WITHDRAWN: Continuous electronic heart rate monitoring for fetal assessment during labor.

BACKGROUND Electronic fetal monitoring (EFM) is used in the management of labor and delivery in nearly three of four pregnancies in the United States. The apparent contradiction between the widespread use of EFM and expert recommendations to limit routine use indicates that a reassessment of this practice is warranted. OBJECTIVES To compare the efficacy and safety of routine continuous EFM during labor with intermittent auscultation, using the results of published randomized controlled trials (RCTs). SEARCH STRATEGY We identified RCTs by searching MEDLINE and the register maintained by the Cochrane Pregnancy and Childbirth Group, and by contacting experts, and reviewing published references. Date of last search: January 2001. SELECTION CRITERIA Randomized controlled trials. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS Data were abstracted by one of us, and their accuracy was confirmed independently by a second person. A single reviewer assessed study quality based on criteria developed by others for RCTs. Data reported from similar studies were used to calculate a combined risk estimate for each of eight outcomes. MAIN RESULTS Our search identified 13 published RCTs addressing the efficacy and safety of EFM; no unpublished studies were found. Four trials that did not fulfil our selection criteria were excluded. The remaining nine trials included 18,561 pregnant women and their 18,695 infants in both high- and low-risk pregnancies from seven clinical centers in the United States, Europe, and Australia. Overall, a statistically significant decrease was associated with routine EFM for neonatal seizures (relative risk (RR) 0.51, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.32-0.82). The protective effect for neonatal seizures was only evident in studies with high-quality scores. No significant differences were observed in 1-minute Apgar scores below four or seven, rate of admissions to neonatal intensive care units, perinatal deaths or cerebral palsy. An increase associated with the use of EFM was observed in the rate of cesarean delivery (RR 1.41, 95% CI 1.23-1.61) and operative vaginal delivery (RR 1.20, 95% CI 1.11-1.30). AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS The only clinically significant benefit from the use of routine continuous EFM was in the reduction of neonatal seizures. In view of the increase in cesarean and operative vaginal delivery, the long-term benefit of this reduction must be evaluated in the decision reached jointly by the pregnant woman and her clinician to use continuous EFM or intermittent auscultation during labor.

[1]  S. Neldam,et al.  Intrapartum fetal heart rate monitoring in a combined low- and high-risk population: a controlled clinical trial. , 1986, European journal of obstetrics, gynecology, and reproductive biology.

[2]  S. Neldam,et al.  Maternal attitudes to fetal monitoring. , 1985, European journal of obstetrics, gynecology, and reproductive biology.

[3]  M A Stenchever,et al.  Effects of electronic fetal-heart-rate monitoring, as compared with periodic auscultation, on the neurologic development of premature infants. , 1990, The New England journal of medicine.

[4]  I. Ingemarsson,et al.  Intermittent versus continuous electronic monitoring in labour: a randomised study , 1994, British journal of obstetrics and gynaecology.

[5]  P. Boylan,et al.  The Dublin Randomised Controlled Trial of Intrapartum Electronic Fetal Heart Rate Monitoring , 1985 .

[6]  P. Renou,et al.  Controlled trial of fetal intensive care. , 1976, American journal of obstetrics and gynecology.

[7]  J. Parer,et al.  Fetal heart rate monitoring: is it salvageable? , 2000, American journal of obstetrics and gynecology.

[8]  H. Thompson,et al.  A controlled trial of the differential effects of intrapartum fetal monitoring. , 1979, American journal of obstetrics and gynecology.

[9]  D. Elbourne,et al.  Mothers' views of continuous electronic fetal heart monitoring and intermittent auscultation in a randomized controlled trial. , 1985, Birth.

[10]  P. Renou,et al.  A controlled trial of fetal heart rate monitoring in a low-risk obstetric population. , 1981, American journal of obstetrics and gynecology.

[11]  M. Keirse Electronic Monitoring: Who Needs a Trojan Horse? , 1994 .

[12]  K. Shy,et al.  A randomized trial of electronic fetal monitoring in preterm labor: mothers' views. , 1989, Birth.

[13]  A. Haverkamp,et al.  Pediatric follow-up of a randomized controlled trial of intrapartum fetal monitoring techniques. , 1980, The Journal of pediatrics.

[14]  R J Parsons,et al.  An assessment of continuous fetal heart rate monitoring in labor. A randomized trial. , 1978, American journal of obstetrics and gynecology.

[15]  T C Chalmers,et al.  A method for assessing the quality of a randomized control trial. , 1981, Controlled clinical trials.

[16]  D B Swedlow,et al.  A multicenter controlled trial of fetal pulse oximetry in the intrapartum management of nonreassuring fetal heart rate patterns. , 2000, American journal of obstetrics and gynecology.

[17]  K. Mahomed,et al.  Randomised controlled trial of intrapartum fetal heart rate monitoring , 1994, BMJ.

[18]  I. Chalmers,et al.  The Dublin randomized controlled trial of intrapartum fetal heart rate monitoring. , 1985, American journal of obstetrics and gynecology.

[19]  E. Hennessy,et al.  CEREBRAL PALSY AMONG CHILDREN BORN DURING THE DUBLIN RANDOMISED TRIAL OF INTRAPARTUM MONITORING , 1989, The Lancet.

[20]  C. Cetrulo,et al.  The evaluation of continuous fetal heart rate monitoring in high-risk pregnancy. , 1976, American journal of obstetrics and gynecology.

[21]  S. Thacker,et al.  EFFICACY AND SAFETY OF INTRAPARTUM ELECTRONIC FETAL MONITORING: AN UPDATE , 1995, Obstetrics and gynecology.

[22]  J. Spencer Deaths related to intrapartum asphyxia , 1998, BMJ.

[23]  S. Thacker The efficacy of intrapartum electronic fetal monitoring. , 1987, American journal of obstetrics and gynecology.