Format

Send to

Choose Destination
See comment in PubMed Commons below
Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1995 Oct;173(4):1021-4.

Comparison of intrapartum electronic fetal heart rate monitoring versus intermittent auscultation in detecting fetal acidemia at birth.

Author information

1
Department of Obstetrics, Gynecology, and Reproductive Sciences, RobertWood Johnson Medical School/St. Peter's Medical Center, University of Medicine and Dentistry of New Jersey, New Brunswick, USA.

Abstract

OBJECTIVE:

Our purpose was to compare continuous intrapartum electronic fetal heart rate monitoring with intermittent auscultation for detecting fetal acidemia at birth.

STUDY DESIGN:

Data from a previously published randomized trial of electronic fetal heart rate monitoring versus intermittent auscultation were analyzed to identify any differences between the two methods in detecting fetal acidemia at birth. Fetal acidemia at birth was defined as the presence of cord blood arterial pH < 7.15.

RESULTS:

A total of 1419 patients with umbilical cord blood acid-base measurements were identified, 739 in the electronic FHR monitoring group and 680 in the auscultation group. Electronic FHR monitoring had significantly better sensitivity (97% vs 34%, p < 0.001), lower specificity (84% vs 91%, p < 0.001), higher positive predictive value (37% vs 22%, p < 0.05), and higher negative predictive value (99.5% vs 95%, p < 0.001) in detecting fetal acidemia at birth. In addition, electronic FHR monitoring was significantly better in detecting all types of acidemia: metabolic (95.5% vs 26.5%, p < 0.001), mixed (95% vs 37.5%, p < 0.001), and respiratory (100% vs 41.5%, p < 0.001).

CONCLUSION:

These data suggest that electronic FHR monitoring is superior to intermittent auscultation in detecting fetal acidemia at birth.

PMID:
7485287
[Indexed for MEDLINE]
PubMed Commons home

PubMed Commons

0 comments
How to join PubMed Commons

    Supplemental Content

    Full text links

    Icon for Elsevier Science
    Loading ...
    Support Center