Helfand M, Marton K, Ueland K
Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1985 Mar 15;151(6):737-44. doi: 10.1016/0002-9378(85)90507-1.
In order to study how physicians choose to use electronic fetal monitoring and interpret tracings, we administered a questionnaire to which 107 practicing obstetricians and 11 experts in electronic fetal monitoring responded. Sixty-one (57%) of the respondents monitored more than half of their deliveries (high users). In comparison to the less frequent users of electronic fetal monitoring (low users), they showed more positive attitudes toward electronic fetal monitoring and were nearly always more likely to perform cesarean sections on hypothetical patients described in the questionnaire. These differences appeared to be due to the high users' higher estimate of danger to the fetus. We also found that most physicians were generally more likely to perform a cesarean section on a high-risk mother than a low-risk mother with the same tracing. The majority of high and low users and nearly all of the experts, however, felt that antepartum risk factors are not of value in deciding what to do about an abnormal tracing. We conclude that there is wide variation in the way in which obstetricians use, interpret, and act on electronic fetal monitoring tracings. Some of these differences may be due to differing attitudes toward electronic fetal monitoring, differences in interpretation of electronic fetal monitoring tracings, and differences in the way obstetricians incorporate maternal risk factors into their decision-making.
为了研究医生如何选择使用电子胎儿监护以及解读监护记录,我们发放了一份调查问卷,有107位执业产科医生和11位电子胎儿监护专家进行了回复。61位(57%)受访者对超过半数的分娩进行了监护(高使用者)。与电子胎儿监护使用频率较低的使用者(低使用者)相比,他们对电子胎儿监护表现出更积极的态度,并且几乎总是更倾向于对问卷中描述的假设患者进行剖宫产。这些差异似乎是由于高使用者对胎儿危险的估计更高。我们还发现,对于具有相同监护记录的高危母亲和低危母亲,大多数医生通常更倾向于对高危母亲进行剖宫产。然而,大多数高使用者和低使用者以及几乎所有专家都认为,产前危险因素在决定如何处理异常监护记录时没有价值。我们得出结论,产科医生在使用、解读电子胎儿监护记录以及据此采取行动的方式上存在很大差异。其中一些差异可能是由于对电子胎儿监护的态度不同、对电子胎儿监护记录的解读差异以及产科医生将母亲危险因素纳入决策的方式不同。