Cargando…

Uterine Monitoring Techniques from Patients' and Users' Perspectives

Objective  To evaluate preferences from patients and users on 3 uterine monitoring techniques, during labor. Study Design  Women in term labor were simultaneously monitored with the intrauterine pressure catheter, the external tocodynamometer, and the electrohysterograph. Postpartum, these women fil...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Thijssen, Kirsten M. J., Vlemminx, Marion W. C., Westerhuis, Michelle E. M. H., Dieleman, Jeanne P., Van der Hout-Van der Jagt, M. Beatrijs, Oei, S. Guid
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Thieme Medical Publishers 2018
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6138467/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30250758
http://dx.doi.org/10.1055/s-0038-1669409
_version_ 1783355349425717248
author Thijssen, Kirsten M. J.
Vlemminx, Marion W. C.
Westerhuis, Michelle E. M. H.
Dieleman, Jeanne P.
Van der Hout-Van der Jagt, M. Beatrijs
Oei, S. Guid
author_facet Thijssen, Kirsten M. J.
Vlemminx, Marion W. C.
Westerhuis, Michelle E. M. H.
Dieleman, Jeanne P.
Van der Hout-Van der Jagt, M. Beatrijs
Oei, S. Guid
author_sort Thijssen, Kirsten M. J.
collection PubMed
description Objective  To evaluate preferences from patients and users on 3 uterine monitoring techniques, during labor. Study Design  Women in term labor were simultaneously monitored with the intrauterine pressure catheter, the external tocodynamometer, and the electrohysterograph. Postpartum, these women filled out a questionnaire evaluating their preferences and important aspects. Nurses completed a questionnaire evaluating users' preferences. Results  Of all 52 participating women, 80.8% preferred the electrohysterograph, 17.3% the intrauterine pressure catheter and 1.9% the external tocodynamometer. For these women, the electrohysterograph scored best regarding application and presence during labor ( p  < 0.001). Most important aspects were “least likely to harm” and “least discomfort”. Of 57 nurses, 40.4% preferred the electrohysterograph, 35.1% the external tocodynamometer, and 24.6% had no preference, or replied that their preference is subject to situation and patient. Conclusion  Patients prefer the electrohysterograph over the external tocodynamometer and the intrauterine pressure catheter, while healthcare providers report ambiguous results.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-6138467
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2018
publisher Thieme Medical Publishers
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-61384672018-09-24 Uterine Monitoring Techniques from Patients' and Users' Perspectives Thijssen, Kirsten M. J. Vlemminx, Marion W. C. Westerhuis, Michelle E. M. H. Dieleman, Jeanne P. Van der Hout-Van der Jagt, M. Beatrijs Oei, S. Guid AJP Rep Objective  To evaluate preferences from patients and users on 3 uterine monitoring techniques, during labor. Study Design  Women in term labor were simultaneously monitored with the intrauterine pressure catheter, the external tocodynamometer, and the electrohysterograph. Postpartum, these women filled out a questionnaire evaluating their preferences and important aspects. Nurses completed a questionnaire evaluating users' preferences. Results  Of all 52 participating women, 80.8% preferred the electrohysterograph, 17.3% the intrauterine pressure catheter and 1.9% the external tocodynamometer. For these women, the electrohysterograph scored best regarding application and presence during labor ( p  < 0.001). Most important aspects were “least likely to harm” and “least discomfort”. Of 57 nurses, 40.4% preferred the electrohysterograph, 35.1% the external tocodynamometer, and 24.6% had no preference, or replied that their preference is subject to situation and patient. Conclusion  Patients prefer the electrohysterograph over the external tocodynamometer and the intrauterine pressure catheter, while healthcare providers report ambiguous results. Thieme Medical Publishers 2018-07 2018-09-14 /pmc/articles/PMC6138467/ /pubmed/30250758 http://dx.doi.org/10.1055/s-0038-1669409 Text en https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/ This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives License, which permits unrestricted reproduction and distribution, for non-commercial purposes only; and use and reproduction, but not distribution, of adapted material for non-commercial purposes only, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Thijssen, Kirsten M. J.
Vlemminx, Marion W. C.
Westerhuis, Michelle E. M. H.
Dieleman, Jeanne P.
Van der Hout-Van der Jagt, M. Beatrijs
Oei, S. Guid
Uterine Monitoring Techniques from Patients' and Users' Perspectives
title Uterine Monitoring Techniques from Patients' and Users' Perspectives
title_full Uterine Monitoring Techniques from Patients' and Users' Perspectives
title_fullStr Uterine Monitoring Techniques from Patients' and Users' Perspectives
title_full_unstemmed Uterine Monitoring Techniques from Patients' and Users' Perspectives
title_short Uterine Monitoring Techniques from Patients' and Users' Perspectives
title_sort uterine monitoring techniques from patients' and users' perspectives
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6138467/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30250758
http://dx.doi.org/10.1055/s-0038-1669409
work_keys_str_mv AT thijssenkirstenmj uterinemonitoringtechniquesfrompatientsandusersperspectives
AT vlemminxmarionwc uterinemonitoringtechniquesfrompatientsandusersperspectives
AT westerhuismichelleemh uterinemonitoringtechniquesfrompatientsandusersperspectives
AT dielemanjeannep uterinemonitoringtechniquesfrompatientsandusersperspectives
AT vanderhoutvanderjagtmbeatrijs uterinemonitoringtechniquesfrompatientsandusersperspectives
AT oeisguid uterinemonitoringtechniquesfrompatientsandusersperspectives