Comparison between Figo and Nichd Criteria in Assessing Fetal Heart Rate



Abstract Views
1247

Downloads
1304

Citations

Share

##plugins.themes.bootstrap3.article.sidebar##

Submitted Mar 18, 2022
Published May 17, 2023
10.24018/ejmed.2023.5.3.1284

Abstract viewed = 1247 times

Table of Contents

##plugins.themes.bootstrap3.article.main##

Assessing the fetal heart rate (FHR) is one of the most important aspects of antenatal care and delivery. Fetal heart rate is one indicator of fetal well-being. Assessing FHR can be done by auscultation or by using a cardiotocography (KTG) device, also known as an Electronic Fetal Monitor (EFM). In interpreting the results of the cardiotocography examination, there are two criteria used to interpret the condition of the fetus, namely the criteria issued by the International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics (FIGO) and the National Institute of Child Health and Human Development (NICHD).

Keywords: comparison fetal heart rate FIGO criteria NICDH criteria

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

  1. Shrimpton R. Global policy and programme guidance on maternal nutrition: what exists, the mechanisms for providing it, and how to improve them?. Paediatr Perinat Epidemiol. 2012; 26 Suppl 1: 315-325.
    DOI  |   Google Scholar
  2. Voicu I, Ménigot S, Kouamé D, Girault JM. New estimators and guidelines for better use of fetal heart rate estimators with Doppler ultrasound devices. Comput Math Methods Med. 2014; 2014: 784862.
    DOI  |   Google Scholar
  3. Martis R, Emilia O, Nurdiati DS, Brown J. Intermittent auscultation (IA) of fetal heart rate in labour for fetal well-being. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2017; 2(2): CD008680.
    DOI  |   Google Scholar
  4. Ayres-de-Campos D, Spong C, Chandraharan E. FIGO consensus guidelines on intrapartum fetal monitoring: Cardiotocography. International Journal of Gynecology & Obstetrics. 2015; 131(1): 13-24.
    DOI  |   Google Scholar
  5. Macones G, Hankins G, Spong C, Hauth J, Moore T. The 2008 National Institute of Child Health and Human Development Workshop Report on Electronic Fetal Monitoring: Update on Definitions, Interpretation, and Research Guidelines. Journal of Obstetric, Gynecologic & Neonatal Nursing. 2008; 37(5): 510-515.
    DOI  |   Google Scholar
  6. Garabedian C, Butruille L, Drumez E, Servan Schreiber E, Bartolo S, Bleu G et al. Inter-observer reliability of 4 fetal heart rate classifications. Journal of Gynecology Obstetrics and Human Reproduction. 2017; 46(2): 131-13.
    DOI  |   Google Scholar


Most read articles by the same author(s)

1 2 3 4 > >>