• About Us
    • Contact Us
    • Login
    • ObGFirst
  • Alerts
  • OB
  • 2T US Atlas
  • The Genome
  • GYN
    • GYN
    • Sexual Health
  • Primary Care
  • Your Practice
  • GrandRounds
  • My Bookshelf
  • COVID-19
About Us Contact Us Login ObGFirst
  • Alerts
  • OB
  • 2T US Atlas
  • The Genome
  • GYN
    • GYN
    • Sexual Health
  • Primary Care
  • Your Practice
  • GrandRounds
  • My Bookshelf
  • COVID-19
Grand Rounds

How Well Can Experienced Clinicians Identify Pending Neonatal Encephalopathy Using EFM?

image_pdfFavoriteLoadingFavorite

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE:

  • The clinical utility of EFM has been challenged, but there is evidence that it may reduce neonatal seizures
  • Farquhar et al. (JAMA Netw Open., 2020) explored whether experienced clinicians could detect and develop action plans for abnormal FH tracings that were recorded during the next to last hour before birth of infants who were diagnosed with moderate to severe neonatal encephalopathy (NE)

METHODS:

  • Case-control study (New Zealand)
  • Participants
    • Practicing, experienced obstetricians and midwives
    • Completed a fetal surveillance education program within 2 years
  • Neonatal encephalopathy (NE)
    • Defined as “disordered neonatal brain function within the first week of life in term infants”
  • Study design
    • Participants were masked to the perinatal outcome | Provided with clinical details and 1 hour of FH tracing from 2 hours before birth
    • Case group: Tracings from neonates with NE and evidence of birth hypoxia and without an acute perinatal event
    • Control group: Tracings from neonates without NE or birth hypoxia
    • Clinicians recommended a plan based on their assessment
    • A year later, clinician assessors were asked to relook at the tracings
  • Statistical analysis
    • 80% power at a significance level of .05 to detect a difference in rates of immediate response for abnormal tracing | Assumption based on difference in rates (controls vs cases): 1% and 15%, 5% and 25%, and 10% and 35%
  • Primary outcomes
    • Sensitivity for detection of hypoxia: Proportion of cases where tracing was read as abnormal
    • Sensitivity for appropriate management of hypoxia: Proportion of cases where assessors developed an immediate plan (e.g. immediate delivery by cesarean or instrumental delivery) dependent on clinical findings
    • Specificity: Proportion of controls where assessors rated a tracing as normal and made no plan for immediate action

RESULTS:

  • 10 clinicians participated
  • Infant characteristics
    • Cases: 35 infants | Mean (SD) gestational age, 40 (1.4) weeks | 45.7% cesarean
    • Controls: 105 infants | Mean (SD) gestational age, 39.4 (1.2) weeks | 21% cesarean
  • Detection rate for hypoxia across all assessors: Mean (range) was
    • Sensitivity: 75% (63% to 91%)
    • Specificity: 67% (53% to 77%)
  • Recommendation for appropriate management across all assessors: Mean (range) was
    • Sensitivity: 41% (23% to 57%)
    • Specificity: 87% (65% to 99%)
  • A sensitivity analysis was performed that only included assessors with 80% or more interassessor agreement
    • Mean (range) sensitivity for detection: 76% (63% to 91%)
    • Sensitivity for action plan: 36% (25% to 49%)
    • Specificity for detection: 71% (53% to 77%)
    • Specificity for action plan: 93% (88% to 99%)
  • Intraassessor agreement (same tracings 1 year later)
    • Identifying abnormal tracings: 63% to 93%
    • Planning immediate action: 70% to 93%

CONCLUSION:

  • In this study, clinicians used a tool based on NICE guidelines and elements of the RANZCOG guidance | Compared to ACOG, NICE is more sensitive but ACOG is more specific
  • The authors recognize important study limitations, including the inability to definitively rule out an antepartum cause for NE, although blood gasses provide evidence for case inclusion
  • Highly experienced clinicians could detect 3 out of 4 infants who would subsequently be diagnosed with NE
  • Clinicians recommended action to expedite delivery for >40% of infants with NE
  • “Most assessors only agreed with themselves 70% to 80% of the time”
  • The authors conclude that
    • EFM alone does not identify all infants at risk of NE
    • Further investment is needed into clinician education and alternative approaches to fetal surveillance in labor
  • The authors state that EFM is “embedded” into obstetrical care and

