Fungibility, accessibility and clinical utility of remote electronic fetal monitoring in improving maternal emotional status compared with traditional method: A multicenter prospective cohort analysis.

IF 2.6 3区 医学 Q2 OBSTETRICS & GYNECOLOGY
Yu Pan, Zi Chen, Lujiao Chen, Lingli Ning, Huimin Wan, Ting Chen, Haihong Zhang, Ying Jiang, Qiong Luo
{"title":"Fungibility, accessibility and clinical utility of remote electronic fetal monitoring in improving maternal emotional status compared with traditional method: A multicenter prospective cohort analysis.","authors":"Yu Pan, Zi Chen, Lujiao Chen, Lingli Ning, Huimin Wan, Ting Chen, Haihong Zhang, Ying Jiang, Qiong Luo","doi":"10.1002/ijgo.15917","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>Supported by remote signal processing techniques and wireless communication technology, remote electronic fetal monitoring (REFM) has emerged as a promising alternative to traditional electronic fetal monitoring (TEFM) in clinical practice. The aim of this study was to evaluate the comparability, accessibility, and clinical utility of REFM in contrast to TEFM.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This was a multicenter prospective cohort study. A cohort of 2900 pregnant women were enrolled from three medical centers between June 1, 2021 and June 31, 2022. Among them, 800 utilized REFM, with 760 of them completing the self-rating anxiety scale (SAS) and self-rating depression scale (SDS) assessments using the devices for 1 month. The control group comprised 2100 pregnant women who did not use REFM. Additionally, 80 pregnant women concurrently employed both REFM and TEFM, and their respective curve coincidence rates were determined through curve fitting. Primary outcomes encompassed pregnancy outcomes in both groups, average curve coincidence rates between REFM and TEFM, as well as SDS and SAS scores.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Among the 760 pregnant women who completed SAS and SDS assessments, their average SAS scores before and after 1 month of REFM usage were 43.09 ± 8.04 and 41.58 ± 6.59, respectively. Concurrently, the average SDS scores before and after 1 month of REFM usage were 45.45 ± 9.60 and 44.80 ± 9.17, respectively. A statistically significant decrease was observed in SAS scores (P = 0.005), whereas no significant difference was noted in SDS scores (P = 0.340). Furthermore, a statistically significant difference in the rate of adverse pregnancy outcomes (neonatal asphyxia) emerged between the two groups, those who employed REFM and those who did not (P = 0.021). In the subset of 80 pregnant women employing both REFM and TEFM, all 80 results showed precise congruence between the two methods. The average coincidence rate was determined to be 79.45% ± 12.64%.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>REFM contributes to improved pregnancy outcomes and exhibits a high level of concordance with TEFM, thereby accurately reflecting the quality of fetal heart monitoring. Additionally, REFM effectively mitigates pregnant women's anxiety. Thus, REFM demonstrates comparability, accessibility, and clinical utility.</p>","PeriodicalId":14164,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Gynecology & Obstetrics","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.6000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Journal of Gynecology & Obstetrics","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1002/ijgo.15917","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"OBSTETRICS & GYNECOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objective: Supported by remote signal processing techniques and wireless communication technology, remote electronic fetal monitoring (REFM) has emerged as a promising alternative to traditional electronic fetal monitoring (TEFM) in clinical practice. The aim of this study was to evaluate the comparability, accessibility, and clinical utility of REFM in contrast to TEFM.

Methods: This was a multicenter prospective cohort study. A cohort of 2900 pregnant women were enrolled from three medical centers between June 1, 2021 and June 31, 2022. Among them, 800 utilized REFM, with 760 of them completing the self-rating anxiety scale (SAS) and self-rating depression scale (SDS) assessments using the devices for 1 month. The control group comprised 2100 pregnant women who did not use REFM. Additionally, 80 pregnant women concurrently employed both REFM and TEFM, and their respective curve coincidence rates were determined through curve fitting. Primary outcomes encompassed pregnancy outcomes in both groups, average curve coincidence rates between REFM and TEFM, as well as SDS and SAS scores.

Results: Among the 760 pregnant women who completed SAS and SDS assessments, their average SAS scores before and after 1 month of REFM usage were 43.09 ± 8.04 and 41.58 ± 6.59, respectively. Concurrently, the average SDS scores before and after 1 month of REFM usage were 45.45 ± 9.60 and 44.80 ± 9.17, respectively. A statistically significant decrease was observed in SAS scores (P = 0.005), whereas no significant difference was noted in SDS scores (P = 0.340). Furthermore, a statistically significant difference in the rate of adverse pregnancy outcomes (neonatal asphyxia) emerged between the two groups, those who employed REFM and those who did not (P = 0.021). In the subset of 80 pregnant women employing both REFM and TEFM, all 80 results showed precise congruence between the two methods. The average coincidence rate was determined to be 79.45% ± 12.64%.

Conclusion: REFM contributes to improved pregnancy outcomes and exhibits a high level of concordance with TEFM, thereby accurately reflecting the quality of fetal heart monitoring. Additionally, REFM effectively mitigates pregnant women's anxiety. Thus, REFM demonstrates comparability, accessibility, and clinical utility.

与传统方法相比,远程电子胎儿监护在改善产妇情绪状态方面的可行性、可及性和临床实用性:多中心前瞻性队列分析。
目的:在远程信号处理技术和无线通信技术的支持下,远程电子胎儿监护(REFM)已成为临床实践中替代传统电子胎儿监护(TEFM)的一种有前途的方法。本研究旨在评估远程电子胎儿监护与传统电子胎儿监护的可比性、可及性和临床实用性:这是一项多中心前瞻性队列研究。方法:这是一项多中心前瞻性队列研究。2021 年 6 月 1 日至 2022 年 6 月 31 日期间,三个医疗中心共招募了 2900 名孕妇。其中 800 人使用了 REFM,其中 760 人使用该设备完成了为期 1 个月的焦虑自评量表(SAS)和抑郁自评量表(SDS)评估。对照组由 2100 名未使用 REFM 的孕妇组成。此外,80 名孕妇同时使用了 REFM 和 TEFM,通过曲线拟合确定了它们各自的曲线重合率。主要结果包括两组孕妇的妊娠结局、REFM 和 TEFM 的平均曲线重合率以及 SDS 和 SAS 评分:在完成 SAS 和 SDS 评估的 760 名孕妇中,使用 REFM 1 个月前后的平均 SAS 分数分别为 43.09 ± 8.04 和 41.58 ± 6.59。同时,使用 REFM 1 个月前后的 SDS 平均得分分别为 45.45 ± 9.60 和 44.80 ± 9.17。从统计学角度看,SAS 分数明显下降(P = 0.005),而 SDS 分数无明显差异(P = 0.340)。此外,采用 REFM 和未采用 REFM 的两组孕妇在不良妊娠结局(新生儿窒息)的发生率上存在明显差异(P = 0.021)。在同时采用 REFM 和 TEFM 的 80 名孕妇中,所有 80 项结果均显示两种方法精确一致。平均吻合率为 79.45% ± 12.64%:结论:REFM 有助于改善妊娠结局,并与 TEFM 高度一致,从而准确反映了胎心监护的质量。此外,REFM 还能有效缓解孕妇的焦虑情绪。因此,REFM 具有可比性、可及性和临床实用性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
5.80
自引率
2.60%
发文量
493
审稿时长
3-6 weeks
期刊介绍: The International Journal of Gynecology & Obstetrics publishes articles on all aspects of basic and clinical research in the fields of obstetrics and gynecology and related subjects, with emphasis on matters of worldwide interest.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信