Change search
ReferencesLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Women's experiences of two different self-assessment methods for monitoring fetal movements in full-term pregnancy. A Crossover trial.
Department of Women's and Children's Health, Uppsala University, Uppsala, Sweden.
Sophiahemmet University, Box 5605, Stockholm, Sweden.
Department of Women's and Children's Health, Uppsala University, Uppsala, Sweden.
Mid Sweden University, Faculty of Human Sciences, Department of Nursing Sciences. Department of Women's and Children's Health, Uppsala University, Uppsala, Sweden.ORCID iD: 0000-0001-6985-6729
Show others and affiliations
2014 (English)In: BMC Pregnancy and Childbirth, ISSN 1471-2393, E-ISSN 1471-2393, Vol. 14, no 1, Art. no. 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, no 1, Art. no. 349- p.
Keyword [en]
Crossover trial, Fetal movements, Pregnancy, Self-assessment
National Category
Nursing
Identifiers
URN: urn:nbn:se:miun:diva-23552DOI: 10.1186/1471-2393-14-349ISI: 000343175500001ScopusID: 2-s2.0-84908072656OAI: oai:DiVA.org:miun-23552DiVA: diva2:767168
Available from: 2014-12-01 Created: 2014-12-01 Last updated: 2016-10-25Bibliographically approved

Open Access in DiVA

fulltext(287 kB)10 downloads
File information
File name FULLTEXT01.pdfFile size 287 kBChecksum SHA-512
7b5cac21c0df62c69b5c86a688c07485d2d4a04179c3a62d1506e0d566a56b0937495a86dede18e8b96d5179ceeca6b8f4d6b9e32d1d0b2cdfcfbb8c05395cf3
Type fulltextMimetype application/pdf

Other links

Publisher's full textScopushttp://www.biomedcentral.com/1471-2393/14/349

Search in DiVA

By author/editor
Hildingsson, Ingegerd
By organisation
Department of Nursing Sciences
In the same journal
BMC Pregnancy and Childbirth
Nursing

Search outside of DiVA

GoogleGoogle Scholar
Total: 10 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

Altmetric score

Total: 46 hits
ReferencesLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link