Objective To examine whether a method for raising women's awareness of fetal movements, Mindfetalness, can affect pregnancy outcomes.Design Cluster-randomised controlled trial.Setting Sixty-seven maternity clinics in Stockholm, Sweden.Population Women with singleton pregnancy with birth from 32 weeks' gestation.Methods Women registered at a clinic randomised to Mindfetalness were assigned to receive a leaflet about Mindfetalness (n = 19 639) in comparison with routine care (n = 20 226). Data were collected from a population-based register.Main outcome measures Apgar score <7 at 5 minutes after birth, visit to healthcare due to decrease in fetal movements. Other outcomes: Apgar score <4 at 5 minutes after birth, small-forgestational-age and mode of delivery.Results No difference (1.1 versus 1.1%, relative risk [RR] 1.0; 95% CI 0.8-1.2) was found between the Mindfetalness group and the Routine care group for a 5-minute Apgar score <7. Women in the Mindfetalness group contacted healthcare more often due to decreased fetal movements (6.6 versus 3.8%, RR 1.72; 95% CI 1.57-1.87). Mindfetalness was associated with a reduction of babies born small-for-gestational-age (RR 0.95, 95% CI 0.90-1.00), babies born after gestational week 41 +6 (RR 0.91, 95% CI 0.83-0.98) and caesarean sections (19.0 versus 20.0%, RR 0.95; 95% CI 0.91-0.99).Conclusions Mindfetalness did not reduce the number of babies born with an Apgar score <7. However, Mindfetalness was associated with the health benefits of decreased incidence of caesarean section and fewer children born small-for-gestational-age.

BackgroundMaternal perception of decreased fetal movements and low awareness of fetal movements are associated with a negative birth outcome. Mindfetalness is a method developed for women to facilitate systematic observations of the intensity, character and frequency of fetal movements in late pregnancy. We sought to explore women’s attitudes, experiences and compliance in using Mindfetalness.MethodsWe enrolled 104 pregnant women treated at three maternity clinics in Stockholm, Sweden, from February to July of 2016. We educated 104 women in gestational week 28–32 by providing information about fetal movements and how to practice Mindfetalness. Each was instructed to perform the assessment daily for 15 min. At each subsequent follow-up, the midwife collected information regarding their perceptions of Mindfetalness, and their compliance. Content analyses, descriptive and analytic statistics were used in the analysis of data.ResultsOf the women, 93 (89%) were positive towards Mindfetalness and compliance was high 78 (75%). Subjective responses could be binned into one of five categories: Decreased worry, relaxing, creating a relationship, more knowledge about the unborn baby and awareness of the unborn baby. Eleven (11%) women had negative perceptions of Mindfetalness, citing time, and the lack of need for a method to observe fetal movements as the most common reasons.ConclusionWomen in late pregnancy are generally positive about Mindfetalness and their compliance with daily use is high. The technique helped them to be more aware of, and create a relationship with, their unborn baby. Mindfetalness can be a useful tool in antenatal care. However, further study is necessary in order to determine whether the technique is able to reduce the incidence of negative birth outcome.

Background: Studies report that women born in some African countries, after migrating to the Nordic countries, have worse pregnancy outcomes than women born in the receiving countries. With the aim of identifying unmet needs among Somali-born women, we here study this subgroup. Objective: We compared pregnancy outcomes among women born in Somalia to women born in Sweden. Further, we investigated whether the proactive maternal observation of fetal movements has effects on birth outcomes among women born in Somalia. Methods: In Stockholm, half of the maternity clinics were randomized to intervention, in which midwives were instructed to be proactive towards women by promoting daily selfmonitoring of fetal movements. Data for 623 women born in Somalia and 26 485 born in Sweden were collected from a population-based register. Results: An Apgar score below 7 (with stillbirth counting as 0) at 5 minutes was more frequent in babies of women born in Somalia as compared to babies of women born in Sweden (RR 2.17, 95% CI 1.25-3.77). Babies born small for gestational age were more common among women born in Somalia (RR 2.22, CI 1.88-2.61), as were babies born after 41 + 6 gestational weeks (RR 1.65, CI 1.29-2.12). Somali-born women less often contacted obstetric care for decreased fetal movements than did Swedish-born women (RR 0.19, CI 0.08-0.36). The differences between women born in Somalia and women born in Sweden were somewhat lower (not statistically significant) among women allocated to proactivity as compared to the Routine-care group. Conclusions: A higher risk of a negative outcome for mother and baby is seen among women born in Somalia compared to women born in Sweden. We suggest it may be worthwhile to investigate whether a Somali-adapted intervention with proactivity concerning self-monitoring of fetal movements may improve pregnancy outcomes in this migrant population.