uu.seUppsala University Publications
Change search
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf
Women's experiences of two different self-assessment methods for monitoring fetal movements in full-term pregnancy: a crossover trial
Uppsala University, Disciplinary Domain of Medicine and Pharmacy, Faculty of Medicine, Department of Women's and Children's Health, Obstetrics and Gynaecology.
Uppsala University, Disciplinary Domain of Medicine and Pharmacy, Faculty of Medicine, Department of Women's and Children's Health, Obstetrics and Gynaecology.
Uppsala University, Disciplinary Domain of Medicine and Pharmacy, Faculty of Medicine, Department of Women's and Children's Health, Obstetrics and Gynaecology.
Show others and affiliations
2014 (English)In: BMC Pregnancy and Childbirth, ISSN 1471-2393, E-ISSN 1471-2393, Vol. 14, 349- p.Article in journal (Refereed) Published
Abstract [en]

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.

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
2014. Vol. 14, 349- p.
National Category
Obstetrics, Gynecology and Reproductive Medicine
Identifiers
URN: urn:nbn:se:uu:diva-234678DOI: 10.1186/1471-2393-14-349ISI: 000343175500001PubMedID: 25288075OAI: oai:DiVA.org:uu-234678DiVA: diva2:757453
Available from: 2014-10-22 Created: 2014-10-22 Last updated: 2017-12-05Bibliographically approved
In thesis
1. Fetal Movements in late Pregnancy: Categorization, Self-assessment, and Prenatal Attachment in relation to women’s experiences
Open this publication in new window or tab >>Fetal Movements in late Pregnancy: Categorization, Self-assessment, and Prenatal Attachment in relation to women’s experiences
2016 (English)Doctoral thesis, comprehensive summary (Other academic)
Abstract [en]

Aim: To explore how pregnant women experience fetal movements in late pregnancy. Specific aims were:  to study women’s experiences during the time prior to receiving news that their unborn baby had died in utero (I), to investigate women’s descriptions of fetal movements (II), investigate the association between the magnitude of fetal movements and level of prenatal attachment (III), and to study women’s experiences using two different self-assessment methods (IV).

Methods: Interviews, questionnaires, and observations were used.

Results: Premonition that something had happened to their unborn baby, based on a lack of fetal movements, was experienced by the participants. The overall theme “something is wrong” describes the women’s insight that the baby’s life was threatened (I). Fetal movements that were sorted into the domain “powerful movements” were perceived in late pregnancy by 96 % of the participants (II). Perceiving frequent fetal movements on at least three occasions per 24 hours was associated with higher scores of prenatal attachment in all the three subscales on PAI-R. The majority (55%) of the 456 participants reported average occasions of frequent fetal movements, 26% several occasions and 18% reported few occasions of frequent fetal movements, during the current gestational week.  (III). Only one of the 40 participants did not find at least one method for monitoring fetal movements suitable. Fifteen of the 39 participants reported a preference for the mindfetalness method and five for the count-to-ten method. The women described the observation of the movements as a safe and reassuring moment for communication with their unborn baby (IV).

Conclusion:  In full-term and uncomplicated pregnancies, women usually perceive fetal movements as powerful. Furthermore, women in late pregnancy who reported frequent fetal movements on several occasions during a 24-hour period seem to have a high level of prenatal attachment. Women who used self-assessment methods for monitoring fetal movements felt calm and relaxed when observing the movements of their babies. They had a high compliance for both self-assessment methods. Women that had experienced a stillbirth in late pregnancy described that they had a premonition before they were told that their baby had died in utero. 

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
Uppsala: Acta Universitatis Upsaliensis, 2016. 73 p.
Series
Digital Comprehensive Summaries of Uppsala Dissertations from the Faculty of Medicine, ISSN 1651-6206 ; 1171
Keyword
Fetal movements, pregnancy, prenatal attachment, self-assessment, stillbirth
National Category
Medical and Health Sciences
Research subject
Obstetrics and Gynaecology
Identifiers
urn:nbn:se:uu:diva-271429 (URN)978-91-554-9446-9 (ISBN)
Public defence
2016-02-25, Föreläsningssal 6, Högskolegatan 2, Falun, 13:00 (Swedish)
Opponent
Supervisors
Available from: 2016-02-04 Created: 2016-01-08 Last updated: 2016-02-12

Open Access in DiVA

fulltext(204 kB)132 downloads
File information
File name FULLTEXT01.pdfFile size 204 kBChecksum SHA-512
f844a468653d65e110ede5ce6f23273c05bb053e6f41e5de8a34d955212a46320659652ee0ec448b42b9d67f5bbdce234146400cabe1d216320f81ccdf1f941a
Type fulltextMimetype application/pdf

Other links

Publisher's full textPubMed

Authority records BETA

Malm, Mari-CristinRubertsson, ChristineHildingsson, Ingegerd

Search in DiVA

By author/editor
Malm, Mari-CristinRubertsson, ChristineHildingsson, Ingegerd
By organisation
Obstetrics and Gynaecology
In the same journal
BMC Pregnancy and Childbirth
Obstetrics, Gynecology and Reproductive Medicine

Search outside of DiVA

GoogleGoogle Scholar
Total: 132 downloads
The number of downloads is the sum of all downloads of full texts. It may include eg previous versions that are now no longer available

doi
pubmed
urn-nbn

Altmetric score

doi
pubmed
urn-nbn
Total: 616 hits
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf