Are we (mis)guided by current guidelines on intrapartum fetal heart rate monitoring? Case for a more physiological approach to interpretation.
review · Level V
Where this comes from
- Record sourced from PubMed, PMID 24920154.
- Also identified by DOI 10.1111/1471-0528.12900.
- No licence information is recorded for this record.
- Because redistribution is not established, this page shows the abstract only. Follow the links below for the full text.
Abstract
Original interpretations of fetal heart rate (FHR) patterns equated FHR decelerations with 'fetal distress', requiring expeditious delivery. This simplistic interpretation is still implied in our clinical guidelines despite 40 years of increasing understanding of the behaviour and regulation of the fetal cardiovascular system during labour. The physiological basis of FHR responses and adaptations to oxygen deprivation is de-emphasised, whilst generations of obstetricians and midwives are trained to focus on, and classify, the morphological appearances of decelerations into descriptive categories, with no attempt to understand how the fetus defends itself and compensates for intrapartum hypoxic ischaemic insults, or the patterns that suggest progressive loss of compensation. Consequently, there is a lack of confidence, marked variation in FHR interpretation, defensive practices, unnecessary operative interventions, and a failure to recognise abnormal FHR patterns, resulting in adverse outcomes and expensive litigation.
Medical subject headings
- Fetal Distress
- Fetal Hypoxia
- Fetal Monitoring
- Heart Rate, Fetal