Screening with Doppler velocimetry in labor

Feinkind, Leonard; Abulafia, Ovadia; Delke, Isaac; Feldman, Joseph; Minkoff, Howard

doi:10.1016/0002-9378(89)90398-0

Cited by 24 publications

(5 citation statements)

References 16 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The full manuscripts of all articles considered to be relevant by any one observer were obtained for review. Of the 19 articles, 18 were published in English 31–48 and one in French 49 . Two articles were identified through examining the reference lists of the known primary publications or obtained from personal knowledges 50,51 .…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Agreement concerning eligibility was 100% (kappa 1.0). The reasons for excluding the remaining 15 manuscripts were inability to extract data to construct the 2 × 2, table 31,35,39,41,48,50 , inappropriate outcome measures 43,46,47,52 , and inappropriate study design 49,53 . Out of the eight studies selected for overview 36–38,40,42,44,51 data was available on Apgar score at 1 minute in four studies 36–37,42,44 , Apgar score at 5 minutes in four studies 36,40,42,51 , small for gestational age infants in five studies 37,40,42,45,51 .…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…We have been unable to include any unpublished studies into our overview and our electronic searches failed to identify two additional relevant articles 52,53 for review of their full manuscripts. Furthermore, we did not write to the authors in the original articles to obtain additional information in those studies in which we have been unable to extract data to construct the 2 × 2 tabble 31–35,39,41,48,50 or where irrelevant outcome measures have been reported 43,46,52 , in order to calculate the likelihood ratios for the outcome measures selected for this review.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Intrapartum umbilical artery Doppler velocimetry as a predictor of adverse perinatal outcome: a systematic review

Farrell

Chien

Gordon

1999

BJOG

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objective To evaluate the diagnostic prediction of intrapartum umbilical artery Doppler velocimetry for adverse perinatal outcomes using systematic quantitative overview of the available literature.Design Online searching of MEDLINE database (January 1966-September 1997, scanning of bibliography of known primary and review articles, review of recent journal issues and that from personal files. Study selection, assessment of study quality and data extraction were all performed in duplicate under masked conditions.Participants 2700 women (unselected, low, high, and combined low and high obstetric risk populations) included in eight studies selected for meta-analyses. Main outcome measuresLikelihood ratios (LRs) for positive and negative test results were generated for the following outcome measures: Apgar scores c 7 at 1 and 5 minute following delivery, small for gestational age fetus; intrapartum fetal heart rate abnormality, umbilical arterial acidosis at delivery; and caesarean section for fetal distress.Results For Apgar score c 7 at 1 minute following delivery, the pooled LR was 2.5 (95% CI 1.7-3.7) for a positive test and 1.0 (95% CI 0.9-1-1) for a negative test result. A positive test predicted an Apgar score < 7 at 5 minute following delivery with a pooled LR of 1.3 (95% CI 0.4-4-1) while a negative test had a pooled LR of 1.0 (95% CI 0.8-1.2). For the prediction of a small for gestational age fetus, the pooled LR was 3.4 (95% CI 2-3-5.1) for a positive test and 0.9 (95% CI 0-8-1.0) for a negative test. The prediction for fetal heart rate abnormality during labour was similarly disappointing: the pooled LR for a positive test result was 1.4 (95% CI 0.9-1.2) whereas a negative test result generated a pooled LR of 0.9 (95% CI 0.9-1 e0). With umbilical acidosis at delivery, the pooled LR was 1.6 (95% CI 1.1-2.5) for a positive test and 1.1 (95% CI 1-0-1.2) for a negative test. The LRs for the prediction of caesarean section for fetal distress were 4.1 (95% CI 2.7-6.2) for a positive test result and 0-9 (95% CI 0-8-1.0) for a negative test result.Conclusion Intrapartum umbilical artery Doppler velocimetry is a poor predictor of adverse perinatal outcomes.

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Intrapartum umbilical artery Doppler velocimetry as a predictor of adverse perinatal outcome: a systematic review

Farrell

Chien

Gordon

1999

BJOG

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…After reading all titles and abstracts, 3743 were excluded because they were obviously not about the labour admission test. Eighteen titles were identified by the electronic search, 1,5,20–35 five by hand searching the reference lists 6,10,36–38 and two by personal field knowledge 39,40 . Twenty‐five studies (3 randomised controlled and 22 observational studies) were left for further assessment (Fig.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Of the 22 studies identified, 1 was excluded because it was not about the labour admission test, 5 6 because the study population and/or outcome measures were not relevant and could not be transformed or recoded, 6,26,29,36,37,40 1 because of double publication, 20 1 because data could not be entered into 2 × 2 tables 22 and 2 because of poor study quality 30,32 . Of the 11 observational studies included, 3 were from Singapore, 1,23,28 3 from Great Britain, 24,25,34 4 from USA 10,11,35,38 and 1 from Norway 21 .…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Prognostic value of the labour admission test and its effectiveness compared with auscultation only: a systematic review

Blix

Reinar

Klovning

et al. 2005

BJOG

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Population Pregnant women in labour. Three randomised controlled trials including 11,259 women and 11 observational studies including 5831 women. Methods Literature searches in Medline, EMBASE, CINAHL, SweMed, The Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, reference lists from identified studies and contact with experts. Main outcome measures Obstetric interventions (augmentation of labour, continuous electronic fetal monitoring, epidural analgesia, fetal blood sampling and operative deliveries) and neonatal outcomes (perinatal mortality, Apgar score, seizures, resuscitation and admission to neonatal unit). Results Meta-analyses of the controlled trials found that women randomised to the labour admission test were more likely to have minor obstetric interventions like epidural analgesia [relative risk (RR) 1.2, 95% confidence interval (95% CI) 1.1-1.4], continuous electronic fetal monitoring (RR 1.3, 95% CI 1.2 -1.5) and fetal blood sampling (RR 1.3, 95% CI 1.1 -1.5) compared with women randomised to auscultation on admission. There were no significant differences in any of the other outcomes. From the observational studies, prognostic value for various outcomes was found to be generally poor. Likelihood ratio (LR) for a positive test was above 10 in 2 of 28 single outcomes and between 5 and 10 in six outcomes. Conclusions There is no evidence supporting that the labour admission test is beneficial in low risk women.

show abstract

Intrapartale Dopplersonographie

Gnirs

Schneider

Dopplersonographie in Geburtshilfe Und Gynäkologie

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Screening with Doppler velocimetry in labor

Cited by 24 publications

References 16 publications

Intrapartum umbilical artery Doppler velocimetry as a predictor of adverse perinatal outcome: a systematic review

Intrapartum umbilical artery Doppler velocimetry as a predictor of adverse perinatal outcome: a systematic review

Prognostic value of the labour admission test and its effectiveness compared with auscultation only: a systematic review

Intrapartale Dopplersonographie

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About