The association between increased subjective sensation of fetal movements and pregnancy outcome–a prospective cohort and a retrospective comparative analysis

3Citations
Citations of this article
10Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

This article is free to access.

Abstract

Objective: To determine pregnancy outcomes in women with subjective sensation of increased fetal movements (IFM). Methods: A prospective cohort study of women after 20 weeks of gestation who were referred with subjective sensation of IFM (April 2018–April 2019) for assessment. Pregnancy outcome was compared to pregnancies with a normal sensation of fetal movements all through pregnancy who underwent obstetrical assessment at term (37–41 weeks of gestation) matched by maternal age and pre-pregnancy BMI in a 1:2 ratio. Results: Overall, out of 28,028 women referred to the maternity ward during the study period, 153 (0.54%) presented due to subjective sensation of IFM. The latter mainly occurred during the 3rd trimester (89.5%). Primiparity was significantly more prevalent in the study group (75.5% vs. 51.5%, p =.002). The study group had increased rates of operative vaginal deliveries and cesarean section (CS) due to non-reassuring fetal heart rate (15.1% vs. 8.7%, p =.048). Multivariate regression analysis showed that IFM was not associated with NRFHR affecting the mode of delivery (OR 1.1, CI 0.55 − 2.19), opposed to other variables such as primiparity (OR 11.08, CI 3.21–38.28) and induction of labor (OR 2.46, CI 1.18–5.15). There were no differences in the rates of meconium-stained amniotic fluid, 5 min Apgar score, birth weight, or rates of large/small for gestational-age newborns. Conclusion: Subjective sensation of IFM is not associated with adverse pregnancy outcomes.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Avraham, S., Baruch, Y., Schwartz, A., Lavie, A., Ignative, A., Belov, Y., … Yogev, Y. (2023). The association between increased subjective sensation of fetal movements and pregnancy outcome–a prospective cohort and a retrospective comparative analysis. Journal of Maternal-Fetal and Neonatal Medicine, 36(1). https://doi.org/10.1080/14767058.2023.2184224

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free