ArticleAmerican journal of perinatology2024
Urgent Follow-up after Outpatient Nonstress Tests and the Potential for Fetal Monitoring at Home.
Article in American journal of perinatology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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.
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.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveThis study aimed to measure the proportion of patients needing urgent clinical follow-up after an abnormal outpatient nonstress test (NST). We further sought to capture the patient perspective on the acceptability of performing NSTs at home. STUDY
designA retrospective cohort study was performed over a 2-year period to determine the frequency of abnormal NSTs in a hospital-based, antepartum testing unit in patients greater than or equal to 32 weeks' gestation. The proportion of patients who delivered within 24 hours of an abnormal NST was also determined. A cross-sectional, web-based patient survey was conducted to obtain insight into the patient's comfort level with potentially performing NSTs at home.
resultsThe chart review yielded 665 patients who underwent 2,122 NSTs at greater than or equal to 32 weeks. Of the 2,122 NSTs, 111 were categorized as abnormal and required urgent clinical follow-up, or 5.2% (95% confidence interval [CI] 4.3, 6.3%). Of the 665 patients, 13 delivered within 24 hours of an abnormal NST, or 2.0% (95% CI 1.0, 3.3%). In the web-based survey, the proportion of respondents who would feel comfortable or very comfortable conducting NSTs at home was 87/125, or 69.6% (95% CI 60.9, 77.1%).
conclusionThis study revealed that 5.2% of NSTs performed in a hospital-based antepartum testing unit were abnormal and required urgent clinical follow-up. Of the patients being followed in the antepartum testing unit, 2.0% delivered within 24 hours of an abnormal NST. The majority of the survey respondents indicated they would feel comfortable performing NSTs at home. The present study adds important information regarding the risks and benefits of NSTs at home. KEY POINTS: · Telehealth for NSTs offers advantages over in-person NSTs.. · The proportion of NSTs that need urgent follow-up was 5.2%.. · A majority of patients are interested in telehealth for NSTs.. · Guidelines are needed before adoption of telehealth for NSTs..
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.