Top

BMC Pregnancy and Childbirth

Published in:

Open Access 01-12-2017 | Research article

A pilot exploratory investigation on pregnant women’s views regarding STan fetal monitoring technology

Authors: Kate Bryson, Chris Wilkinson, Sabrina Kuah, Geoff Matthews, Deborah Turnbull

Published in: BMC Pregnancy and Childbirth | Issue 1/2017

Abstract

Background

Women’s views are critical for informing the planning and delivery of maternity care services. ST segment analysis (STan) is a promising method to more accurately detect when unborn babies are at risk of brain damage or death during labour that is being trialled for the first time in Australia. This is the first study to examine women’s views about STan monitoring in this context.

Methods

Semi-structured interviews were conducted with pregnant women recruited across a range of clinical locations at the study hospital. The interviews included hypothetical scenarios to assess women’s prospective views about STan monitoring (as an adjunct to cardiotocography, (CTG)) compared to the existing fetal monitoring method of CTG alone. This article describes findings from an inductive and descriptive thematic analysis.

Results

Most women preferred the existing fetal monitoring method compared to STan monitoring; women’s decision-making was multifaceted. Analysis yielded four themes relating to women’s views towards fetal monitoring in labour: a) risk and labour b) mobility in labour c) autonomy and choice in labour d) trust in maternity care providers.

Conclusions

Findings suggest that women’s views towards CTG and STan monitoring are multifaceted, and appear to be influenced by individual labour preferences and the information being received and understood. This underlies the importance of clear communication between maternity care providers and women about technology use in intrapartum care. This research is now being used to inform the implementation of the first properly powered Australian randomised trial comparing STan and CTG monitoring.

Available only for authorised users

McIntyre MJ, Francis K, Chapman Y. National review of maternity services 2008: women influencing change. BMC Pregnancy Childbirth. 2011;11(1):1. doi:10.1186/1471-2393-11-53.CrossRef

Michels A, Kruske S, Thompson R. Women’s postnatal psychological functioning: the role of satisfaction with intrapartum care and the birth experience. J Reprod Infant Psychol. 2013;31(2):172–82. doi:10.1080/02646838.2013.791921.CrossRef

Mahmud A, Morris E, Johnson S, Ismail KM. Developing core patient-reported outcomes in maternity: PRO-maternity. BJOG. 2014;121:15–9. doi:10.1111/1471-0528.12901.CrossRefPubMed

Green JM. Integrating women's views into maternity care research and practice. Birth. 2012;39(4):291–5. doi:10.1111/birt.12003.CrossRefPubMed

Wilkinson C, Kuah S, Bryson K, Mayes M, Matthews G, Mol B, Chandraharan E, McPhee A, Slater A, Symonds I, Turnbull D. A pilot randomised trial of STan fetal monitoring compared with CTG monitoring alone [abstract]. In: abstracts of the 21st annual congress of the perinatal Society of Australia and new Zealand (PSANZ), 2-5 April 2017, Canberra, Australia. Journal of Paediatrics and child health. 2017;53(52):107. doi:10.1111/jpc.13494_315.

Sacco A, Muglu J, Navaratnarajah R, Hogg M. ST analysis for intrapartum fetal monitoring. Obstet Gynecol. 2015;17(1):5–12. doi:10.1111/tog.12154.CrossRef

Belfort MA, Saade GR, Thom E, Blackwell SC, Reddy UM, Thorp JM Jr, Tita AT, Miller RS, Peaceman AM, McKenna DS, Chien EK. A randomized trial of intrapartum fetal ECG ST-segment analysis. N Engl J Med. 2015;373(7):632–41. doi:10.1056/NEJMoa1500600.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

Neilson JP. Fetal electrocardiogram (ECG) for fetal monitoring during labour. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews. 2015;(Issue 12. Art. No.: CD000116) doi:10.1002/14651858.CD000116.pub5.

Olofsson P, Ayres-de-Campos D, Kessler J, Tendal B, Yli BM, Devoe L. A critical appraisal of the evidence for using cardiotocography plus ECG ST interval analysis for fetal surveillance in labor. Part II: the meta-analyses. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand. 2014;93(6):571–86. doi:10.1111/aogs.12412.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

10.

National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence. Intrapartum Care: Care of Healthy Women and their Babies during Childbirth. London: RCOG, 2014. Available online from: https://www.nice.org.uk/guidance/cg190/resources (Accessed 20 April 2015).

11.

Alfirevic Z, Devane D, Gyte GML. Continuous cardiotocography (CTG) as a form of electronic fetal monitoring (EFM) for fetal assessment during labour. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews. 2013;(Issue 5. Art. No.: CD006066) doi:10.1002/14651858.CD006066.pub2.

