Fetal movement counting is associated with the reduction of delayed maternal reaction after perceiving decreased fetal movements: a prospective study.
Journal
Scientific reports
ISSN: 2045-2322
Titre abrégé: Sci Rep
Pays: England
ID NLM: 101563288
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
24 05 2021
24 05 2021
Historique:
received:
20
12
2020
accepted:
10
05
2021
entrez:
25
5
2021
pubmed:
26
5
2021
medline:
6
11
2021
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
Maternal perception of decreased fetal movement is associated with adverse perinatal outcomes. Although there have been several studies on interventions related to the fetal movements count, most focused on adverse perinatal outcomes, and little is known about the impact of the fetal movement count on maternal behavior after the perception of decreased fetal movement. We investigated the impact of the daily fetal movement count on maternal behavior after the perception of decreased fetal movement and on the stillbirth rate in this prospective population-based study. Pregnant women in Shiga prefecture of Japan were asked to count the time of 10 fetal movements from 34 weeks of gestation. We analyzed 101 stillbirths after the intervention compared to 121 stillbirths before the intervention. In multivariable analysis, maternal delayed visit to a health care provider after the perception of decreased fetal movement significantly reduced after the intervention (aOR 0.31, 95% CI 0.11-0.83). Our regional stillbirth rates in the pre-intervention and post-intervention periods were 3.06 and 2.70 per 1000 births, respectively. Informing pregnant women about the fetal movement count was associated with a reduction in delayed maternal reaction after the perception of decreased fetal movement, which might reduce stillbirths.
Identifiants
pubmed: 34031497
doi: 10.1038/s41598-021-90240-4
pii: 10.1038/s41598-021-90240-4
pmc: PMC8144404
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
10818Références
Med Hypotheses. 2011 Jan;76(1):17-20
pubmed: 20826059
Birth. 2012 Mar;39(1):10-20
pubmed: 22369601
Tohoku J Exp Med. 2015;235(2):145-9
pubmed: 25746158
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2015 Oct 15;(10):CD004909
pubmed: 26467769
Obstet Gynecol. 2020 May;135(5):1227
pubmed: 32332397
PLoS One. 2012;7(6):e39259
pubmed: 22723978
J Perinat Med. 2004;32(1):13-24
pubmed: 15008381
Women Birth. 2019 Apr;32(2):127-130
pubmed: 31007206
Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2015 Nov;213(5):678.e1-6
pubmed: 26205461
BJOG. 2016 May;123(6):886-98
pubmed: 26629884
BMC Res Notes. 2010 Jan 04;3(1):2
pubmed: 20044943
Obstet Gynecol. 2020 May;135(5):1227-1228
pubmed: 32332398
Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand. 2009;88(12):1345-51
pubmed: 19878088
MedGenMed. 2004 May 27;6(2):53
pubmed: 15266278
J Obstet Gynaecol. 2016;36(1):39-43
pubmed: 26204351
Women Birth. 2017 Dec;30(6):468-471
pubmed: 28506686
Obstet Gynecol. 2020 Feb;135(2):453-462
pubmed: 31923063
J Obstet Gynaecol. 2007 Jan;27(1):41-3
pubmed: 17365457
BMJ Open. 2018 Jul 6;8(7):e020031
pubmed: 29982198