If this is as good as it gets, then we will continue to see rising intervention rates in women with no fetal hypoxia while continuing to fail some infants at risk

Learn More – Primary Sources:

Clinician Identification of Birth Asphyxia Using Intrapartum Cardiotocography Among Neonates With and Without Encephalopathy in New Zealand

Get Guideline Notifications direct to your phone with ObGFirst

Try it Free »

image_pdfFavoriteLoadingFavorite
< Previous
All Grand Rounds Posts
Next >

Related ObG Topics:

Is There an Association Between Certain FHR Characteristics and Neonatal Encephalopathy?
Electronic Fetal Monitoring vs. Intermittent Auscultation
Which Fetal Heart Monitoring Parameters Best Predict Fetal Acidemia?

Sections

  • Alerts
  • OB
  • GYN
    • GYN
    • Sexual Health
  • 2T US Atlas
  • The Genome
  • Primary Care
  • Your Practice
  • Grand Rounds
  • My Bookshelf
  • COVID-19

Are you an
ObG Insider?

Get specially curated clinical summaries delivered to your inbox every week for free

  • Site Map/
  • © ObG Project/
  • Terms and Conditions/
  • Privacy/
  • Contact Us/
© ObG Project
SSL Certificate


  • Already an ObGFirst Member?
    Welcome back

    Log In

    Want to sign up?
    Get guideline notifications
    CME Included

    Sign Up

Sign In

Lost your password?

Sign Up for ObGFirst and Stay Ahead

  • - Professional guideline notifications
  • - Daily summary of a clinically relevant
    research paper
  • - Includes 1 hour of CME every month

ObGFirst Free Trial

Already a Member of ObGFirst®?

Please log in to ObGFirst to access the 2T US Atlas

Password Trouble?

Not an ObGFirst® Member Yet?

  • - Access 2T US Atlas
  • - Guideline notifications
  • - Daily research paper summaries
  • - And lots more!
ObGFirst Free Trial

Media - Internet

Computer System Requirements

OBG Project CME requires a modern web browser (Internet Explorer 10+, Mozilla Firefox, Apple Safari, Google Chrome, Microsoft Edge). Certain educational activities may require additional software to view multimedia, presentation, or printable versions of their content. These activities will be marked as such and will provide links to the required software. That software may be: Adobe Flash, Apple QuickTime, Adobe Acrobat, Microsoft PowerPoint, Windows Media Player, or Real Networks Real One Player.

Disclosure of Unlabeled Use

This educational activity may contain discussion of published and/or investigational uses of agents that are not indicated by the FDA. The planners of this activity do not recommend the use of any agent outside of the labeled indications.

The opinions expressed in the educational activity are those of the faculty and do not necessarily represent the views of the planners. Please refer to the official prescribing information for each product for discussion of approved indications, contraindications, and warnings.

Disclaimer

Participants have an implied responsibility to use the newly acquired information to enhance patient outcomes and their own professional development. The information
presented in this activity is not meant to serve as a guideline for patient management. Any procedures, medications, or other courses of diagnosis or treatment discussed or suggested in this activity should not be used by clinicians without evaluation of their patient’s conditions and possible contraindications and/or dangers in use, review of any applicable manufacturer’s product information, and comparison with recommendations of other authorities.

Jointly provided by

NOT ENOUGH CME HOURS

It appears you don't have enough CME Hours to take this Post-Test. Feel free to buy additional CME hours or upgrade your current CME subscription plan

Subscribe

JOIN OBGFIRST AND GET CME/CE CREDITS

One of the benefits of an ObGFirst subscription is the ability to earn CME/CE credits from the ObG entries you read. Tap the button to learn more about ObGFirst

Learn More
Leaving ObG Website

You are now leaving the ObG website and on your way to PRIORITY at UCSF, an independent website. Therefore, we are not responsible for the content or availability of this site