2021
DOI: 10.1016/j.xagr.2021.100008
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Electronic intrapartum fetal monitoring: a systematic review of international clinical practice guidelines

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1

Citation Types

1
10
0

Year Published

2022
2022
2025
2025

Publication Types

Select...
6
1
1

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 16 publications
(11 citation statements)
references
References 22 publications
1
10
0
Order By: Relevance
“…The results indicate that FHR decreases in the last hour before delivery from a median of 136 to 131 bpm. This baseline heart rate falls within the established normal range (110–160), as documented in various guidelines [ 12 ]. In addition, the presented baseline FHR findings fall within category I in the National Institute of Child Health and Human Development classification system, which is strongly predictive of normal acid-base status when other parameters in the same category are normal [ 22 ].…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 68%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…The results indicate that FHR decreases in the last hour before delivery from a median of 136 to 131 bpm. This baseline heart rate falls within the established normal range (110–160), as documented in various guidelines [ 12 ]. In addition, the presented baseline FHR findings fall within category I in the National Institute of Child Health and Human Development classification system, which is strongly predictive of normal acid-base status when other parameters in the same category are normal [ 22 ].…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 68%
“…Guidelines derived from different studies and professional bodies are in agreement on recommending a baseline FHR of 110–160 beats per minute (bpm) during pregnancy and delivery [ 12 ]. However, during delivery, the first and second stages of labor are different in terms of physiology.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…[7,8] There are different guidelines worldwide for CTG interpretation. [9] There is not only substantial inter-observer disagreement using individual guidelines but also poor agreement when comparison is made across different guidelines. [10,11] Furthermore, some experts argue that looking at CTG on the basis of pattern recognition alone with emphasis on FHR decelerations results in unnecessary interventions for non-acidotic babies who mount normal responses to hypoxia and has no correlation with neonatal outcomes.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Cited weaknesses of the technique include subjective interpretation of tracings, poor intra-and inter-observer agreement, insufficient sensitivity and specificity, and poor correlation with fetal acidemia (4,5). Using current classifications of patterns, with their contradictions (6), CTG has not seemed to reduce the overall incidence of permanent intrapartum-linked neurological injury, although it may have lowered the incidence of neonatal hypoxic-ischemic encephalopathy (HIE) and seizures (7,8). Long-term studies suggest a temporal improvement in outcome with the introduction of enhanced CTG techniques, but cannot attribute the improvement specifically to CTG (9).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%