Evidence map›Paper›PMID 21029466›Full record

Trial reportBMC pregnancy and childbirth2010

A randomised clinical trial of intrapartum fetal monitoring with computer analysis and alerts versus previously available monitoring.

Diogo Ayres-de-Campos, Austin Ugwumadu, Philip Banfield, Pauline Lynch, Pina Amin, David Horwell, Antonia Costa, Cristina Santos, João Bernardes, Karl Rosen

Open access · goldAbstract readMulticenter StudyRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in BMC pregnancy and childbirth, 2010. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed
4.7field-weighted citation impact, top 6% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

7 citing papers in PubMed, 35 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Changing Perspectives of Electronic Fetal Monitoring.Reproductive sciences (Thousand Oaks, Calif.) · 2022
    Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Open access intrapartum CTG database.BMC pregnancy and childbirth · 2014
    Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

10 authors at 7 institutions in 3 countries.

Diogo Ayres-de-CamposDepartmento de Ginecologia e Obstetrícia, Faculdade de Medicina do Porto, Alameda Hernani Monteiro 4200-319 Porto, Portugal. dcampos@med.up.pt
Austin Ugwumadu
Philip Banfield
Pauline Lynch
Pina Amin
David Horwell
Antonia Costa
Cristina Santos
João Bernardes
Karl Rosen
Glan Clwyd Hospital · GBLuton and Dunstable Hospital · GBNinewells Hospital · GBUniversidade do Porto · PTUniversity Hospital of Wales · GBUniversity of Borås · SEUniversity of London · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundIntrapartum fetal hypoxia remains an important cause of death and permanent handicap and in a significant proportion of cases there is evidence of suboptimal care related to fetal surveillance. Cardiotocographic (CTG) monitoring remains the basis of intrapartum surveillance, but its interpretation by healthcare professionals lacks reproducibility and the technology has not been shown to improve clinically important outcomes. The addition of fetal electrocardiogram analysis has increased the potential to avoid adverse outcomes, but CTG interpretation remains its main weakness. A program for computerised analysis of intrapartum fetal signals, incorporating real-time alerts for healthcare professionals, has recently been developed. There is a need to determine whether this technology can result in better perinatal outcomes. METHODS/

designThis is a multicentre randomised clinical trial. Inclusion criteria are: women aged ≥ 16 years, able to provide written informed consent, singleton pregnancies ≥ 36 weeks, cephalic presentation, no known major fetal malformations, in labour but excluding active second stage, planned for continuous CTG monitoring, and no known contra-indication for vaginal delivery. Eligible women will be randomised using a computer-generated randomisation sequence to one of the two arms: continuous computer analysis of fetal monitoring signals with real-time alerts (intervention arm) or continuous CTG monitoring as previously performed (control arm). Electrocardiographic monitoring and fetal scalp blood sampling will be available in both arms. The primary outcome measure is the incidence of fetal metabolic acidosis (umbilical artery pH < 7.05, BDecf > 12 mmol/L). Secondary outcome measures are: caesarean section and instrumental vaginal delivery rates, use of fetal blood sampling, 5-minute Apgar score < 7, neonatal intensive care unit admission, moderate and severe neonatal encephalopathy with a marker of hypoxia, perinatal death, rate of internal monitoring, tracing quality, and signal loss. Analysis will follow an intention to treat principle. Incidences of primary and secondary outcomes will be compared between groups. Assuming a reduction in metabolic acidosis from 2.8% to 1.8%, using a two-sided test with alpha = 0.05, power = 0.80, and 10% loss to follow-up, 8133 women need to be randomised. DISCUSSION: This study will provide evidence of the impact of intrapartum monitoring with computer analysis and real-time alerts on the incidence of adverse perinatal outcomes, intrapartum interventions and signal quality. (Current controlled trials ISRCTN42314164).

Indexed as

Clinical AlarmsPregnancy OutcomeSignal Processing, Computer-AssistedAcidosisCardiotocographyDelivery, ObstetricElectrocardiographyFemaleFetal DistressFetal HypoxiaHumansInfant, NewbornLabor, ObstetricPregnancyRandomized Controlled Trials as TopicUmbilical Arteries

Identifiers

PMID21029466
PMCPMC2987886
OpenAlexW2150002439

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.