Cargando…

Accuracy, interpretability and usability study of a wireless self-guided fetal heartbeat monitor compared to cardiotocography

Fetal Cardiography is usually performed using in-hospital Cardiotocographic (CTG) devices to assess fetal wellbeing. New technologies may permit home-based, self-administered examinations. We compared the accuracy, clinical interpretability, and user experience of a patient-administered, wireless, f...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Porter, Paul, Zhou, Huaqiong, Schneider, Brooke, Choveaux, Jennifer, Bear, Natasha, Della, Phillip, Jones, Kym
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Nature Publishing Group UK 2022
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9630800/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36329127
http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/s41746-022-00714-6
_version_ 1784823686149177344
author Porter, Paul
Zhou, Huaqiong
Schneider, Brooke
Choveaux, Jennifer
Bear, Natasha
Della, Phillip
Jones, Kym
author_facet Porter, Paul
Zhou, Huaqiong
Schneider, Brooke
Choveaux, Jennifer
Bear, Natasha
Della, Phillip
Jones, Kym
author_sort Porter, Paul
collection PubMed
description Fetal Cardiography is usually performed using in-hospital Cardiotocographic (CTG) devices to assess fetal wellbeing. New technologies may permit home-based, self-administered examinations. We compared the accuracy, clinical interpretability, and user experience of a patient-administered, wireless, fetal heartbeat monitor (HBM) designed for home use, to CTG. Initially, participants had paired HBM and CTG examinations performed in the clinic. Women then used the HBM unsupervised and rated the experience. Sixty-three women had paired clinic-based HBM and CTG recordings, providing 6982 fetal heart rate measures for point-to-point comparison from 126 min of continuous recording. The accuracy of the HBM was excellent, with limits of agreement (95%) for mean fetal heart rate (FHR) between 0.72 and −1.78 beats per minute. The FHR was detected on all occasions and confirmed to be different from the maternal heart rate. Both methods were equally interpretable by Obstetricians, and had similar signal loss ratios. Thirty-four (100%) women successfully detected the FHR and obtained clinically useful cardiographic data using the device at home unsupervised. They achieved the required length of recording required for non-stress test analysis. The monitor ranked in the 96–100(th) percentile for usability and learnability. The HBM is as accurate as gold-standard CTG, and provides equivalent clinical information enabling use in non-stress test analyses conducted outside of hospitals. It is usable by expectant mothers with minimal training.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-9630800
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2022
publisher Nature Publishing Group UK
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-96308002022-11-03 Accuracy, interpretability and usability study of a wireless self-guided fetal heartbeat monitor compared to cardiotocography Porter, Paul Zhou, Huaqiong Schneider, Brooke Choveaux, Jennifer Bear, Natasha Della, Phillip Jones, Kym NPJ Digit Med Article Fetal Cardiography is usually performed using in-hospital Cardiotocographic (CTG) devices to assess fetal wellbeing. New technologies may permit home-based, self-administered examinations. We compared the accuracy, clinical interpretability, and user experience of a patient-administered, wireless, fetal heartbeat monitor (HBM) designed for home use, to CTG. Initially, participants had paired HBM and CTG examinations performed in the clinic. Women then used the HBM unsupervised and rated the experience. Sixty-three women had paired clinic-based HBM and CTG recordings, providing 6982 fetal heart rate measures for point-to-point comparison from 126 min of continuous recording. The accuracy of the HBM was excellent, with limits of agreement (95%) for mean fetal heart rate (FHR) between 0.72 and −1.78 beats per minute. The FHR was detected on all occasions and confirmed to be different from the maternal heart rate. Both methods were equally interpretable by Obstetricians, and had similar signal loss ratios. Thirty-four (100%) women successfully detected the FHR and obtained clinically useful cardiographic data using the device at home unsupervised. They achieved the required length of recording required for non-stress test analysis. The monitor ranked in the 96–100(th) percentile for usability and learnability. The HBM is as accurate as gold-standard CTG, and provides equivalent clinical information enabling use in non-stress test analyses conducted outside of hospitals. It is usable by expectant mothers with minimal training. Nature Publishing Group UK 2022-11-03 /pmc/articles/PMC9630800/ /pubmed/36329127 http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/s41746-022-00714-6 Text en © The Author(s) 2022 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article’s Creative Commons license, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article’s Creative Commons license and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this license, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) .
spellingShingle Article
Porter, Paul
Zhou, Huaqiong
Schneider, Brooke
Choveaux, Jennifer
Bear, Natasha
Della, Phillip
Jones, Kym
Accuracy, interpretability and usability study of a wireless self-guided fetal heartbeat monitor compared to cardiotocography
title Accuracy, interpretability and usability study of a wireless self-guided fetal heartbeat monitor compared to cardiotocography
title_full Accuracy, interpretability and usability study of a wireless self-guided fetal heartbeat monitor compared to cardiotocography
title_fullStr Accuracy, interpretability and usability study of a wireless self-guided fetal heartbeat monitor compared to cardiotocography
title_full_unstemmed Accuracy, interpretability and usability study of a wireless self-guided fetal heartbeat monitor compared to cardiotocography
title_short Accuracy, interpretability and usability study of a wireless self-guided fetal heartbeat monitor compared to cardiotocography
title_sort accuracy, interpretability and usability study of a wireless self-guided fetal heartbeat monitor compared to cardiotocography
topic Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9630800/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36329127
http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/s41746-022-00714-6
work_keys_str_mv AT porterpaul accuracyinterpretabilityandusabilitystudyofawirelessselfguidedfetalheartbeatmonitorcomparedtocardiotocography
AT zhouhuaqiong accuracyinterpretabilityandusabilitystudyofawirelessselfguidedfetalheartbeatmonitorcomparedtocardiotocography
AT schneiderbrooke accuracyinterpretabilityandusabilitystudyofawirelessselfguidedfetalheartbeatmonitorcomparedtocardiotocography
AT choveauxjennifer accuracyinterpretabilityandusabilitystudyofawirelessselfguidedfetalheartbeatmonitorcomparedtocardiotocography
AT bearnatasha accuracyinterpretabilityandusabilitystudyofawirelessselfguidedfetalheartbeatmonitorcomparedtocardiotocography
AT dellaphillip accuracyinterpretabilityandusabilitystudyofawirelessselfguidedfetalheartbeatmonitorcomparedtocardiotocography
AT joneskym accuracyinterpretabilityandusabilitystudyofawirelessselfguidedfetalheartbeatmonitorcomparedtocardiotocography