Women’s experiences of two different self-assessment methods for monitoring fetal movements in full-term pregnancy - a crossover trial

BMC Pregnancy and Childbirth

Helena Lindgren³  Ingegerd Hildingsson²  Christine Rubertsson⁴  Ingela Rådestad¹  Mari-Cristin Malm⁴ 

[1] Sophiahemmet University, Box 5605, 114 86 Stockholm, Sweden;Department of Nursing, Mid Sweden University, 85170 Sundsvall, Sweden;Department of Health and Caring Sciences, Sahlgrenska Academy University of Gothenburg, Gothenburg, Sweden;Department of Women’s and Children’s Health, Uppsala University, 751 85 Uppsala, Sweden

关键词: Crossover trial;    Pregnancy;    Fetal movements;    Self-assessment;   

Others  :  1122677
DOI  :  10.1186/1471-2393-14-349

 received in 2014-07-10, accepted in 2014-09-24,  发布年份 2014

【 摘 要 】

Background

Low maternal awareness of fetal movements is associated with negative birth outcomes. Knowledge regarding pregnant women’s compliance with programs of systematic self-assessment of fetal movements is needed. The aim of this study was to investigate women’s experiences using two different self-assessment methods for monitoring fetal movements and to determine if the women had a preference for one or the other method.

Methods

Data were collected by a crossover trial; 40 healthy women with an uncomplicated full-term pregnancy counted the fetal movements according to a Count-to-ten method and assessed the character of the movements according to the Mindfetalness method. Each self-assessment was observed by a midwife and followed by a questionnaire. A total of 80 self-assessments was performed; 40 with each method.

Results

Of the 40 women, only one did not find at least one method suitable. Twenty of the total of 39 reported a preference, 15 for the Mindfetalness method and five for the Count-to-ten method. All 39 said they felt calm, relaxed, mentally present and focused during the observations. Furthermore, the women described the observation of the movements as safe and reassuring and a moment for communication with their unborn baby.

Conclusions

In the 80 assessments all but one of the women found one or both methods suitable for self-assessment of fetal movements and they felt comfortable during the assessments. More women preferred the Mindfetalness method compared to the count-to-ten method, than vice versa.

