Open Access Open Access  Restricted Access Subscription or Fee Access

To Assess the Accuracy, Sensitivity and Specificity of Fetal Heart Rate (FHR) and Uterine Activity (UA) from Abdominal ECG and EMG Electrodes in Comparison with Conventional Cardiotocography (CTG) Machine

Latha Venkatraman, Srimathy Raman, Priyanka Singh, Aravind Prasad, Swilly Menon, Rutvi Prajapati

Abstract


Background: FHR and UC are two vital parameters that need to be monitored during the intrapartum period which can help reduce death from preventable causes during the intrapartum period. CTG is the currently used tool for intrapartum monitoring, but being expensive, bulky, and dependent on skilled healthcare workers for interpretation of results makes it unsuitable for use in healthcare settings. KEYAR is an affordable, portable, wearable, and easy to use continuous FHR and UC monitoring device. This study aims to validate Keyar with gold standard FHR DHR and UC monitoring device CTG. Subjects and Methods:Prospective study was conducted to compare a test device (KEYAR) with a gold standard device (cardiotocography) for 38 participants in Rangadore Memorial Hospital, Bangalore, India. The inclusion criteria included more than 36 weeks of gestational age, singleton pregnancy and cephalic presentation. The procedure for using both devices to monitor FHR and UC was explained to the participants. Data analysis was done with Microsoft EXCEL (Microsoft Corporation) and Python Jupyter Notebook. Results: The accuracy, sensitivity and specificity of Fetal Heart Rate (FHR) was found to be 92.92, 72.7 and 66.7% respectively, in comparison with conventional cardiotocography (CTG) machines for 38 participants. The FHR reliability was computed as 97.33%. The maximum FHR accuracy was found to be 99.7%. The accuracy computed for 41 datasets for the total number of contractions in 10 min was 90.24% and for the average duration of contraction for 1 contraction was 92.68% with respect to the CTG graphs. Conclusions: Gestational age (GA) does not play a significant role in determining the comparative accuracy with CTG. However, it was noted that we would require significantly more data for a detailed analysis. More research can be done to explore less GA and other presentations.


Full Text:

PDF

References


Wall SN, Lee AC, Carlo W, Goldenberg R, Niermeyer S, Darmstadt GL, Keenan W, Bhutta ZA, Perlman J, Lawn JE. Reducing intrapartum-related neonatal deaths in low-and middle-income countries—what works? In: Seminars in perinatology. 2010 Dec 1; 34(6): 395–407. WB Saunders.

Bryce J, Boschi-Pinto C, Shibuya K, Black RE, WHO Child Health Epidemiology Reference Group. WHO estimates of the causes of death in children. Lancet. 2005 Mar 26; 365(9465):

–52.

NHM. (2020). Child Health. [Online] Nhm.gov.in. Available at:

lang=1&level=2&sublinkid=819&lid=219> [Accessed 1 April 2020].

Munro D, Murphy MM. Global call to action on preventable stillbirths. World of Irish Nursing and Midwifery. 2016; 24(2): 58.

WHO. (2020). Maternal Mortality. [Online]. Available at: https://www.who.int/news-room/fact-sheets/detail/maternal-mortality [Accessed 1 April 2020].

UNICEF. (2020). Maternal Health. [Online]. Available at: https://www.unicef.org/india/what-we-do/maternal-health [Accessed 1 April 2020].

NITI Aayog. (2020). Maternal Mortality Ratio (MMR) (Per 100000 Live Births). [Online]. Available at: http://niti.gov.in/content/maternal-mortality-ratio-mmr-100000-live-births [Accessed 12 March 2020]

Shewa A, Hacker TW, Nuovo J. Interpretation of the electronic fetal heart rate during labour. Am Family Phys. 1999; 59(9): 2507–12.

Neilson Jr DR, Freeman RK, Mangan S. Signal ambiguity resulting in unexpected outcome with external fetal heart rate monitoring. American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology (AJOG). 2008 Jun 1; 198(6): 717–24.

Euliano TY, Nguyen MT, Darmanjian S, McGorray SP, Euliano N, Onkala A, Gregg AR. Monitoring uterine activity during labor: a comparison of 3 methods. American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology (AJOG). 2013 Jan 1; 208(1): 66-e1.

Hasan MA, Reaz MB, Ibrahimy MI, Hussain MS, Uddin J. Detection and processing techniques of FECG signal for fetal monitoring. Biol Proced Online. 2009 Dec 1; 11(1): 263–295.

