ArticleTechnology and health care : official journal of the European Society for Engineering and Medicine2024
Study on the clinical value of the wearable foetal electrocardiogram monitoring system.
Article in Technology and health care : official journal of the European Society for Engineering and Medicine, 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.
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundElectronic foetal monitoring (EFM), a method to monitor foetal intrauterine conditions and foetal reserve capacity, is the most extensively used intrauterine monitoring technology in obstetrics.
objectiveThis study aims to compare the Thoth wearable foetal electrocardiogram (foetal ECG [FECG]) monitoring system with a traditional Doppler foetal heart monitoring system before labour to investigate their respective values in clinical application.
methodsA total of 393 pregnant women admitted to our hospital between 2020 and 2022 participated in this study. They were recruited using the convenience sampling method. We employed a paired design to assess the confusion rate, trend overlap, and foetal heart rate/ECG monitoring consistency, whereas a completely randomised design was used to measure pregnancy outcome indicators. The participants were divided into two groups using a random number table: the Thoth group (n= 196) and the traditional Doppler group (n= 197). Each group was monitored using the corresponding system.
resultsThe Thoth monitor demonstrated a lower confusion rate compared with the traditional Doppler monitor (0.25% vs 2.04%; χ2= 5.508, P= 0.019). The trend overlap in foetal heart rates was consistently 100%, with 91.2% of readings showing a consistency rate of ⩾ 95%. Additionally, the Thoth monitor recorded a higher cumulative interruption time in the foetal heart rate curve (12.13 ± 2.22 vs 21.02 ± 2.34; t= 18.471, P< 0.001) and more abnormal ECGs (21.21 ± 4.32 vs 18.21 ± 2.91; t= 7.582, P< 0.001) than the traditional Doppler system.
conclusionThe Thoth wearable FECG monitor offers several advantages over the traditional Doppler foetal heart monitoring system. These include a reduced confusion rate, more accurate data collection, a lower rate of clinical misjudgement, reduced workload for medical staff, and enhanced comfort during vaginal delivery. The rates of emergency caesarean sections and neonatal asphyxia in the Thoth group were marginally lower than those in the Doppler group, which may be attributed to issues such as ECG disconnection or interference from the maternal heart rate.
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.