In the most recent year for which data are available, approximately 3.4 million fetuses (85% of approximately 4 million live births) in the United States were assessed with electronic fetal monitoring (EFM), making it the most common obstetric procedure (1). Despite its widespread use, there is controversy about the efficacy of EFM, interobserver and intraobserver variability, nomenclature, systems for interpretation, and management algorithms. Moreover, there is evidence that the use of EFM increases the rate of cesarean deliveries and operative vaginal deliveries. The purpose of this document is to review nomenclature for fetal heart rate assessment, review the data on the efficacy of EFM, delineate the strengths and shortcomings of EFM, and describe a system for EFM classification. Copyright © July 2009 by the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists.
CITATION STYLE
Gnirs, J., Schneider, K.-T. M., & Schiermeier, S. (2016). Geburtsüberwachung. In Die Geburtshilfe (pp. 693–747). Springer Berlin Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-662-45064-2_30
Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.