Advanced

Women's experiences of two different self-assessment methods for monitoring fetal movements in full-term pregnancy - a crossover trial

Malm, Mari Cristin; Rådestad, Ingela; Rubertsson, Christine LU ; Hildingsson, Ingegerd and Lindgren, Helena (2014) In BMC Pregnancy and Childbirth 14(1).
Abstract

Background: Low maternal awareness of fetal movements is associated with negative birth outcomes. Knowledge regarding pregnant women's compliance with programs of systematic self-assessment of fetal movements is needed. The aim of this study was to investigate women's experiences using two different self-assessment methods for monitoring fetal movements and to determine if the women had a preference for one or the other method.Methods: Data were collected by a crossover trial; 40 healthy women with an uncomplicated full-term pregnancy counted the fetal movements according to a Count-to-ten method and assessed the character of the movements according to the Mindfetalness method. Each self-assessment was observed by a midwife and followed... (More)

Background: Low maternal awareness of fetal movements is associated with negative birth outcomes. Knowledge regarding pregnant women's compliance with programs of systematic self-assessment of fetal movements is needed. The aim of this study was to investigate women's experiences using two different self-assessment methods for monitoring fetal movements and to determine if the women had a preference for one or the other method.Methods: Data were collected by a crossover trial; 40 healthy women with an uncomplicated full-term pregnancy counted the fetal movements according to a Count-to-ten method and assessed the character of the movements according to the Mindfetalness method. Each self-assessment was observed by a midwife and followed by a questionnaire. A total of 80 self-assessments was performed; 40 with each method.Results: Of the 40 women, only one did not find at least one method suitable. Twenty of the total of 39 reported a preference, 15 for the Mindfetalness method and five for the Count-to-ten method. All 39 said they felt calm, relaxed, mentally present and focused during the observations. Furthermore, the women described the observation of the movements as safe and reassuring and a moment for communication with their unborn baby.Conclusions: In the 80 assessments all but one of the women found one or both methods suitable for self-assessment of fetal movements and they felt comfortable during the assessments. More women preferred the Mindfetalness method compared to the count-to-ten method, than vice versa.

(Less)
Please use this url to cite or link to this publication:
author
publishing date
type
Contribution to journal
publication status
published
keywords
Crossover trial, Fetal movements, Pregnancy, Self-assessment
in
BMC Pregnancy and Childbirth
volume
14
issue
1
publisher
BioMed Central
external identifiers
  • scopus:84908072656
ISSN
1471-2393
DOI
10.1186/1471-2393-14-349
language
English
LU publication?
no
id
b60f3b59-5848-445b-9d0e-d2444a0c78d4
date added to LUP
2017-10-27 13:53:38
date last changed
2017-10-30 10:31:30
@article{b60f3b59-5848-445b-9d0e-d2444a0c78d4,
  abstract     = {<p>Background: Low maternal awareness of fetal movements is associated with negative birth outcomes. Knowledge regarding pregnant women's compliance with programs of systematic self-assessment of fetal movements is needed. The aim of this study was to investigate women's experiences using two different self-assessment methods for monitoring fetal movements and to determine if the women had a preference for one or the other method.Methods: Data were collected by a crossover trial; 40 healthy women with an uncomplicated full-term pregnancy counted the fetal movements according to a Count-to-ten method and assessed the character of the movements according to the Mindfetalness method. Each self-assessment was observed by a midwife and followed by a questionnaire. A total of 80 self-assessments was performed; 40 with each method.Results: Of the 40 women, only one did not find at least one method suitable. Twenty of the total of 39 reported a preference, 15 for the Mindfetalness method and five for the Count-to-ten method. All 39 said they felt calm, relaxed, mentally present and focused during the observations. Furthermore, the women described the observation of the movements as safe and reassuring and a moment for communication with their unborn baby.Conclusions: In the 80 assessments all but one of the women found one or both methods suitable for self-assessment of fetal movements and they felt comfortable during the assessments. More women preferred the Mindfetalness method compared to the count-to-ten method, than vice versa.</p>},
  articleno    = {349},
  author       = {Malm, Mari Cristin and Rådestad, Ingela and Rubertsson, Christine and Hildingsson, Ingegerd and Lindgren, Helena},
  issn         = {1471-2393},
  keyword      = {Crossover trial,Fetal movements,Pregnancy,Self-assessment},
  language     = {eng},
  month        = {10},
  number       = {1},
  publisher    = {BioMed Central},
  series       = {BMC Pregnancy and Childbirth},
  title        = {Women's experiences of two different self-assessment methods for monitoring fetal movements in full-term pregnancy - a crossover trial},
  url          = {http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1471-2393-14-349},
  volume       = {14},
  year         = {2014},
}