Evidence map›Paper›PMID 22336808›Full record

SynthesisThe Cochrane database of systematic reviews2012

Cardiotocography versus intermittent auscultation of fetal heart on admission to labour ward for assessment of fetal wellbeing.

Declan Devane, Joan G Lalor, Sean Daly, William McGuire, Valerie Smith

Abstract readComparative StudyMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in The Cochrane database of systematic reviews, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 24 papers, 7 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
24citing papers in PubMed, 7 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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

24 citing papers in PubMed, 7 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 87 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Caesarean Delivery Rate Review: An Evidence-Based Analysis.Ontario health technology assessment series · 2015
    Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Pooled it
  7. Pooled it
  8. Trial
  9. Trial
  10. Fetal Cardiac Function in Early Labour and Intrapartum Outcomes: A Prospective Observational Study.BJOG : an international journal of obstetrics and gynaecology · 2026
    Observational
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. The Development and Psychometric Evaluation of the Electronic Fetal Monitoring Knowledge Scale.Acta informatica medica : AIM : journal of the Society for Medical Informatics of Bosnia & Herzegovina : casopis Drustva za medicinsku informatiku BiH · 2020
    Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Admission Test and Pregnancy Outcome.Iranian journal of medical sciences · 2017
    Article
  19. Article
  20. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors at 4 institutions in 2 countries.

Declan DevaneSchool of Nursing and Midwifery, National University of Ireland Galway, Galway, Ireland. declan.devane@nuigalway.ie.
Joan G Lalor
Sean Daly
William McGuire
Valerie Smith
Trinity College Dublin · IECoombe Women & Infants University Hospital · IEOllscoil na Gaillimhe – University of Galway · IEUniversity of York · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe admission cardiotocograph (CTG) is a commonly used screening test consisting of a short (usually 20 minutes) recording of the fetal heart rate (FHR) and uterine activity performed on the mother's admission to the labour ward.

objectivesTo compare the effects of admission CTG with intermittent auscultation of the FHR on maternal and infant outcomes for pregnant women without risk factors on their admission to the labour ward. SEARCH

methodsWe searched the Cochrane Pregnancy and Childbirth Group's Trials Register (17 May 2011) (CENTRAL) (The Cochrane Library 2011 Issue 2 of 4), MEDLINE (1966 to 17 May 2011), CINAHL (1982 to 17 May 2011), Dissertation Abstracts (1980 to 17 May 2011) and the reference list of retrieved papers. SELECTION CRITERIA: All randomised and quasi-randomised trials comparing admission CTG with intermittent auscultation of the FHR for pregnant women between 37 and 42 completed weeks of pregnancy and considered to be at low risk of intrapartum fetal hypoxia and of developing complications during labour. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two authors independently assessed trial eligibility and quality, and extracted data. Data were checked for accuracy. MAIN

resultsWe included four trials involving more than 13,000 women. All four studies included women in labour. Overall, the studies were at low risk of bias. Although not statistically significant using a strict P < 0.05 criterion, data are consistent with women allocated to admission CTG having, on average, a higher probability of an increase in incidence of caesarean section than women allocated to intermittent auscultation (risk ratio (RR) 1.20, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.00 to 1.44, four trials, 11,338 women, T² = 0.00, I² = 0%). There was no significant difference in the average treatment effect across included trials between women allocated to admission CTG and women allocated to intermittent auscultation in instrumental vaginal birth (RR 1.10, 95% CI 0.95 to 1.27, four trials, 11,338 women, T² = 0.01, I² = 38%) and fetal and neonatal deaths (RR 1.01, 95% CI 0.30 to 3.47, four trials, 11339 infants, T² = 0.00, I² = 0%).Women allocated to admission CTG had, on average, significantly higher rates of continuous electronic fetal monitoring during labour (RR 1.30, 95% CI 1.14 to 1.48, three trials, 10,753 women, T² = 0.01, I² = 79%) and fetal blood sampling (RR 1.28, 95% CI 1.13 to 1.45, three trials, 10,757 women, T² = 0.00, I² = 0%) than women allocated to intermittent auscultation. There were no differences between groups in other secondary outcome measures. AUTHORS'

conclusionsContrary to continued use in some clinical areas, we found no evidence of benefit for the use of the admission cardiotocograph (CTG) for low-risk women on admission in labour.We found no evidence of benefit for the use of the admission CTG for low-risk women on admission in labour. Furthermore, the probability is that admission CTG increases the caesarean section rate by approximately 20%. The data lacked power to detect possible important differences in perinatal mortality. However, it is unlikely that any trial, or meta-analysis, will be adequately powered to detect such differences. The findings of this review support recommendations that the admission CTG not be used for women who are low risk on admission in labour. Women should be informed that admission CTG is likely associated with an increase in the incidence of caesarean section without evidence of benefit.

Indexed as

AdultCardiotocographyDiagnostic Tests, RoutineEchocardiography, DopplerFemaleHeart AuscultationHeart Rate, FetalHumansLabor, ObstetricPregnancyRandomized Controlled Trials as Topic

Identifiers

PMID22336808
OpenAlexW4247973981

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.