Skip to main content
Log in

Evaluation of the effects of acoustic stimulation and feeding mother stimulation on non-reactive non-stress test: a randomized clinical trial

  • Maternal-Fetal Medicine
  • Published:
Archives of Gynecology and Obstetrics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Purpose

Non-stress test (NST) is known as one of the most common assessments for evaluation of fetus well being. Since the prevalence of its false positive results is high and majority of fetuses with non-reactive results are not at risk, it is important to find out effective approaches to identify such results to avoid unnecessary interventions. So this survey was conducted with the aim of comparing the effects of acoustic stimulation with feeding mothers stimulation on non-reactive NST results.

Subjects and methods

This study preformed on 104 healthy pregnant women with non-reactive NST results and gestational ages between 32 and 42 weeks in Tabriz Alzahra hospital. Subjects were divided into two groups for acoustic stimulation and feeding mother stimulation. Half an hour later NST repeated for participants of each group in the same environmental condition and again the results evaluated.

Results

According to our findings, 75 % of subjects with non-reactive NST results changed to reactive after acoustic stimulation group. However, 80 % of participants with non-reactive NST results changed into reactive after feeding stimulation. No significant differences found while comparing test results.

Conclusion

Both stimulating approaches were effective in the identification of false positive NSTs and might be useful in preventing the unnecessary interventions.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Behraman RE (2008) Nelson essentials of pediatrics. Arjmand Publication, Tehran, pp 210–211

    Google Scholar 

  2. Velazquez MD, Rayburn WF (2002) Antenatal evaluation of the fetus using fetal movement monitoring. Clin Obstet Gynecol 45(4):993–1004

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Menihan CA, Kopel E (2007) Electronic fetal monitoring: concepts and applications. Lippincott Williams and Wilkins, Philadelphia, pp 65–68

    Google Scholar 

  4. Zuspan FP, Zuspan EJ (1994) Current therapy in obstetrics and gynecology. Saunders, Philadelphia, p 287

    Google Scholar 

  5. Jams DK, Steer PJ, Weiner CP, Gonic B (2000) Highrisk pregnancy. WB Saunders Company, Philadelphia, pp 11–12

    Google Scholar 

  6. Hasanzadeh M (2003) Evaluating the association between mother’s position and Non stress test results among hospitalized pregnant women in Tabriz Alzahra educational and treatment center. Master thesis Tabriz University of medical sciences faculty of midwifery

  7. Christopher R, Harman SM, Frank AM (2000) Assessing fetal health. In: James DK, Steers PJ, Weinter CP, Gonik B (eds) High risk pregnancy. W.B Saunders Company, Philadelphia, p 253

    Google Scholar 

  8. Ling F, Duff P (2001) Obstetrics and Gynecology, McGraw-Hill, New York, pp 9–46

  9. Boby P (2003) Multiple assessment techniques education antepartum fetal risk. Pediatr Ann 32:609–632

    Google Scholar 

  10. Gabbe GS, Niebyl RJ, Simposn J (2002) Obstetrics normal and problem pregnancies, 4th edn. Saunders, Philadelphia, pp 33–324

    Google Scholar 

  11. Gilbert E, Hamon J (2003) Manual of high risk pregnancy and delivery. Mosby, Saint Louis, pp 605–620

    Google Scholar 

  12. Fanaroff A, Richard J (2002) Disease of the fetus and infant, Neonate- Perinatal Medicine. Mosby, Saint Louis, pp 300–322

    Google Scholar 

  13. Caningham FG (2001) Intrapartum assessment. In: Obstetrics W (ed) Appleton and large United States. Asimon and Schuster Company, New York, pp 1330–1359

    Google Scholar 

  14. Sarinoglu F, Sshin I, Turkkani B (1999) The predictive value of fetal acoustic stimulation. J Perinatol 19:103–105

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Sciscion A, Jonson T (1996) Fetal respons to vibroacostic. Medical Economic Company, USA, pp 1100–1150

    Google Scholar 

  16. Winn H, Hobins J (2000) Clinical maternal-fetal medicine. Parthenon Publishing Group, UK, pp 20–700

    Google Scholar 

  17. Modares M (2008) Comparison the results of non reactive non stress test after acoustic stimulation during fetal health assessment M. Modares Tehran University of medical sciences

  18. Goldstein I, Makhoul IR, Nisman D, Tamir A, Escalante G, Itskovitz-Eldor J (2003) Influence of maternal carbohydrate on fetal movments at 14 to 16 weeks of gestation. Prenat Diagn 23(2):95–97

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Bikas A (2008). Evaluation the influence of mothers fasting on non stress test results, Doctoral thesis Tabriz University of medical sciences

  20. Xi Q, Du J, Liu X, Ling Shao J (2011) Clinical study on detecting false non-reactive of non-stress test by improved acoustic stimulation. Arch Gynecol Obstet 284:271–274

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Dr. Fakhari (2003–2004), Comparison the prediction results of fetal distress during active phase of confinement with or without using vibrating acoustic stimulation, Kermanshah University of medical sciences

Download references

Acknowledgements

This paper is a result of MRS Shiva Raouf thesis graduate student from Aras University of Medical Sciences (International unit). Researchers wish to thank personal of Tabriz Al-Zahra Hospital for their helpful assistance.

Conflict of interest

All authors said that they have no conflict of interest.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Shiva Raouf.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Hasanpour, S., Raouf, S., Shamsalizadeh, N. et al. Evaluation of the effects of acoustic stimulation and feeding mother stimulation on non-reactive non-stress test: a randomized clinical trial. Arch Gynecol Obstet 287, 1105–1110 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00404-012-2695-6

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00404-012-2695-6

Keywords

Navigation