The indirectly obtained fetal heart rate: comparison of first- and second-generation electronic fetal monitors.

Fetal heart rate variability has become an essential component in evaluation of the fetus during continuous electronic fetal monitoring. Because of technical deficiencies of monitoring equipment, fetal heart rate variability may not always be available, such as during indirect monitoring of the fetus. In lieu of integration, a mathematical procedure called autocorrelation has, with the use of microprocessors, been incorporated into the fetal monitor, creating the "second generation" of electronic fetal monitoring. This study examined the accuracy of the first- and second-generation monitors by comparing simultaneously obtained indirect and direct real-time fetal heart rate data. The second-generation monitor produced an indirectly obtained fetal heart rate that was more accurate when compared with the directly obtained data than that with the first-generation fetal monitor. In addition, the variation in data from the first-generation monitor was substantially higher than that with the second-generation monitor. It is concluded that the fetal heart rate tracing from the second-generation monitor is more accurate when compared with the fetal electrocardiogram and may facilitate a truer interpretation of fetal heart rate variability than that obtained with the first-generation monitor.

[1]  M. Trierweiler,et al.  Baseline fetal heart rate characteristics as an indicator of fetal status during the antepartum period. , 1976, American journal of obstetrics and gynecology.

[2]  M Macklin,et al.  Changes in the conduction of the fetal electrocardiogram to the maternal abdominal surface during gestation. , 1977, American journal of obstetrics and gynecology.

[3]  B. Schifrin,et al.  Fetal heart rate patterns. Prediction of Apgar score. , 1972, JAMA.

[4]  E H Hon,et al.  Clinical fetal monitoring. VII. The evaluation and significance of intrapartum baseline FHR variability. , 1975, American journal of obstetrics and gynecology.

[5]  J. King,et al.  The relationship of fetal heart rate patterns to the fetal transcutaneous PO2. , 1981, American journal of obstetrics and gynecology.

[6]  E H Hon,et al.  Clinical fetal monitoring. V. Effect on perinatal outcome. , 1974, American journal of obstetrics and gynecology.

[7]  E. Hon,et al.  The neonatal value of fetal monitoring. , 1975, Transactions of the Pacific Coast Obstetrical and Gynecological Society.

[8]  M Y Divon,et al.  Autocorrelation techniques in fetal monitoring. , 1985, American journal of obstetrics and gynecology.

[9]  G S Dawes,et al.  A comparison of ultrasound (with autocorrelation) and direct electrocardiogram fetal heart rate detector systems. , 1983, American journal of obstetrics and gynecology.