التفاصيل البيبلوغرافية
| العنوان: |
Intra- and interobserver agreement among obstetric experts in court regarding the review of abnormal fetal heart rate tracings and obstetrical management. |
| المؤلفون: |
Sabiani, Laura, Le Dû, Renaud, Loundou, Anderson, d’Ercole, Claude, Bretelle, Florence, Boubli, Léon, Carcopino, Xavier, d'Ercole, Claude |
| المصدر: |
American Journal of Obstetrics & Gynecology; Dec2015, Vol. 213 Issue 6, p856.e1-856.e8, 1p |
| مصطلحات موضوعية: |
FETAL heart rate monitoring, HEALTH outcome assessment, CEREBRAL palsy, OBSTETRICS, FETAL growth disorders, MALPRACTICE, OBSTETRICS -- Law & legislation, APGAR score, ARTIFICIAL respiration, AUDITING, DELIVERY (Obstetrics), CORD blood, FETAL monitoring, HOSPITAL admission & discharge, HYDROGEN-ion concentration, NEONATAL intensive care, PATIENTS, NEONATAL intensive care units, RESEARCH bias, RETROSPECTIVE studies, FETAL heart rate |
| مصطلحات جغرافية: |
FRANCE |
| مستخلص: |
Objective: The objective of the study was to evaluate the intra- and interobserver agreement among obstetric experts in court regarding the retrospective review of abnormal fetal heart rate tracings and obstetrical management of patients with abnormal fetal heart rate during labor.Study Design: A total of 22 French obstetric experts in court reviewed 30 cases of term deliveries of singleton pregnancies diagnosed with at least 1 hour of abnormal fetal heart rate, including 10 cases with adverse neonatal outcome. The experts reviewed all cases twice within a 3-month interval, with the first review being blinded to neonatal outcome. For each case reviewed, the experts were provided with the obstetric data and copies of the complete fetal heart rate recording and the partogram. The experts were asked to classify the abnormal fetal heart rate tracing and to express whether they agreed with the obstetrical management performed. When they disagreed, the experts were asked whether they concluded that an error had been made and whether they considered the obstetrical management as the cause of cerebral palsy in children if any.Results: Compared with blinded review, the experts were significantly more likely to agree with the obstetric management performed (P < .001) and with the mode of delivery (P < .001) when informed about the neonatal outcome and were less likely to conclude that an error had been made (P < .001) or to establish a link with potential cerebral palsy (P = .003). The experts' intraobserver agreement for the review of abnormal fetal heart rate tracing and obstetrical management were both mediocre (kappa = 0.46-0.51 and kappa = 0.48-0.53, respectively). The interobserver agreement for the review of abnormal fetal heart rate tracing was low and was not improved by knowledge of the neonatal outcome (kappa = 0.11-0.18). The interobserver agreement for the interpretation of obstetrical management was also low (kappa = 0.08-0.19) but appeared to be improved by knowledge of the neonatal outcome (kappa = 0.15-0.32).Conclusion: The intra- and interobserver agreement among obstetric experts in court for the review of abnormal fetal heart rate tracing and the appropriateness of obstetrical care is poor, suggesting a lack of objectivity of obstetrical expertise as currently performed in court. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR] |
|
Copyright of American Journal of Obstetrics & Gynecology is the property of Elsevier B.V. and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.) |
| قاعدة البيانات: |
Supplemental Index |
