Primary studies included in this systematic review

loading
10 articles (10 References) loading Revert Studify

Primary study

Unclassified

Fetal movement counting--maternal concern and experiences: a multicenter, randomized, controlled trial.

blocked
Journal Birth (Berkeley, Calif.)
Year 2012
Links Pubmed DOI

This article is included in 1 Systematic review Systematic reviews (1 reference)

Loading references information
BACKGROUND: Fetal movement counting may improve timely identification of decreased fetal activity and thereby contribute to prevent adverse pregnancy outcomes, but it may also contribute to maternal concern. This study aimed to test whether fetal movement counting increased maternal concern. METHODS: In a multicenter, controlled trial 1,013 women with a singleton pregnancy were randomly assigned either to perform daily fetal movement counting from pregnancy week 28 or to follow standard Norwegian antenatal care where fetal movement counting is not encouraged. The primary outcome was maternal concern, measured by the Cambridge Worry Scale. Analysis was by intention-to-treat. RESULTS: The means and SDs on Cambridge Worry Scale scores were 0.77 (0.55) and 0.90 (0.62) for the intervention and the control groups, respectively, a mean difference between the groups of 0.14 (95% CI: 0.06-0.21, p<0.001). Decreased fetal activity was of concern to 433 women once or more during pregnancy, 45 and 42 percent in the intervention and control groups, respectively (relative risk=1.1, 95% CI: 0.9-1.2). Seventy-nine percent of the women responded favorably to the use of counting charts. CONCLUSIONS: Women who performed fetal movement counting in the third trimester reported less concern than those in the control group. The frequency of maternal report of concern about decreased fetal activity was similar between the groups. Most women considered the use of a counting chart to be positive.

Primary study

Unclassified

Fetal movement counting improved identification of fetal growth restriction and perinatal outcomes--a multi-centre, randomized, controlled trial.

blocked
Journal PloS one
Year 2011
Links Pubmed DOI PubMed Central

This article is included in 1 Systematic review Systematic reviews (1 reference)

Loading references information
BACKGROUND: Fetal movement counting is a method used by the mother to quantify her baby's movements, and may prevent adverse pregnancy outcome by a timely evaluation of fetal health when the woman reports decreased fetal movements. We aimed to assess effects of fetal movement counting on identification of fetal pathology and pregnancy outcome. METHODOLOGY: In a multicentre, randomized, controlled trial, 1076 pregnant women with singleton pregnancies from an unselected population were assigned to either perform fetal movement counting from gestational week 28, or to receive standard antenatal care not including fetal movement counting (controls). Women were recruited from nine Norwegian hospitals during September 2007 through November 2009. Main outcome was a compound measure of fetal pathology and adverse pregnancy outcomes. Analysis was performed by intention-to-treat. PRINCIPAL FINDINGS: The frequency of the main outcome was equal in the groups; 63 of 433 (11.6%) in the intervention group, versus 53 of 532 (10.7%) in the control group [RR: 1.1 95% CI 0.7-1.5)]. The growth-restricted fetuses were more often identified prior to birth in the intervention group than in the control group; 20 of 23 fetuses (87.0%) versus 12 of 20 fetuses (60.0%), respectively, [RR: 1.5 (95% CI 1.0-2.1)]. In the intervention group two babies (0.4%) had Apgar scores <4 at 1 minute, versus 12 (2.3%) in the control group [RR: 0.2 (95% CI 0.04-0.7)]. The frequency of consultations for decreased fetal movement was 71 (13.1%) and 57 (10.7%) in the intervention and control groups, respectively [RR: 1.2 (95% CI 0.9-1.7)]. The frequency of interventions was similar in the groups. CONCLUSIONS: Maternal ability to detect clinically important changes in fetal activity seemed to be improved by fetal movement counting; there was an increased identification of fetal growth restriction and improved perinatal outcome, without inducing more consultations or obstetric interventions. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.govNCT00513942.

