Archives of Gynecology and Obstetrics

, Volume 284, Issue 2, pp 271–274 | Cite as

Clinical study on detecting false non-reactive of non-stress test by improved acoustic stimulation

Materno-fetal Medicine

Abstract

Purpose

To approach the clinical significance on detecting false non-reactive of non-stress test (NST) by improved acoustic stimulation.

Method

One-hundred and sixteen pregnant women who were at 34–41 weeks’ gestation were monitored for the fetal movement and the fetal heart rate. Then, the improved acoustic stimulation which was caused by clapping hands about 1 cm above maternal abdomen over the fetal vertex was given to the pregnant women whose NST were non-reactive.

Results

Among the 485 NST tests, 143 were non-reactive, accounting for 29.5%. With improved acoustic stimulation, 132 of them turned to be reactive, accounting for 92.3%. With oxygen therapy, 5 of the 11 changed to be reactive, but the other six pregnant women were given emergency caesarean section, and three of them were fetal distress. Among the 110 reactive pregnant women, only two were fetal distress. The sensitivity, specificity, positive, and negative predictive values for predicting fetal distress of NST with improved acoustic stimulation were 60.0, 97.3, 50.0, and 98.2%, respectively.

Conclusion

NST with improved acoustic stimulation is a convenient, fast, safe, and effective method on detecting false non-reactive NST and it can increase the specificity of NST.

Keywords

Acoustic stimulation test Accelerated fetal heart rate Fetal movement NST 

References

  1. 1.
    Suwanrath C, Suntharasaj T (2010) Sleep-wake cycles in normal fetuses. Arch Gynecol Obstet 281(3):449–454PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Tan KH, Sabapathy A (2001) Fetal manipulation for facilitating tests of fetal wellbeing. Cochrane Database Syst Rev Issue 4. Art. No.: CD003396. doi:10.1002/14651858.CD003396
  3. 3.
    D’Elia A, Pighetti M, Vanacore F, Fabbrocini G, Arpaia L (2005) Vibroacoustic stimulation in normal term human pregnancy. Early Hum Dev 81(5):449–453PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Khooshideh M, Izadi S, Shahriari A, Mirteymouri M (2009) The predictive value of ultrasound assessment of amniotic fluid index, biophysical profile score, nonstress test and foetal movement chart for meconium- stained amniotic fluid in prolonged pregnancies. J Pak Med Assoc 59(7):471–474PubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Ocak V, Demirkíran F, Sen C, Colgar U, Ocer F, Kilavuz O, Uras Y (1992) The predictive value of fetal heart rate monitoring: a retrospective analysis of 2165 high-risk pregnancies. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol 44(1):53–58PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Batcha TM, Goonewardene IM (2005) The fetal acoustic stimulation test: a reliable and cost effective method of antepartum fetal monitoring. Ceylon Med J 50(4):156–159PubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Peleg D, Orvieto R, Sirota L, Ben-Rafael Z (1999) Neonatal atrial flutter following fetal exposure to vibroacoustic stimulation. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol 82(1):1–3PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Müller H, Meinel K, Hampe K (1996) Methods, value and limits of prenatal hearing diagnosis. Zentralbl Gynakol 118(8):435–440PubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Kisilevsky BS, Muir DW, Low JA (1992) Maturation of human fetal responses to vibroacoustic stimulation. Child Dev 63(6):1497–1508PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Nyman M, Arulkumaran S, Hsu TS, Ratnam SS, Till O, Westgren M (1991) Vibroacoustic stimulation and intrauterine sound pressure levels. Obstet Gynecol 78:803–806PubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Sohmer H, Perez R, Sichel JY, Priner R, Freeman S (2001) The pathway enabling external sounds to reach and excite the fetal inner ear. Audiol Neurootol 6(3):109–116PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 2010

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Institute Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Shengjing HospitalChina Medical UniversityShenyangChina

Personalised recommendations