212
Views
5
CrossRef citations to date
0
Altmetric
Original Article

Guideline choice for CTG analysis influences first caesarean decision

, , , , &
Pages 1816-1819 | Received 24 Dec 2015, Accepted 21 Aug 2016, Published online: 09 Sep 2016

References

  • Marshall NE, Fu R, Guise JM. Impact of multiple caesarean deliveries on maternal morbidity: a systematic review. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2011;3:1–8
  • Häger RM, Daltveit AK, Hofoss D, et al. Complications of cesarean deliveries: rates and risk factors. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2004;190:428–34
  • ACOG practise bulletin intrapartum foetal heart rate monitoring. Obstet Gynecol 2009;114:192–202
  • Wareham V, Bain C, Cruickshank D. Caesarean section audit by peer review. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol 1993;48:9–14
  • International Federation of Gynaecology and Obstetrics (FIGO). Guidelines for the use of foetal monitoring. Int J Gynaecol Obstet 1987;25:159–67
  • American College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists. Foetal Heart Rate Patterns: Monitoring, Interpretation, and Management. Washington, DC: ACOG; 1995
  • Sholapurkar SL. The conundrum of vanishing early decelerations in British obstetrics, a step backwards? Detailed appraisal of British and American classifications of foetal heart rate decelerations: fallacies of emphasis on waveform and putative aetiology. J Obstet Gynaecol 2012;32:505–11
  • Williams B, Arulkumaran S. Cardiotocography and medicolegal issues. Best Pract Res Clin Obstet Gynaecol 2004;18:457–66
  • Martin A. Foetal heart rate during labour: definitions and interpretation. Recommandations pour la pratique clinique. J Gynecol Obstet Biol Reprod 2008;37:S34–45
  • Parer JT, Hamilton EF. Comparison of 5 experts and computer analysis in rule-based fetal heart rate interpretation. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2010;203:451.e1–7
  • Westerhuis M, Van Horen E, Kwee A, et al. Inter- and intra-observer agreement of intrapartum ST analysis of the fetal electrocardiogram in women monitored by STAN. BJOG 2009;116:545–51
  • Chauhan SP, Klauser CK, Woodring TC, et al. Intrapartum nonreassuring foetal heart rate tracing and prediction of adverse outcomes: interobserver variability. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2008;199:623.e1–5
  • Vayssière C, Tsatsaris V, Pirrello O, et al. Inter-observer agreement in clinical decision-making for abnormal cardiotocogram (CTG) during labour: a comparison between CTG and CTG plus STAN. BJOG 2009;116:1081–7
  • Ojala K, Vääräsmäki M, Mäkikallio K, et al. A comparison of intrapartum automated foetal electrocardiography and conventional cardiotocography: a randomised controlled study. BJOG 2006;113:419–23
  • Pehrson C, Sorensen JL, Amer-Wåhlin I. Evaluation and impact of cardiotocography training programmes: a systematic review. BJOG 2011;118:926–35
  • Chauhan SP, Magann EF, Scott JR, et al. Emergency cesarean delivery for nonreassuring fetal heart rate tracings. Compliance with ACOG guidelines. J Reprod Med 2003;48:975–81
  • Luzietti R, Erkkola R, Hasbargen U, et al. European community multi-center trial “Fetal ECG analysis during labor: ST plus CTG analysis. J Perinat Med 2014;27:431–40
  • Gebeh A Yulia P., Ayuk Intrapartum cardiotocograph interpretation by midwives and trainee obstetricians using a modified definition of a foetal heart rate deceleration. J Obst Gynecol 2010;7:671–4
  • Carbonne B, Dreyfus M, Schaal JP. Groupe d’experts des RPC sur la surveillance fœtale au cours du travail. Classification CNGOF du rythme cardiaque fœtal: obstétriciens et sages-femmes au tableau! [CNGOF classification of foetal heart rate: colour code for obstetricians and midwives]. J Gynecol Obstet Biol Reprod (Paris) 2013;42:509–10
  • Sabiani L, Le Dû R, Loundou A, et al. Intra- and interobserver agreement among obstetric experts in court regarding the review of abnormal fetal heart rate tracings and obstetrical management. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2015;213:856.e1–8
  • Althabe F, Belizán JM, Villar J, et al. Latin American Caesarean Section Study Group. Mandatory second opinion to reduce rates of unnecessary caesarean sections in Latin America: a cluster randomised controlled trial. Lancet 2004;363:1934–40

Reprints and Corporate Permissions

Please note: Selecting permissions does not provide access to the full text of the article, please see our help page How do I view content?

To request a reprint or corporate permissions for this article, please click on the relevant link below:

Academic Permissions

Please note: Selecting permissions does not provide access to the full text of the article, please see our help page How do I view content?

Obtain permissions instantly via Rightslink by clicking on the button below:

If you are unable to obtain permissions via Rightslink, please complete and submit this Permissions form. For more information, please visit our Permissions help page.