A lot of moms to be want to ascertain fetal gender early in pregnancy. The myth says that in case the unborn child’s heart rate is under a hundred and forty beats per minute, you are having a baby boy, and in case it is over a hundred and forty beats per minute, you are having a baby girl. Opposite to common beliefs usually held by a lot of expectant parents and their older family members, there’re no significant differences between female and male fetal heart rate throughout the 1st trimester.
Fetal heart rate doesn’t determine the gender of the unborn child, and so far so many moms to be are still convinced that their unborn child’s heart sound is an accurate sign of her or his gender. The FHR does correspond well with age before 9 weeks; on the other hand, there’s no difference at all between baby boys and baby girls that’s significant enough to be measured. As with all gender myths, though, they have a 50-50 chance of being right and the half that end up being right are what fuel the continuation of these fun myths.
However, it is not easy to resist this simple (and let’s face it, fun) test and ever so tempting to overanalyze the pitter patter of the small heart. In first trimester the reassuring sound of the heart beating is actually the one and only thing moms have got to show a child is even there.
Even though this particular myth has been kicking around for years, there’s not much solid evidence to support it. What’s more, there is only one study on the books which seems to lend any credence to the myth at all: a 1993 study at the University of Kentucky that concluded that the FHR can be used to accurately predict the gender of 74% of female fetuses and 91% of male fetuses.
There’re just 4 accurate ways to determine for sure what gender a mom is having: birth, ultrasound performed after 20 weeks, chorionic villus sampling and amniocentesis. However even an ultrasound scan depends on the physician performing it as well as the child’s cooperation. The child sometimes simply refuses to cooperate and the physician is unable to see the gender. Chorionic villus samplings as well as amniocentesis have their own risks.
Given that each and every other study on the books has reached the exact opposite conclusion, we would not paint the nursery blue or pink on this basis! The child’s gender can’t be predicted by heart rate. So do not fall for this old wives tale; even though some (and even some physicians) insist on repeating it, it has been disproven by many medical studies.
November 24, 2010
Young expectant parents are being advised by many medical professionals not to use hand-held home use fetal heart rate monitors (an instrument better known as the Doppler) in order to listen to the baby’s heartbeat over (justified) fears that these sophisticated medical instruments can lead to delays in seeking medical help for reduced fetal movements (RFM) which can represent a warning sign that the unborn child is small for gestation or unwell. Therefore, expectant mothers who report reduced fetal movements have to be investigated thoroughly.
In one article in the British Medical Journal, Dr Thomas Aust (MD Obstetrician/Gynecologist) and his colleague physicians from the Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology at Arrowe Park Hospital, Wirral describe the case of a young twenty seven year old woman who presented to their labor ward thirty two weeks into her first pregnancy with reduced fetal movements.
She had first noted a reduction in the unborn child’s activity 2 days earlier, however, had used her own home use fetal Doppler instrument to listen to her unborn child’s heart beating and reassured herself that all was okay.
Further fetal heart rate monitoring by the prenatal care team wasn’t reassuring. So, the child was delivered by C-section later that night. The newborn remained on the special care newborn room for two months and is making steady progress.
Fetal Doppler instrument assesses the presence of an unborn child’s heart beating only at that moment and it’s used by obstetricians as well as trained midwives in order to check for viability or for intermittent monitoring throughout the labor, say the authors. In inexperienced hands it’s much more likely that blood flow through the placenta or the pregnant woman’s main blood vessels will be heard.
Following this specific case, they searched the Web and found that a hand-held home use Doppler instrument could be rented for $15 per one month or bought for as little as $40 to $70. Even though the companies offering sales state that the instrument isn’t intended to replace advised prenatal diagnosis, manufacturers make claims like: “Expectant parents will be able to locate and listen to the heart beating with amazing clarity.”
It’s quite hard to say whether self monitoring altered the outcome in this particular instance, explain the authors. On the other hand, they now have posters in their antenatal areas advising that expectant parents don’t use these instruments.
September 16, 2010
In what seems to be one of the biggest and perhaps most demanding studies to this date, Washington University School of Medicine scientists are trying to better understand the use of the most widespread obstetric procedure used by many physicians — fetal heart rate monitoring.
Fetal heart rate monitoring was first introduced in back the early ‘70s to continuously check unborn child’s heart rates and, needless to say, on time intervene, if found necessary. The main aim was to reduce the risk of death as well as cerebral palsy resulting from insufficient oxygen to the baby’s sensitive brain.
In spite of the simple procedure being used in over 85% of United States childbirths, the stillbirth rate hasn’t changed and the rate of cerebral palsy has unfortunately increased.
“The technology became accepted practice before we knew if it worked or not.” These are the words of Dr. Alison Cahill, Assistant Professor in the Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Division of Maternal-Fetal Medicine at Washington.
In order to compare the fetal heart rate patterns to neonatal outcomes in seven thousands deliveries Dr. Alison Cahill and her colleague medical scientists have received a $3.5 million, 5-year grant from the National Institute of Child Health and Human Development.
Dr. Alison Cahill also said that: “Physicians are intervening on EFM recordings they think have particular meaning, but the recordings are not accurately predicting which babies will have neurological damage.” She also added that: “If we can learn more about these recordings and what they mean, we can possibly reduce the number of c-sections and also improve newborn care.”
For many years, the heart rate patterns were divided into 2 main categories: non-reassuring and reassuring. New recommendations introduced in 2008 divided the heart rate patterns into 3 main categories considered abnormal, normal, and intermediate. Intermediate readings are the most common, Dr. Alison Cahill said, on the other hand, “we have no information about the meanings of those patterns.”
Medical researches hope the study will ultimately result in much more precise interpretations of the recordings and help lessen the rate of C-sections as well, which have risen to 32% of all childbirths from 7% when fetal heart rate monitoring was first introduced.
Due to the threat of liability, a lot of children who might have been okay after a natural childbirth are being delivered with forceps or surgically, are the words of the Dr. George Macones, Mitchell and Elaine Yanow Professor and Chair, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology.
Sophisticated fetal heart rate monitoring technology holds promise, were the words of the Dr. Alison Cahill said that. She also said that: “It is hard to imagine second-to-second monitoring is less valuable. We just have not looked at it in a successful way.”
In the study to come, medical scientists will assess the fetal heart rate monitoring recordings a hundred and twenty minutes before childbirth and see whether those recordings predict which babies will suffer neurological damage. What’s more, two hundred full-term children born at Barnes-Jewish Hospital will undergo much more thorough tests in order to detect brain damage, like an MRI or cord blood sample.
September 12, 2010
Previous page