Uterine Monitoring Techniques from Patients' and Users' Perspectives

Abstract

Objective To evaluate preferences from patients and users on 3 uterine monitoring techniques, during labor.

Study Design Women in term labor were simultaneously monitored with the intrauterine pressure catheter, the external tocodynamometer, and the electrohysterograph. Postpartum, these women filled out a questionnaire evaluating their preferences and important aspects. Nurses completed a questionnaire evaluating users' preferences.

Results Of all 52 participating women, 80.8% preferred the electrohysterograph, 17.3% the intrauterine pressure catheter and 1.9% the external tocodynamometer. For these women, the electrohysterograph scored best regarding application and presence during labor (p < 0.001). Most important aspects were “least likely to harm” and “least discomfort”. Of 57 nurses, 40.4% preferred the electrohysterograph, 35.1% the external tocodynamometer, and 24.6% had no preference, or replied that their preference is subject to situation and patient.

Conclusion Patients prefer the electrohysterograph over the external tocodynamometer and the intrauterine pressure catheter, while healthcare providers report ambiguous results.

Keywords

cardiotocography (MeSH) - electrohysterograph - external tocodynamometer - intrauterine pressure catheter - uterine contraction (MeSH) - uterine monitoring (MeSH) - patient preference (MeSH) - user preference

• References

• 1 Bakker JJH, Janssen PF, van Halem K. , et al. Internal versus external tocodynamometry during induced or augmented labour. (Review) Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2013; (08) CD006947
• 2 Bakker JJ, Verhoeven CJ, Janssen PF. , et al. Outcomes after internal versus external tocodynamometry for monitoring labor. N Engl J Med 2010; 362 (04) 306-313
• 3 Euliano TY, Nguyen MT, Darmanjian S. , et al. Monitoring uterine activity during labor: a comparison of 3 methods. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2013; 208 (01) 66.e1-66.e6
• 4 Hadar E, Biron-Shental T, Gavish O, Raban O, Yogev Y. A comparison between electrical uterine monitor, tocodynamometer and intra uterine pressure catheter for uterine activity in labor. J Matern Fetal Neonatal Med 2015; 28 (12) 1367-1374
• 5 Vlemminx MWC, Thijssen KMJ, Bajlekov GI, Dieleman JP, Van Der Hout-Van Der Jagt MB, Oei SG. Electrohysterography for uterine monitoring during term labour compared to external tocodynamometry and intra-uterine pressure catheter. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol 2017; 215: 197-205
• 6 Panelli D, Teplick F, McCarthy M, Hebert S. Comparing methods to secure external fetal-monitoring devices. MCN Am J Matern Child Nurs 2014; 39 (01) 41-47 , quiz 48–49
• 7 Bakker PCAM, Zikkenheimer M, van Geijn HP. The quality of intrapartum uterine activity monitoring. J Perinat Med 2008; 36 (03) 197-201
• 8 Devedeux D, Marque C, Mansour S, Germain G, Duchêne J. Uterine electromyography: a critical review. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1993; 169 (06) 1636-1653
• 9 Tam HW, Webster JG. Minimizing electrode motion artifact by skin abrasion. IEEE Trans Biomed Eng 1977; 24 (02) 134-139
• 10 Bakker PCAM, Van Rijswijk S, van Geijn HP. Uterine activity monitoring during labor. J Perinat Med 2007; 35 (06) 468-477
• 11 Wilmink FA, Wilms FF, Heydanus R, Mol BWJ, Papatsonis DNM. Fetal complications after placement of an intrauterine pressure catheter: a report of two cases and review of the literature. J Matern Fetal Neonatal Med 2008; 21 (12) 880-883
• 12 Rothman KJ, Boice JD. Epidemiological Analysis with a Programmable Calculator. USA: NIH Publication; 1979
• 13 Wilson EB. Probable inference, the law of succession, and statistical inference. J Am Stat Assoc 1927; 22 (158) 209-212
• 14 Fetal monitoring. Guidelines; perinatology. Dutch Society for Obstetrics and Gynecology. Version 30. 2015
• 15 Ayres-de-Campos D, Spong C, Chandraharan E. FIGO consensus guideline on intrapartum fetal monitoring. Int J Gynaecol Obstet 2015; 131( (01) 13-24
• 16 American College of Obstetrics and Gynecology Committee on Practice Bulletins-Obstetrics. ACOG practice bulletin number 49, December 2003: dystocia and augmentation of labor. Obstet Gynecol 2003; 102 (49) 1445-1454
• 17 Namm JP. Primum Non Nocere: Ethical Implications in Medical Innovation. Am J Bioeth 2016; 16 (07) 72-73
• 18 Rood KM. Complications associated with insertion of intrauterine pressure catheters: an unusual case of uterine hypertonicity and uterine perforation resulting in fetal distress after insertion of an intrauterine pressure catheter. Case Rep Obstet Gynecol 2012; 2012: 517461
• 19 Euliano TY, Nguyen MT, Darmanjian S, Busowski JD, Euliano N, Gregg AR. Monitoring uterine activity during labor: clinician interpretation of electrohysterography versus intrauterine pressure catheter and tocodynamometry. Am J Perinatol 2016; 33 (09) 831-838
• 20 Cohen W, Hayes-Gill B, Hassan S. , et al. Accuracy and reliability of uterine contraction identification using abdominal surface electrodes. Clin Med Insights Womens Health 2012; 5: 65-75
• 21 Euliano T, Skowronski M, Marossero D, Shuster J, Edwards R. Prediction of intrauterine pressure waveform from transabdominal electrohysterography. J Matern Fetal Neonatal Med 2006; 19 (12) 811-816
• 22 Simpson KR, James DC. Effects of oxytocin-induced uterine hyperstimulation during labor on fetal oxygen status and fetal heart rate patterns. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2008; 199 (01) 34.e1-34.e5
• 23 Bakker PCAM, van Geijn HP. Uterine activity: implications for the condition of the fetus. J Perinat Med 2008; 36 (01) 30-37
• 24 Cohen WR, Schifrin BS. Medical negligence lawsuits relating to labor and delivery. Clin Perinatol 2007; 34 (02) 345-360 , vii–viii
• 25 Lawrence A, Lewis L, Hofmeyr GJ, Dowswell T, Styles C. Maternal positions and mobility during first stage labour. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2013;
• 26 Reinhard J, Hayes-Gill BR, Schiermeier S. , et al. Uterine activity monitoring during a multi-centre, blinded two-way trial of external tocodynamometry against electrohysterography. Z Geburtshilfe Neonatol 2011; 215 (05) 199-204
• 27 Rogers EM. Diffusion of Innovations. 5th ed. New York, NY: Simon and Schuster; 2003