These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


Pubmed for Handhelds

PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS

Search MEDLINE/PubMed

  • Title: Guideline choice for CTG analysis influences first caesarean decision.
    Author: Vejux N, Ledu R, D'ercole C, Piechon L, Loundou A, Bretelle F.
    Journal: J Matern Fetal Neonatal Med; 2017 Aug; 30(15):1816-1819. PubMed ID: 27550148.
    Abstract:
    OBJECTIVE: To compare intrapartum cardiotocography (CTG) analysis in case of first caesarean section (CS) for non-reassuring CTG according to international guidelines. METHODS: Four ObGyns retrospectively analysed first CS for non-reassuring CTG during labour blind to neonatal outcome. CTG were analysed according to French National College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists (CNGOF) and to the FIGO guidelines. First, CTG analysis was done without obstetrical context, then secondly, it was given. ObGyns stated if CS was justified or not. Inter-operator ObGyn agreement was analysed. RESULTS: Among 587 CS, 100 women met the inclusion criteria with a first CS for non-reassuring CTG. The overall inter observer agreement was low but fair. ObGyns were significantly more concordant using the FIGO than the CNGOF guidelines (kappa coefficient = 0.331 [0.27-0.39] versus 0.209 [0.16-0.26] p < 0.001). Without obstetrical context 70% of CS were considered as unjustified. This rate decreased to 16% with the knowledge of the obstetrical context and the use of a classification (p < 0.001). Two-third of the unjustified CS were carried out during night hours (p = 0.026). CONCLUSION: The FIGO guidelines are more reproducible than CNGOF guidelines. The overall inter-observer agreement was low but fair. The guideline choice could have an impact on first CS decision.
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]