This Article  • Full text  • PDF  • Send to a friend  • Save in My Folder  • Save to citation manager  • Permissions  Citing Articles  • Contact me when this article is cited  Related Content  • Similar articles in JAMA  Topic Collections  • Pediatrics  • Neonatology and Infant Care  • Women's Health  • Pregnancy and Breast Feeding  • Alert me on articles by topic  Social Bookmarking   What's this?

Mike Mitka

JAMA. 2009;302(9):935-936.

	Since this article does not have an abstract, we have provided the first 150 words of the full text and any section headings.

A revised guideline on monitoring fetal heart rate during labor from the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (ACOG) seeks to decrease perinatal morbidity and mortality by improving communication among members of the health care delivery team.

The updated guideline also highlights the uncertain efficacy of electronic fetal monitoring and limitations such as a high false-positive rate for predicting cerebral palsy and poor consistency among physicians in interpreting fetal heart rate tracings (Obstet Gynecol. 2009;114[1]:192-202).

Revisions to guidelines on electronic fetal monitoring during labor provide standardized and unambiguous definitions intended to improve communication among members of the health care delivery team and outcomes for mothers and neonates. (Photo credit: Paul Velgos/iStockphoto.com)

SUBOPTIMAL EFFICACY

When electronic fetal monitoring was introduced in the 1960s, clinicians hoped that the procedure, which provides information predictive of the acid-base status of the fetus, would help diagnose fetal acidemia and reduce perinatal . . . [Full Text of this Article]

CiteULike    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    Twitter     What's this?