Primary study

Unclassified

Fetal movement counting--effects on maternal-fetal attachment: a multicenter randomized controlled trial.

blocked
Journal Birth (Berkeley, Calif.)
Year 2011
Links Pubmed DOI

This article is included in 1 Systematic review Systematic reviews (1 reference)

Loading references information
BACKGROUND:   Women presenting with decreased fetal movement have an increased risk of adverse pregnancy outcomes. Fetal movement counting may be associated with improvement in maternal-fetal attachment, which in turn, improves pregnancy outcome and postnatal mother-infant attachment. The study aim was to test whether maternal-fetal attachment differed between groups of mothers who systematically performed fetal movement counting and mothers who followed standard antenatal care where routine fetal movement counting was discouraged. METHODS:   In a multicenter, randomized trial, 1,123 women were assigned to either systematic fetal movement counting from pregnancy week 28 or to standard antenatal care. This study sample included primarily white, cohabiting, nonsmoking, and relatively well-educated women. The outcome measure was maternal-fetal attachment, measured by using the Prenatal Attachment Inventory. Analysis was by intention-to-treat. RESULTS:   No difference was found between the groups in the scores on prenatal attachment; the means and standard deviations were 59.54 (9.39) and 59.34 (9.75) [corrected] for the intervention and the control groups, respectively (p = 0.747). The mean difference between the groups was 0.20 (95% CI: -1.02-1.42) [corrected]. CONCLUSIONS:   Fetal movement counting in the third trimester does not stimulate antenatal maternal-fetal attachment. This result differs from a previous study where fetal movement counting improved maternal-fetal attachment. Further research with a focus on possible mediating factors such as levels of stress, concern, and other psychological factors is required.

Primary study

Unclassified

Compliance with a fetal movement chart by high risk patients

blocked
Journal American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology
Year 2011
Links DOI www.ajog.org

This article is included in 1 Systematic review Systematic reviews (1 reference)

Loading references information
OBJECTIVE: To compare the degree of compliance with a novel fetal movement chart (FMC) by high risk patients versus the standard ‘‘count-to-ten’’ charting method of fetal activity monitoring. STUDY DESIGN: Prospective randomized trial of 1,400 high-risk patients presenting for prenatal care at a single institution between October 1999 and March 2000. Patients with singleton gestations were randomly assigned to use either the ‘‘count-to-ten’’ charting method of fetal activity monitoring or the FMC proposed by the Latin American Center for Perinatology and Human Development (CLAP Group). The FMC records fetal movements during 30 minutes following meals and before bedtime at night; a registry of ten or more movements per day is considered normal. Patients were defined as compliant with the method if they brought a completed chart to all subsequent visits during a minimum follow-up of one month. By means of direct interviews, patients were asked to identify the main advantage and disadvantage (in case of abandonment) of the assigned chart. Compliance with regimens was compared between the 2 groups using chi square tests. RESULTS: Demographic characteristics were similar between groups. Sixtyfour percent (448/700) of the FMC group were compliant recording fetal activity compared with 91% (638/700) of the ‘‘count-to-ten’’ group (p < 0.001). Non-interference with daily life activities was the main advantage of using the ‘‘count-to-ten’’ chart. No cases of intrauterine demise occurred in either group and rates of intervention based on either method were similar. CONCLUSION: High risk patients were more compliant with the standard ‘‘count-to-ten’’ method of fetal activity monitoring than with the FMC. This easy and cheap technology should not be disregarded in obstetric practice in developing countries.

Primary study

Unclassified

Compliance with a fetal movement chart by high-risk obstetric patients in a Peruvian hospital.

blocked
Journal American journal of perinatology
Year 2007
Links Pubmed DOI

This article is included in 2 Systematic reviews Systematic reviews (2 references)

Loading references information
We sought to determine the degree of compliance with a novel fetal movement chart (FMC) by high-risk patients versus the standard so-called count-to-10 method. This prospective trial included 1400 high-risk patients. Women with singleton gestations were randomly assigned to use either the count-to-10 chart or a FMC proposed by the Latin American Center for Perinatology (CLAP). Advantages and disadvantages were identified by patients. Compliance with regimens was measured and compared between the two groups. Demographic characteristics were similar. Compliance in the CLAP group (448 of 700) was lower than in the count-to-10 group (638 of 700; 64 versus 91%; P < 0.0001). The main advantage of the count-to-10 chart was lack of interference with daily activities. No intrauterine demises occurred in either group. High-risk patients were more compliant with the standard count-to-10 charting method than with the novel FMC. The count-to-10 method is an easy and inexpensive tool for fetal monitoring and should continue to be used in obstetric practice.

