A recent Australian study investigated women’s experiences with various fetal monitoring methods during labor, finding that wired CTG was predominant. First-time mothers reported more CTG use, which correlated with higher emergency cesarean rates and epidural use. Many women felt monitoring negatively impacted their experiences, highlighting a need for improved woman-centered maternity care practices.
Maternity professionals face pressure to continuously record fetal heartbeats, leading to interventions that prioritise monitoring over women’s birth priorities. Evidence suggests that uninterrupted heart rate tracing does not improve neonatal outcomes and can increase complications. The focus should be on overall fetal wellbeing rather than solely on heart rate data accuracy.
Informed consent is a critical principle in healthcare. A recent Australian survey revealed that many women lacked sufficient information and choice about fetal monitoring methods. Only 35% reported being asked for consent. This highlights a significant issue in maternity care, and it is well past time it was addressed.
Does CTG monitoring generate more harm than benefit for babies? Here’s the evidence….
Today’s post takes us back to the basics and discusses what CTG monitoring is.
I’m not saying the goal of shared decision making is inherently wrong – it’s simply too little and too late.
Does #STAN reduce the #caesarean rate when #CTG monitoring is in use? New Australian research!
This is what CTG monitoring practice looks like in the Netherlands. How does this compare to where you are?
Can you record an EEG signal with a fetal spiral electrode? And why might you want to?
Is it better to find the fetal heart rate using two different technologies at the same time rather than just one?
Birth Small Talk 