Journal de gynecologie, obstetrique et biologie de la reproduction · 2016
[Use of fetal movements counting for prolonged pregnancy: A comparative preliminary cohort study before and after implementation of an information brochure].
Сравнительное исследованиеСтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Chauveau L, Di Bartolomeo A, Noblot E, Fanget C, Raia-Barjat T, Chauleur C
Аннотация
OBJECTIVES: Compare the number of consultations with the consultation's delay in relation with the sensation of decrease active fetal movements (AFM) in case of late pregnancy, according to the fact if the patients use or not the AFM's count.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: We have compared a "control" group made up of 160 patients who received a classic information and observation (from December 18th, 2013 to February 28th, 2014) versus an "educated" group made up of 160 patients who have been educated to the AFM count (from March 1st, 2014 to August 12th, 2014).
RESULTS: The consultations for AFM decrease, were significantly more frequent in the "control" group than in the "educated" group (36 versus 8, P=0.0009). Inducing labor due to AFM reduction was not statistically different between both groups (13 patients in the "educated group" versus 7 patients in the "control" group P=0.97).
CONCLUSION: Learning a count method seems to decrease the number of consultations for AFM reduction without increasing the perinatal morbidity but maybe at the cost of an increase of obstetric interventions.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: We have compared a "control" group made up of 160 patients who received a classic information and observation (from December 18th, 2013 to February 28th, 2014) versus an "educated" group made up of 160 patients who have been educated to the AFM count (from March 1st, 2014 to August 12th, 2014).
RESULTS: The consultations for AFM decrease, were significantly more frequent in the "control" group than in the "educated" group (36 versus 8, P=0.0009). Inducing labor due to AFM reduction was not statistically different between both groups (13 patients in the "educated group" versus 7 patients in the "control" group P=0.97).
CONCLUSION: Learning a count method seems to decrease the number of consultations for AFM reduction without increasing the perinatal morbidity but maybe at the cost of an increase of obstetric interventions.