Intrapartum electronic fetal heart rate monitoring versus intermittent auscultation: a meta-analysis

To use a meta-analysis of all published randomized trials to determine whether the use of continuous electronic fetal heart rate monitoring (EFM) as the main method of intrapartum fetal surveillance is associated with improved pregnancy outcome compared to intermittent auscultation.

We used the MEDLINE data base and reference lists of articles to identify all published randomized trials of EFM versus intermittent auscultation.

A total of nine randomized trials published in peer-review journals were identified. The selection criterion was the use of EFM or intermittent auscultation as the main intrapartum fetal surveillance technique.

A total of 18,561 patients were included in the nine published randomized trials, 9398 in the EFM group and 9163 in the auscultation group. Measures of pregnancy outcome included cesarean delivery, cesarean for suspected fetal distress, overall use of forceps or vacuum, use of forceps or vacuum for suspected fetal distress, overall perinatal mortality, and perinatal mortality due to fetal hypoxia (intrapartum or early neonatal death) attributable to the method of intrapartum monitoring. The meta-analysis showed that the patients monitored electronically had a significantly higher overall cesarean rate (odds ratio [OR] 1.53, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.17-2.01), higher cesarean rate for fetal distress (OR 2.55, 95% CI 1.81-3.53), overall increased use of forceps or vacuum (OR 1.23, 95% CI 1.02-1.49), increased use of forceps or vacuum for suspected fetal distress (OR 2.50, 95% CI 1.97-3.18), and decreased perinatal mortality due to fetal hypoxia (OR 0.41, 95% CI 0.17-0.98).

Electronic fetal monitoring is associated with increased rates of surgical intervention and decreased perinatal mortality due to fetal hypoxia.