Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35330616›Full record

ReviewEuropean journal of midwifery2022

The effect of formal fetal movement counting on maternal psychological outcomes: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

Nazia AlAmri, Valerie Smith

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in European journal of midwifery, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed, 1 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

5 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. 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

2 authors.

Nazia AlAmriKing Hamad University Hospital, Busaiteen, Bahrain.
Valerie SmithSchool of Nursing and Midwifery, Trinity College Dublin, Dublin, Ireland.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionFormally counting fetal movements in pregnancy is one of the oldest methods to assess fetal well-being. Although not routinely recommended in contemporary maternity care, due to a lack of evidence of its effectiveness, formal fetal movement counting is still practiced in many birth settings. Requesting women to formally count their fetal movements in a structured, objective way that can potentially improve maternal subjective outcomes such as worry or concern. The aim of this study was to evaluate the effect of formal fetal movement counting versus no formal counting, on maternal worry, concern or anxiety, and maternal-fetal attachment (MFA). Secondary outcomes were compliance with the intervention (counting method) and hospital admission/attendance for fetal activity concerns.

methodsCINAHL, MEDLINE and EMBASE were searched systematically for eligible studies from inception dates to June 2020, supplemented by searches of trial databases, grey literature and the reference lists of included studies. Randomized controlled and quasi-randomized trials were included in the review.

resultsNine studies reported across 15 publications were included involving 70824 pregnant women. The results showed that MFA levels were significantly higher in women who formally counted fetal movements than those who did not (standardized mean difference=0.72; 95% CI: 0.10-1.33, five studies, 1565 women). There were no differences between the groups in maternal anxiety or worry/concern outcomes. Attendance or admission rates for reduced fetal movements, or concern for fetal activity, did not differ between the groups (OR=1.36; 95% CI: 0.97-1.91, three studies, 1947 women). Compliance in completing fetal movement charts varied, ranging 45-90%, although definitions of compliance differed across studies, which may have affected rates.

conclusionsThis review has found that formal fetal movement counting in pregnancy has no detrimental effects on maternal psychological or emotional status and positively affects maternal-fetal attachment. Although current evidence does not support the use of formal fetal movement counting for improving perinatal outcomes, such as stillbirth and neonatal death, the results of this review are helpful for clinicians in discussing fetal movements in pregnancy and in discussing the optional methods available to women who may be advised to or choose to objectively assess fetal movements using a formal fetal movement counting method.

Indexed as

fetal movement assessmentmaternal–fetal attachment

Identifiers

PMID35330616
PMCPMC8892388

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.