn><eissn>1756-1833</eissn><abstract>Abstract Objective : To compare effectiveness of different methods of monitoring intrapartum fetal heart rate. Design : Prospective randomised controlled trial. Setting : Referral maternity hospital, Harare,Zimbabwe. Subjects : 1255 women who were 37 weeks or more pregnant with singleton cephalic presentation and normal fetal heart rate before entry into study. Interventions : Intermittent monitoring of fetal heart rate by electronic monitoring, Doppler ultrasound, use of Pinard stethoscope by a research midwife, or routine use of Pinard stethoscope by attending midwife. Main outcome measures - Abnormal fetal heart rate patterns, need for operative delivery for fetal distress, neonatal mortality, Apgar scores, admission to neonatal unit, neonatal seizures, and hypoxic ischaemic encephalopathy. Results : Abnormalities in fetal heart rate were detected in 54% (172/318) of the electronic monitoring group, 32% (100/312) of the ultrasonography group, 15% (47/310) of the Pinard stethoscope group, and 9% (28/315) of the routine monitoring group. Caesarean sections were performed for 28% (89), 24% (76), 10% (32), and 15% (46) of the four groups respectively. Neonatal outcome was best in the ultrasonography group: hypoxic ischaemic encephalopathy occurred in two, one, seven, and 10 cases in the four groups respectively; neonatal seizures occurred only in the last two groups (six and nine cases respectively); and deaths occurred in eight,two, five, and nine cases respectively. Conclusions : Abnormalities in fetal heart rate were more reliably detected by Doppler ultrasonography than with Pinard stethoscope, and its use resulted in good perinatal outcome. The use ofrelatively cheap ultrasound monitors should be further evaluated and promoted in obstetric units caring for high risk pregnancies in developing countries with scarce resources.</abstract><cop>England</cop><pub>British Medical Journal Publishing Group</pub><pmid>8136665</pmid><doi>10.1136/bmj.308.6927.497</doi><tpages>4</tpages><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 0959-8138
ispartof BMJ, 1994-02, Vol.308 (6927), p.497-500
issn 0959-8138
1468-5833
1756-1833
language eng
recordid cdi_pubmedcentral_primary_oai_pubmedcentral_nih_gov_2542781
source Jstor Complete Legacy; MEDLINE; Alma/SFX Local Collection
subjects Acceleration
Babies
Cesarean section
Childbirth & labor
Developing countries
Electronic monitoring
Female
Fetal distress
Fetal heart rate
Fetal monitoring
Fetal Monitoring - methods
Fetal Monitoring - standards
Heart rate
Heart Rate, Fetal
Humans
Hypertension
Labor, Obstetric
LDCs
Methods
Midwifery
Morbidity
Mortality
Obstetrics
Pregnancy
Pregnancy Outcome
Prenatal Care
Sample size
Stethoscopes
Ultrasonic imaging
Ultrasonography
Ultrasonography, Prenatal
title Randomised controlled trial of intrapartum fetal heart rate monitoring
url https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-29T05%3A09%3A55IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-jstor_pubme&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Randomised%20controlled%20trial%20of%20intrapartum%20fetal%20heart%20rate%20monitoring&rft.jtitle=BMJ&rft.au=Mahomed,%20K&rft.date=1994-02-19&rft.volume=308&rft.issue=6927&rft.spage=497&rft.epage=500&rft.pages=497-500&rft.issn=0959-8138&rft.eissn=1468-5833&rft_id=info:doi/10.1136/bmj.308.6927.497&rft_dat=%3Cjstor_pubme%3E29722624%3C/jstor_pubme%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=1777699008&rft_id=info:pmid/8136665&rft_jstor_id=29722624&rfr_iscdi=true