12.

Barber EL, Lundsberg L, Belanger K, Pettker CM, Funai EF, Illuzzi JL. Indications contributing to the increasing cesarean delivery rate. Obstet Gynecol. 2011;118(1):29. doi:10.1097/AOG.0b013e31821e5f65.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

13.

Parisaei M, Harrington KF, Erskine KJ. Maternal satisfaction and acceptability of foetal electrocardiographic (STAN®) monitoring system. Arch Gynecol Obstet. 2011;283(1):31–5. doi:10.1007/s00404-009-1268-9.CrossRefPubMed

14.

Sawyer A, Ayers S, Abbott J, Gyte G, Rabe H, Duley L. Measures of satisfaction with care during labour and birth: a comparative review. BMC Pregnancy Childbirth. 2013;13(1):108. doi:10.1186/1471-2393-13-108.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

15.

Chalmers BE, Dzakpasu S. Interventions in labour and birth and satisfaction with care: the Canadian maternity experiences survey findings. J Reprod Infant Psychol. 2015;33(4):374–87. doi:10.1186/s12888-015-0550-6.CrossRef

16.

Scotland GS, McNamee P, Cheyne H, Hundley V, Barnett C. Women’s preferences for aspects of labor management: results from a discrete choice experiment. Birth. 2011;38(1):36–46. doi:10.1111/j.1523-536X.2010.00447.x.CrossRefPubMed

17.

Yee LM, Kaimal AJ, Houston KA, Wu E, Thiet MP, Nakagawa S, Caughey AB, Firouzian A, Kuppermann M. Mode of delivery preferences in a diverse population of pregnant women. A J Obstetrics Gynecol. 2015;212(3):377.e1–24. doi:10.1016/j.ajog.2014.10.029.CrossRef

18.

Scheil W, Scott J, Catcheside B, Sage L, Kennare R. Pregnancy Outcome in South Australia. In: Adelaide: pregnancy outcome unit, SA Health, government of South Australia; 2014. Available online from: https://www.sahealth.sa.gov.au/wps/wcm/connect/d8b1db004f29bbbda841ee9ea2e2f365/16148.1+Pregnancy+Outcomes+Report+A4_final.pdf?MOD=AJPERES&CACHEID=ROOTWORKSPACE-d8b1db004f29bbbda841ee9ea2e2f365-m0dlpms. Accessed 5 Dec 2017.

19.

Hundley V, Ryan M. Are women's expectations and preferences for intrapartum care affected by the model of care on offer? BJOG. 2004;111(6):550–60. doi:10.1111/j.1471-0528.2004.00152.x.CrossRefPubMed

20.

Bayrampour H, Heaman M, Duncan KA, Tough S. Advanced maternal age and risk perception: a qualitative study. BMC Pregnancy Childbirth. 2012;12(1):100. doi:10.1186/1471-2393-12-100.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

21.

Coyne IT. Sampling in qualitative research. Purposeful and theoretical sampling; merging or clear boundaries? J Adv Nurs. 1997;26(3):623–30. doi:10.1046/j.1365–2648.1997.t01–25-00999.x.CrossRefPubMed

22.

American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists. ACOG Practice Bulletin no. 115: vaginal birth after previous cesarean delivery. Obstet Gynecol. 2010;116(2 Pt 1):450–63. doi:10.1097/AOG.0b013e3181eeb251.

23.

Jenkins N, Bloor M, Fischer J, Berney L, Neale J. Putting it in context: the use of vignettes in qualitative interviewing. Qual Res. 2010 Apr 1;10(2):175–98. doi:10.1177/1468794109356737.CrossRef

24.

Britten N. Qualitative interviews. In: Pope C, Mays N, editors. Qualitative research in health care. 3rd ed. Carlton: Blackwell publishing; 2006. p. 12–9.CrossRef

25.

Hall WA, Tomkinson J, Klein MC. Canadian care providers’ and pregnant women’s approaches to managing birth minimizing risk while maximizing integrity. Qual Health Res. 2012;22(5):575–86. doi:10.1177/1049732311424292.CrossRefPubMed

26.

Chambers E, Cook S, Thake A, Foster A, Shaw S, Hutten R, Parry G, Ricketts T. The self-management of longer-term depression: learning from the patient, a qualitative study. BMC Psychiatry. 2015;15(1):172. doi:10.1186/s12888-015-0550-6.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

27.

Braun V, Clarke V. Successful Qualitative Research. 1st ed. London: SAGE Publications Ltd; 2013.

