Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Clinical Trial
. 2001 Jun 16;322(7300):1457-60; discussion 1460-2.
doi: 10.1136/bmj.322.7300.1457.

Randomised controlled trial of cardiotocography versus Doppler auscultation of fetal heart at admission in labour in low risk obstetric population

G Mires  1 , F Williams, P Howie
Affiliations
Clinical Trial

Randomised controlled trial of cardiotocography versus Doppler auscultation of fetal heart at admission in labour in low risk obstetric population

G Mires et al. BMJ. .

Abstract

Objective: To compare the effect of admission cardiotocography and Doppler auscultation of the fetal heart on neonatal outcome and levels of obstetric intervention in a low risk obstetric population.

Design: Randomised controlled trial.

Setting: Obstetric unit of teaching hospital

Participants: Pregnant women who had no obstetric complications that warranted continuous monitoring of fetal heart rate in labour.

Intervention: Women were randomised to receive either cardiotocography or Doppler auscultation of the fetal heart when they were admitted in spontaneous uncomplicated labour.

Main outcome measures: The primary outcome measure was umbilical arterial metabolic acidosis. Secondary outcome measures included other measures of condition at birth and obstetric intervention.

Results: There were no significant differences in the incidence of metabolic acidosis or any other measure of neonatal outcome among women who remained at low risk when they were admitted in labour. However, compared with women who received Doppler auscultation, women who had admission cardiotocography were significantly more likely to have continuous fetal heart rate monitoring in labour (odds ratio 1.49, 95% confidence interval 1.26 to 1.76), augmentation of labour (1.26, 1.02 to 1.56), epidural analgesia (1.33, 1.10 to 1.61), and operative delivery (1.36, 1.12 to 1.65).

Conclusions: Compared with Doppler auscultation of the fetal heart, admission cardiotocography does not benefit neonatal outcome in low risk women. Its use results in increased obstetric intervention, including operative delivery.

PubMed Disclaimer

Figures

Figure
Figure
Flow chart of trial
See this image and copyright information in PMC

Comment in

References

    1. Ingemarsson I. Electronic fetal monitoring as a screening test. In: Spencer JAD, Ward RHT, editors. Intrapartum fetal surveillance. London: Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists; 1993. pp. 45–52.
    1. Prentice A, Lind T. Fetal heart rate monitoring in labour—too frequent intervention, too little benefit? Lancet. 1997;ii:1375–1377. - PubMed
    1. Grant AM. Electronic fetal monitoring alone versus intermittent auscultation in labour. In: Enkin MW, Kierse MJNC, Renfrew MJ, Neilson JP, editors. Cochrane pregnancy and childbirth database. Oxford: Update Software; 1993.
    1. Thacker SB, Stroup DF, Peterson HB. Efficacy and safety of intrapartum electronic fetal monitoring: an update. Obstet Gynecol. 1995;86:613–620. - PubMed
    1. Thacker SB, Stroup DF. Continuous electronic heart rate monitoring for fetal assessment during labor Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2000;(2):CD000063. - PubMed

Publication types