Abstract
ABSTRACT: We report the views of 200 women interviewed as part of a large randomized controlled trial in a Dublin hospital to compare a policy of continuous intrapartum fetal heart rate monitoring (EFM) with an alternative policy of intermittent auscultation using a Pinard stethoscope (IA). More women allocated to EFM reported that they felt restricted in their movements than did those allocated to IA. On the other hand, we found no evidence that the method of monitoring either influenced the support that they said they experienced or provided significant reassurance or made them feel more or less in control. There is a suggestion that women monitored with EFM were more likely to be left alone for short periods.This study suggests that the method of monitoring was less important to women in this hospital than the support and reassurance they received from staff and companions. Personal and continuous care from a midwife for all women in labor is a key feature of the hospital's policy and our study suggests that, in general, this policy was successfully translated into both IA and EFM practice, although the association between the use of EFM and an increase in women being left alone for short periods indicates a need for caution.
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.