Computerised interpretation of fetal heart rate during labour (INFANT): a randomised controlled trial

Summary Background Continuous electronic fetal heart-rate monitoring is widely used during labour, and computerised interpretation could increase its usefulness. We aimed to establish whether the addition of decision-support software to assist in the interpretation of cardiotocographs affected the number of poor neonatal outcomes. Methods In this unmasked randomised controlled trial, we recruited women in labour aged 16 years or older having continuous electronic fetal monitoring, with a singleton or twin pregnancy, and at 35 weeks' gestation or more at 24 maternity units in the UK and Ireland. They were randomly assigned (1:1) to decision support with the INFANT system or no decision support via a computer-generated stratified block randomisation schedule. The primary outcomes were poor neonatal outcome (intrapartum stillbirth or early neonatal death excluding lethal congenital anomalies, or neonatal encephalopathy, admission to the neonatal unit within 24 h for ≥48 h with evidence of feeding difficulties, respiratory illness, or encephalopathy with evidence of compromise at birth), and developmental assessment at age 2 years in a subset of surviving children. Analyses were done by intention to treat. This trial is completed and is registered with the ISRCTN Registry, number 98680152. Findings Between Jan 6, 2010, and Aug 31, 2013, 47 062 women were randomly assigned (23 515 in the decision-support group and 23 547 in the no-decision-support group) and 46 042 were analysed (22 987 in the decision-support group and 23 055 in the no-decision-support group). We noted no difference in the incidence of poor neonatal outcome between the groups—172 (0·7%) babies in the decision-support group compared with 171 (0·7%) babies in the no-decision-support group (adjusted risk ratio 1·01, 95% CI 0·82–1·25). At 2 years, no significant differences were noted in terms of developmental assessment. Interpretation Use of computerised interpretation of cardiotocographs in women who have continuous electronic fetal monitoring in labour does not improve clinical outcomes for mothers or babies. Funding National Institute for Health Research.

[1]  Amy Salter,et al.  The International Journal of Biostatistics Relative Risk Estimation in Randomized Controlled Trials : A Comparison of Methods for Independent Observations , 2011 .

[2]  N. Marlow,et al.  Developmental assessment of preterm infants at 2 years: validity of parent reports , 2008, Developmental medicine and child neurology.

[3]  Steve Cunningham,et al.  Data Monitoring Committee , 2015 .

[4]  Ann Johnson,et al.  Case-Control Study of Intrapartum Care, Cerebral Palsy, and Perinatal Death , 1994 .

[5]  K. Leveno,et al.  Pathologic Fetal Acidemia , 1991, Obstetrics and gynecology.

[6]  R D Keith,et al.  A multicentre comparative study of 17 experts and an intelligent computer system for managing labour using the cardiotocogram , 1995, British journal of obstetrics and gynaecology.

[7]  J. Westgate,et al.  Umbilical cord blood gas analysis at delivery: a time for quality data , 1994, British journal of obstetrics and gynaecology.

[8]  Nick Freemantle,et al.  Composite outcomes in randomized trials: greater precision but with greater uncertainty? , 2003, JAMA.

[9]  S. Pocock When (not) to stop a clinical trial for benefit. , 2005, JAMA.

[10]  C. Vincent,et al.  Obstetric accidents: a review of 64 cases. , 1990, BMJ.

[11]  A Costa-Pereira,et al.  A multicentre comparative study of 17 experts and an intelligent computer system for managing labour using the cardiotocogram , 1996, British journal of obstetrics and gynaecology.

[12]  S. Cnattingius,et al.  Severe asphyxia due to delivery-related malpractice in Sweden 1990–2005 , 2008, BJOG : an international journal of obstetrics and gynaecology.

[13]  S. M. Kinsella,et al.  Urgency of caesarean section: A new classification , 2000, Journal of the Royal Society of Medicine.

[14]  H W Jongsma,et al.  Percentiles for gas values in human umbilical cord blood. , 1983, European journal of obstetrics, gynecology, and reproductive biology.

[15]  S. Arulkumaran,et al.  Time to optimise and enforce training in interpretation of intrapartum cardiotocograph , 2016, BJOG : an international journal of obstetrics and gynaecology.

[16]  Stuart J Pocock,et al.  The Primary Outcome Fails - What Next? , 2016, The New England journal of medicine.

[17]  N. Marlow,et al.  Validation of a parent report measure of cognitive development in very preterm infants , 2004, Developmental medicine and child neurology.

[18]  K. Murphy,et al.  Birth asphyxia and the intrapartum cardiotocograph , 1990, British journal of obstetrics and gynaecology.

[19]  J. Westgate,et al.  Plymouth randomized trial of cardiotocogram only versus ST waveform plus cardiotocogram for intrapartum monitoring in 2400 cases. , 1993, American journal of obstetrics and gynecology.

[20]  G A Dildy,et al.  Umbilical cord blood gas analysis at delivery. , 1996, American journal of obstetrics and gynecology.

[21]  P. Brocklehurst A study of an intelligent system to support decision making in the management of labour using the cardiotocograph – the INFANT study protocol , 2016, BMC Pregnancy and Childbirth.

[22]  Z. Alfirevic,et al.  Continuous cardiotocography (CTG) as a form of electronic fetal monitoring (EFM) for fetal assessment during labour. , 2017, The Cochrane database of systematic reviews.

[23]  João Bernardes,et al.  Central Fetal Monitoring With and Without Computer Analysis: A Randomized Controlled Trial. , 2017, Obstetrics and gynecology.

[24]  A. Johnson Follow up studies: a case for a standard minimum data set , 1997, Archives of disease in childhood. Fetal and neonatal edition.