28.

Braun V, Clarke V. What can “thematic analysis” offer health and wellbeing researchers? Int J Qualitative Stud Health Well-being. 2014;9 doi:10.3402/qhw.v9.26152.

29.

Tracy SJ. Qualitative quality: eight “big-tent” criteria for excellent qualitative research. Qual Inq. 2010;16(10):837–51. doi:10.1177/1077800410383121.CrossRef

30.

Guest G, Bunce A, Johnson L. How many interviews are enough? An experiment with data saturation and variability. Field methods. 2006;18(1):59–82. doi:10.1177/1525822X05279903.CrossRef

31.

Kerr C, Nixon A, Wild D. Assessing and demonstrating data saturation in qualitative inquiry supporting patient-reported outcomes research. Expert Rev Pharmacoecon Outcomes Res. 2010;10(3):269–81. doi:10.1586/erp.10.30.CrossRefPubMed

32.

Robinson M, Pennell CE, McLean NJ, Tearne JE, Oddy WH, Newnham JP. Risk perception in pregnancy. Eur Psychol. 2015;20(2):120–7. doi:10.1027/1016-9040/a000212.CrossRef

33.

Torres J, De Vries R, Low LK. Consumer information on fetal heart rate monitoring during labor: a content analysis: A Content Analysis. J Perinat Neonatal Nurs. 2014;28(2):135–43. doi:10.1097/JPN.0000000000000035.CrossRefPubMed

34.

Barber V, Linsell L, Locock L, Powell L, Shakeshaft C, Lean K, Colman J, Juszczak E, Brocklehurst P. Electronic fetal monitoring during labour and anxiety levels in women taking part in a RCT. Br J Midwifery. 2013;21(6):394-403. Available from: CINAHL with Full Text. ISSN number is: 0969-4900.

35.

Snowden A, Martin C, Jomeen J, Martin HC. Concurrent analysis of choice and control in childbirth. BMC Pregnancy Childbirth. 2011;11(1):1. doi:10.1186/1471-2393-11-40.CrossRef

36.

Hindley C. Thompson, A. (2005). The rhetoric of informed choice: perspectives from midwives on intrapartum fetal heart rate monitoring. Health Expect. 2000;8(4):306–14. doi:10.1111/j.1369-7625.2005.00355.x.CrossRef

37.

Priddis H, Dahlen H, Schmied V. What are the facilitators, inhibitors, and implications of birth positioning? A review of the literature. Women Birth. 2012;25(3):100–6. doi:10.1016/j.wombi.2011.05.001.CrossRefPubMed

38.

Malacrida C, Boulton T. The best laid plans? Women’s choices, expectations and experiences in childbirth. Health (London). 2013;18(1):41–59. doi:10.1177/1363459313476964.CrossRef

39.

Jomeen J. The paradox of choice in maternity care. J Neonat Nurs. 2012;18(2):60–2. doi:10.1016/j.jnn.2012.01.010.CrossRef

40.

Brocklehurst P. The epidural and position trial collaborative group. Upright versus lying down position in second stage of labour in nulliparous women with low dose epidural: BUMPES randomised controlled trial. BMJ. 2017;359:j4471. doi:10.1136/bmj.j4471.

Title: A pilot exploratory investigation on pregnant women’s views regarding STan fetal monitoring technology
Authors: Kate Bryson
Chris Wilkinson
Sabrina Kuah
Geoff Matthews
Deborah Turnbull
Publication date: 01-12-2017
Publisher: BioMed Central
Published in: BMC Pregnancy and Childbirth / Issue 1/2017
Electronic ISSN: 1471-2393
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s12884-017-1598-8

ACC 2024 Congress

Springer Medicine

A pilot exploratory investigation on pregnant women’s views regarding STan fetal monitoring technology

Abstract

Background

Methods

Results

Conclusions

ACC 2024 Congress

Springer Medicine

Abstract

Background

Methods

Results

Conclusions

Please log in to get access to this content

Other articles of this Issue 1/2017

Evaluation of obstetricians’ surgical decision making in the management of uterine rupture

The role of vitamin D in pre-eclampsia: a systematic review

Learning from deaths: Parents’ Active Role and ENgagement in The review of their Stillbirth/perinatal death (the PARENTS 1 study)

Use of Rapid Ascertainment Process for Institutional Deaths (RAPID) to identify pregnancy-related deaths in tertiary-care obstetric hospitals in three departments in Haiti

Exploring the strategies that midwives in British Columbia use to promote normal birth

Maternal and fetal outcomes of uterine rupture and factors associated with maternal death secondary to uterine rupture