【 授权许可】

   
2014 Malm et al.; licensee BioMed Central Ltd.

【 参考文献 】

• [1]Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists: Green-top Guide 57 February 2011:Reduced Fetal Movements. Avaible here: http://www.rcog.org.uk/files/rcog-corp/GTG57RFM25022011.pdf webcite
• [2]Radestad I, Lindgren H: Women’s perceptions of fetal movements in full-term pregnancy. Sexual Reprod Healthc 2012, 3:113-116.
• [3]Tuffnell DJ, Cartmill RS, Lilford RJ: Fetal movements; factors affecting their perception. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol 1991, 39:165-167.
• [4]Ehrstrom C: Circadian rhythm of fetal movements. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand 1984, 63:539-541.
• [5]Cito G, Luisi S, Mezzesimi A, Cavicchioli C, Calonaci G, Petraglia F: Maternal position during non-stress test and fetal heart rate patterns. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand 2005, 84:335-338.
• [6]Frøen JF: A kick from within – fetal movement counting and the cancelled progress in antenatal care. J Perinat Med 2004, 32:13-24.
• [7]Pearson JF, Weaver JB: Fetal activity and fetal well-being. An evaluation. Br Med J 1976, 1:1305-1307.
• [8]Sadovsky E, Yaffe H: Daily fetal movement recoding and fetal prognosis. Obstet Gynecol 1973, 41:845-850.
• [9]Radestad I: Strengthening mindfetalness. Sex Reprod Healthc 2012, 3:59-60.
• [10]Saastad E, Ahlborg T, Frøen JF: Low maternal awareness of fetal movements is associated with small for gestation age infants. J Midwifery & Women’s Health 2008, 53:345-352.
• [11]Nijhuis JG: Fetal behavior. Neurobiol Aging 2003, 24:41-46.
• [12]Vindla S, James D: Fetal behavior as a test of fetal wellbeing. BJOG 1995, 102:597-600.
• [13]Raynes-Greenow C, Gordon A, Qiushuang L, Hyett J: A cross-sectional study of maternal perception of fetal movements and antenatal advice in a general pregnant population, using a qualitative framework. BMC Pregnancy Childbirth 2013, 13:32. Doi:10.1186/1471-2393-13-32 BioMed Central Full Text
• [14]Mangesi L, Hofmeyr GJ, Smith V: Fetal movement counting for assessment of fetal wellbeing. Cochrane Database Syst RevDOI:10.1002/14651858.CD004909.pub2
• [15]Frøen JF, Tveit JV, Saastad E, Bördahl PE, Stray-Pedersen B, Heazell A, Flenady V, Fretts RE: Management of decreased fetal movements. Semin Prinatol 2008, 32:307-311.
• [16]Malm M-C, Lindgren H, Hildingsson I, Rubertsson C, Radestad I: Development of a tool to evaluate fetal movements in full-term pregnancy. Sex Reprod Healthc 2014, 5:31-35.
• [17]Bergman MM: Content analysis within a mixed methods framework. In Handbook of mixed methods in social and behavior research. Edited by Tashakkor A, Teddile C. London: Sage; 2010:387-388.
• [18]Gomez LM, De La Vega G, Padilla L, Bautista F, Villar A: Compliance with a fetal movement chart by high-risk obstetric patients in a Peruvian hospital. Am J Perinatol 2007, 24:89-94.
• [19]Saastad E, Israel P, Ahlborg T, Gunnes N, Frøen JF: Fetal movement counting—effects on maternal-fetal attachment: a multicenter randomized controlled trial. Birth 2011, 38:282-293.
• [20]Grant A, Elbourne D, Valentin L, Alexander S: Routine formal fetal movement counting and risk of antepartum late death in normally formed singletons. Lancet 1989, 2:345-349.
• [21]Freda C, Mikahail M, Mazloom E, Polizzotto R, Damus K, Merkanz I: Fetal movement counting: which method? Am J Matern Child Nurs 1993, 18:314-321.
• [22]Velasquez M, Rayburn W: Antenatal evaluation of the fetus using fetal movement monitoring. Clin Obstetrics and Gynecology 2002, 45:993-1004.
• [23]Berndl A, O´Connell C, Mc Leod C: Fetal movement monitoring: how are we doing as educators? J Obstet Gynecol Can 2013, 35:22-28.
• [24]Draper J, Field S, Thomas H, Hare MJ: Womens’ views on keeping fetal movement charts. Br J Obstet Gynaecol 1986, 93:334-338.
• [25]Sjöström K, Thelin T, Marsal K, Valentin L: Effects of maternal anxiety of perception of fetal movements in late pregnancy. Early Hum Dev 2003, 72:111-122.
• [26]Liston RM, Bloom K, Zimmer P: The psychological effects of counting fetal movements. Birth 1994, 21:135-140.
• [27]Mikhail M, Freda M, Merkatz R, Polizotto R, Mazloom E, Merkatz I: The effect of fetal movement counting on maternal attachment to fetus. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1991, 165:998-91.
• [28]Lindgren K: Relationship among maternal-fetal attachment, prenatal depression and health practices in pregnancy. Res Nurs Health 2001, 24:203-217.
• [29]Siddiqui A, Hägglöf B: Does maternal prenatal attachment predict postnatal mother–infant interaction? Early Hum Dev 2000, 59:13-25.
• [30]Winje B, Saastad E, Gunnes N, Tveit J, Stray-Pedersen B, Flenady V, Frøen J: Analysis of ‘count-to-ten’ fetal movement charts: a prospective cohort study. BJOG 2011, 118:1229-1238.