Lucovnik M, Kuon RJ, Chambliss LR, et al. Use of uterine electromyography to diagnose term and preterm labor. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand. 2011; 90(2): 150–157. doi:10.1111/j.1600-0412.2010.01031.x

Reinhard J, Louwen F. Non-invasive Foetal ECG–a Comparable Alternative to the Doppler CTG? Geburtshilfe Frauenh. 2012 Mar; 72(03): 211–4.

Cohen WR, Ommani S, Hassan S, Mirza FG, Solomon M, Brown R, Schifrin BS, Himsworth JM, HAYES‐GILL BR. Accuracy and reliability of fetal heart rate monitoring using maternal abdominal surface electrodes. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand. 2012 Nov; 91(11): 1306–13.

Neilson Jr DR, Freeman RK, Mangan S. Signal ambiguity resulting in unexpected outcome with external fetal heart rate monitoring. American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology (AJOG). 2008 Jun 1; 198(6): 717–24.

Van Laar JO, Warmerdam GJ, Verdurmen KM, Vullings R, Peters CH, Houterman S, Wijn PF, Andriessen P, Van Pul C, Guid Oei S. Fetal heart rate variability during pregnancy, obtained from non‐invasive electrocardiogram recordings. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand. 2014 Jan; 93(1): 93–101.

Sänger N, Hayes-Gill BR, Schiermeier S, Hatzmann W, Yuan J, Herrmann E, Louwen F, Reinhard J. Prenatal Foetal Non-invasive ECG instead of Doppler CTG–A Better Alternative? Geburtshilfe Frauenh. 2012 Jul; 72(07): 630–3.

Fruhman G, Gavard JA, McCormick K, Wilson-Griffin J, Amon E, Gross GA. Standard external doppler fetal heart tracings versus external fetal electrocardiogram in very preterm gestation: A pilot study. Am J Perinatol Rep. 2016 Oct; 6(04): e378–83.

Graatsma EM, Jacod BC, Van Egmond LA, Mulder EJ, Visser GH. Fetal electrocardiography: feasibility of long‐term fetal heart rate recordings. BJOG: An International Journal of Obstetrics & Gynaecology. 2009 Jan; 116(2): 334–8.

Rauf Z, O'Brien E, Stampalija T, Ilioniu FP, Lavender T, Alfirevic Z. Home labour induction with retrievable prostaglandin pessary and continuous telemetric trans-abdominal fetal ECG monitoring. PLoS One. 2011; 6(11): e28129.

Kupka T, Matonia A, Jezewski M, Jezewski J, Horoba K, Wrobel J, Czabanski R, Martinek R. New Method for Beat-to-Beat Fetal Heart Rate Measurement Using Doppler Ultrasound Signal. Sensors. 2020; 20(15): 4079.

Matonia Adam, et al. Fetal electrocardiograms, direct and abdominal with reference heartbeat annotations. Sci Data. 2020; 7(1): 1–14.

Wróbel Janusz, et al. Improving fetal heart rate signal interpretation by application of myriad filtering. Biocybern Biomed Eng. 2013; 33(4): 211–221.

Jain Sangeeta, et al. 42: Trans-abdominal uterine electromyography (EMG) vs. clinical parameters as predictors of preterm delivery. American Journal of Obstetrics & Gynecology (AJOG). 2007; 197(6): S19.

Shankar Hariharan, Pagel Paul S, Warner David S. Potential adverse ultrasound-related biological effects: a critical review. The Journal of the American Society of Anesthesiology . 2011; 115(5): 1109–1124.

Sameni Reza, Clifford Gari D. A review of fetal ECG signal processing; issues and promising directions. Open Pacing Electrophysiol Ther J. 2010; 3(1): 4–20.

Qian Xueya, et al. Measurement of Uterine and Abdominal Muscle Electromyography in Pregnant Women for Estimation of Expulsive Activities during the 2nd Stage of Labor. Gynecol Obstet Invest. 2019; 84(6): 555–561.

Qian Xueya, et al. Simultaneous recording and analysis of uterine and abdominal muscle electromyographic activity in nulliparous women during labor. Reprod Sci. 2017; 24(3): 471–477.




DOI: https://doi.org/10.37628/jopnn.v9i1.2302

Refbacks

  • There are currently no refbacks.