Electronic fetal monitoring and clinical practice. A survey of obstetric opinion.
Interviews with 12 obstetricians recognized for their scientific and clinical contributions in the use of electronic fetal monitoring (EFM) revealed notable areas of agreement and disagreement in the interpretation and use of these methods. In reviewing 14 abnormal fetal heart rate (FHR) patterns, the obstetricians displayed an average pairwise agreement of 68% in classifying the patterns as "innocuous," "nonreassuring," or "ominous." When these patterns persisted after corrective treatment, average pairwise agreement was 69% in deciding between continued monitoring and immediate delivery. With the additional option of scalp blood pH sampling, average agreement was 59%. For the set of FHR patterns studied, scalp blood pH sampling was recommended more often to confirm conservative management of labor than to verify the need to intervene. The obstetricians may be classified by their degrees of (1) alarm and (2) interventionism, and by their (3) frequency of and (4) motivation for scalp sampling. Associations among these four dimensions of behavior were limited.
D003657:Decision Making; D005260:Female; D005312:Fetal Blood; D005318:Fetal Heart / Q000503:physiopathology*; D005323:Fetal Monitoring / Q000592:standards*; D006339:Heart Rate; D006801:Humans; D006863:Hydrogen-Ion Concentration; D009774:Obstetrics / Q000592:standards*; D011247:Pregnancy