Imperial College London
Portrait Picture

ProfessorDeborahAshby

Faculty of Medicine, School of Public Health

Dean of the Faculty of Medicine
 
 
 
//

Contact

 

+44 (0)20 7594 8704deborah.ashby Website

 
 
//

Location

 

2.15Faculty BuildingSouth Kensington Campus

//

Summary

 

Publications

Citation

BibTex format

@article{INFANT:2017:10.1016/S0140-6736(17)30568-8,
author = {INFANT, Collaborative Group},
doi = {10.1016/S0140-6736(17)30568-8},
journal = {Lancet},
pages = {1719--1729},
title = {Computerised interpretation of fetal heart rate during labour (INFANT): a randomised controlled trial.},
url = {http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(17)30568-8},
volume = {389},
year = {2017}
}
Download

RIS format (EndNote, RefMan)

TY  - JOUR
AB  - BACKGROUND: Continuous electronic fetal heart-rate monitoring is widely used during labour, and computerised interpretation could increase its usefulness. We aimed to establish whether the addition of decision-support software to assist in the interpretation of cardiotocographs affected the number of poor neonatal outcomes. METHODS: In this unmasked randomised controlled trial, we recruited women in labour aged 16 years or older having continuous electronic fetal monitoring, with a singleton or twin pregnancy, and at 35 weeks' gestation or more at 24 maternity units in the UK and Ireland. They were randomly assigned (1:1) to decision support with the INFANT system or no decision support via a computer-generated stratified block randomisation schedule. The primary outcomes were poor neonatal outcome (intrapartum stillbirth or early neonatal death excluding lethal congenital anomalies, or neonatal encephalopathy, admission to the neonatal unit within 24 h for ≥48 h with evidence of feeding difficulties, respiratory illness, or encephalopathy with evidence of compromise at birth), and developmental assessment at age 2 years in a subset of surviving children. Analyses were done by intention to treat. This trial is completed and is registered with the ISRCTN Registry, number 98680152. FINDINGS: Between Jan 6, 2010, and Aug 31, 2013, 47062 women were randomly assigned (23515 in the decision-support group and 23547 in the no-decision-support group) and 46042 were analysed (22987 in the decision-support group and 23055 in the no-decision-support group). We noted no difference in the incidence of poor neonatal outcome between the groups-172 (0·7%) babies in the decision-support group compared with 171 (0·7%) babies in the no-decision-support group (adjusted risk ratio 1·01, 95% CI 0·82-1·25). At 2 years, no significant differences were noted in terms of developmental assessment. INTERPRETATION: Use of computerised interpretation of
AU  - INFANT,Collaborative Group
DO  - 10.1016/S0140-6736(17)30568-8
EP  - 1729
PY  - 2017///
SP  - 1719
TI  - Computerised interpretation of fetal heart rate during labour (INFANT): a randomised controlled trial.
T2  - Lancet
UR  - http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(17)30568-8
UR  - https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28341515
VL  - 389
ER  -
Download