Primary study

Unclassified

Fetal movement counting: which method?

Journal MCN. The American journal of maternal child nursing
Year 1994
Links Pubmed DOI

This article is included in 1 Systematic review Systematic reviews (1 reference)

Loading references information

Primary study

Unclassified

A comparison of compliance, acceptability of two fetal movement counting methods

blocked
Journal American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology
Year 1992
Links DOI www.ajog.org

This article is included in 1 Systematic review Systematic reviews (1 reference)

Loading references information

Primary study

Unclassified

The effect of fetal movement counting on maternal attachment to fetus.

blocked
Journal American journal of obstetrics and gynecology
Year 1991
Links Pubmed DOI

This article is included in 2 Systematic reviews Systematic reviews (2 references)

Loading references information
The effect of fetal movement counting on maternal attachment to fetus was investigated in 213 women with uncomplicated singleton pregnancies at 28 to 32 weeks' gestation. Women were randomized into those who counted fetal movements using the Sadovsky (n = 63) or Cardiff (n = 62) charts and controls (n = 88). After 1 month of fetal movement counting, the Cranley 24-item scale with five subscales was used as a measure of maternal-fetal attachment. Univariate analysis revealed a statistically significant increase in total attachment scores and in each of the five attachment subscales among women who counted fetal movements (p less than 0.0001). Turkey's studentized range test confirmed significant differences between each of the Sadovsky and Cardiff groups compared with controls (p less than 0.05). Our study suggests that fetal movement counting may enhance the maternal-fetal attachment process.

Primary study

Unclassified

Monitoring of normal pregnancies by daily fetal movement registration or hormone assessment. A random allocation study

blocked
Journal Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology
Year 1990
Links informahealthcare.com

This article is included in 1 Systematic review Systematic reviews (1 reference)

Loading references information
A random allocation study was performed to compare the clinical value of daily fetal movement counting with that of hormone assessment (oestriol and hPL) in the monitoring of apparently normal pregnancies for fetal well-being. Patients with known risk factors and those in whom complications occurred during the study were excluded. In the group counting fetal movements, 577 women recorded 35 189 daily counts, for a mean of 70 days each. The group evaluated with hormone assessments had an average of five determinations of serum total oestriol and human placental lactogen. Patient compliances were 86·8 and 99·5 per cent, respectively. Women having hormone assessments were seen more often as outpatients but the frequencies of hospital admission were identical. Other aspects of management did not differ. Women making fetal movement counts more frequently designated their monitoring procedure as troublesome or expressed insecurity. The number of patients studied was inadequate to assess the methods for ...

Primary study

Unclassified

Routine formal fetal movement counting and risk of antepartum late death in normally formed singletons.

Journal Lancet
Year 1989
Links Pubmed DOI

This article is included in 2 Systematic reviews Systematic reviews (2 references)

Loading references information
The routine recommendation to women to count fetal movements daily during late pregnancy for the prevention of antepartum late fetal death in normally formed singletons has been evaluated. 68,000 women were randomly allocated within thirty-three pairs of clusters either to a policy of routine counting or to standard care, which might involve selective use of formal counting or informal noting of movements. Antepartum death rates for normally formed singletons were similar in the two groups, regardless of cause of prior risk status. Despite the counting policy, most of these fetuses were dead by the time the mothers received medical attention. The study does not rule out a beneficial effect, but at best, the policy would have to be used by about 1250 women to prevent 1 unexplained antepartum late fetal death, and an adverse effect is just as likely. In addition, formal routine counting would use considerable extra resources.