Acceptability of Intrapartum Ultrasound Monitoring - Experience from a Romanian Longitudinal Study
- PMID: 30538842
- PMCID: PMC6243519
- DOI: 10.12865/CHSJ.41.04.10
Acceptability of Intrapartum Ultrasound Monitoring - Experience from a Romanian Longitudinal Study
Abstract
Objectives: To assess the acceptability of intrapartum ultrasound (IPUS) labor monitoring in unselected Romanian women attending a tertiary maternity unit and the patients' experience of the examination (i.e. the perceived difficulty regarding the evaluation protocol).
Methods: The research was a prospective longitudinal observational study on unselected low-risk women that delivered in our unit. IPUS monitoring of active labor was proposed for observational purposes in low-risk population. Transabdominal and transperineal scans were performed hourly in the first stage of labor and at every 15 minutes in the second stage. The second day after birth, consenting women were invited to take part in a questionnaire survey with features regarding the patient's impression about the ultrasound monitoring scans during labor, and the acceptability of having an IPUS protocol for labor monitoring in the future.
Results: From 200 parturient women questioned, 98% of them agreed to IPUS investigation protocol. The demographic characteristics did not influence the acceptance. However, due to the small number of women declining IPUS we were not able to compare the characteristics and perceptions of women who declined the scan with those who accepted it. Most of the women (93% of accepters and 75% of decliners) had little difficulty deciding whether or not to have the scan protocol. All laboring women who had the IPUS scan found it an acceptable experience; 21% of women without epidural anesthesia rated the perceived difficulty as "mild" or "discomforting". Women rated having the IPUS scan as being significantly less difficult than having a cervical smear, transvaginal scan or having a digital clinical evaluation. 67% of the studied patients expressed increased confidence while being able to follow along the medical personnel the progression of the labor on the ultrasound screen. 97% of the consenting women who had the IPUS scans and all the 4 decliners said they would definitely or probably agree such ultrasound monitoring in a future labor, if this technique is proven useful for the labor outcome.
Conclusions: IPUS protocol for labor monitoring was overwhelmingly acceptable in our population of women, despite the fact that they were learning about the procedure for the first time. The demographic characteristics did not influence acceptance, but due to the high rate of acceptance, predictors of acceptance could not be analyzed. More than two thirds of the patients expressed increased confidence while being able to follow along the medical personnel the progression of the labor on the ultrasound screen and almost all the participants were willing to have the procedure again in future, further reinforcing their favorable attitude to the procedure.
Keywords: intrapartum ultrasound; labor; maternal fetal medicine; transperineal ultrasound.
Figures
Similar articles
-
Effect of an online teaching module on midwives' knowledge, attitude and practice regarding intrapartum ultrasound: A quasi-experimental approach.Eur J Midwifery. 2024 Dec 11;10. doi: 10.18332/ejm/195498. eCollection 2024. Eur J Midwifery. 2024. PMID: 39664889 Free PMC article.
-
Labor progress determined by ultrasound is different in women requiring cesarean delivery from those who experience a vaginal delivery following induction of labor.Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2019 Oct;221(4):335.e1-335.e18. doi: 10.1016/j.ajog.2019.05.040. Epub 2019 May 30. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2019. PMID: 31153931
-
Prediction of spontaneous vaginal delivery in nulliparous women with a prolonged second stage of labor: the value of intrapartum ultrasound.Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2019 Dec;221(6):642.e1-642.e13. doi: 10.1016/j.ajog.2019.09.045. Epub 2019 Oct 4. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2019. PMID: 31589867
-
Intrapartum fetal head position I: comparison between transvaginal digital examination and transabdominal ultrasound assessment during the active stage of labor.Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2002 Mar;19(3):258-63. doi: 10.1046/j.1469-0705.2002.00641.x. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2002. PMID: 11896947
-
[INTRAPARTUM ULTRASOUND - THE FUTURE IS HERE].Harefuah. 2021 Feb;160(2):110-116. Harefuah. 2021. PMID: 33760413 Review. Hebrew.
Cited by
-
Sonographic Evaluation of the Mechanism of Active Labor (SonoLabor Study): observational study protocol regarding the implementation of the sonopartogram.BMJ Open. 2021 Sep 7;11(9):e047188. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2020-047188. BMJ Open. 2021. PMID: 34493509 Free PMC article.
-
Routine vaginal examinations compared to other methods for assessing progress of labour to improve outcomes for women and babies at term.Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2022 Mar 4;3(3):CD010088. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD010088.pub3. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2022. PMID: 35244935 Free PMC article.
-
Membrane Status and Reliability of Intrapartum Transperineal Ultrasound in Cervical Dilatation Assessment.Healthcare (Basel). 2025 Jun 2;13(11):1322. doi: 10.3390/healthcare13111322. Healthcare (Basel). 2025. PMID: 40508935 Free PMC article.
-
Acceptability of intrapartum ultrasound by mothers in an African population.J Ultrasound. 2020 Mar;23(1):55-59. doi: 10.1007/s40477-019-00382-5. Epub 2019 May 8. J Ultrasound. 2020. PMID: 31069758 Free PMC article.
-
Intrapartum ultrasound and mother acceptance: A study with informed consent and questionnaire.Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol X. 2023 Oct 12;20:100246. doi: 10.1016/j.eurox.2023.100246. eCollection 2023 Dec. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol X. 2023. PMID: 37876768 Free PMC article.
References
-
- Ville Y. From obstetric ultrasound to ultrasonographic obstetrics. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2006;27(1):1–5. - PubMed
-
- Rayburn WF, Siemers KH, Legino LJ, Nabity MR, Anderson JC, Patil KD. Dystocia in late labor: determining fetal position by clinical and ultrasonic techniques. Am J Perinatol. 1989;6(3):316–319. - PubMed
-
- Kreiser D, Schiff E, Lipitz S, Kayam Z, Avraham A, Achiron R. Determination of fetal occiput position by ultrasound during the second stage of labor. J Matern Fetal Med. 2001;10(4):283–286. - PubMed
-
- Sherer DM, Miodovnik M, Bradley KS, Langer O. Intrapartum fetal head position I: comparison between transvaginal digital examination and transabdominal ultrasound assessment during the active stage of labor. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2002;19(3):258–263. - PubMed
-
- Sherer DM, Miodovnik M, Bradley KS, Langer O. Intrapartum fetal head position II: comparison between transvaginal digital examination and transabdominal ultrasound assessment during the second stage of labor. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2002;19(3):264–268. - PubMed
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources