Technology in the birthing room

Nursing Clinics of North America

Volumn 37, Issue 4, 2002, Pages 781-793

  Miesnik, Susan R ^a   Stringer, Marilyn ^b  

^a CHILDREN S HOSPITAL OF PHILADELPHIA   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA SCHOOL OF NURSING   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

CANADA; DELIVERY; DELIVERY ROOM; FEMALE; FETUS MONITORING; HIGH RISK PREGNANCY; HUMAN; INSTRUMENTATION; LABOR COMPLICATION; MEDICAL TECHNOLOGY; MONITORING; NURSING; PREGNANCY; REVIEW; UNITED STATES;

BIOMEDICAL TECHNOLOGY; CANADA; DELIVERY ROOMS; DELIVERY, OBSTETRIC; FEMALE; FETAL MONITORING; HUMANS; MONITORING, PHYSIOLOGIC; OBSTETRIC LABOR COMPLICATIONS; PREGNANCY; PREGNANCY, HIGH-RISK; UNITED STATES;

EID: 0036982441     PISSN: 00296465     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/S0029-6465(02)00025-7     Document Type: Review

References (36)

1. Barnard A., and Sandelowski M. Technology and humane nursing care: (ir)reconcilable or invented difference?. J Adv Nurs 34 3 (2001) 367-375
2. Sandelowski M. (Ir)Reconcilable differences? The debate concerning nursing and technology. Image J Nurs Sch 29 2 (1997) 169-174
3. McCool W.F. Epidurals, electronic fetal monitoring, and "Dolly": the role of technology in the care of women. J Nurse Midwifery 42 4 (1997) 293-294
4. Ventura S.J., Martin J.A., Curtin S.C., et al. Report on the final natality statistics. 1996. Monthly Vital Statistics Report. NCHS 46 suppl 11 (1998) 1-90
5. Davies B., Niday P., Nimrod C., et al. Electronic fetal monitoring: a Canadian survey. Can Med Assoc J 148 10 (1993) 1737-1742
6. American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists. Fetal heart rate patterns: monitoring, interpretation, and management. ACOG Technical Bulletin #207 (1995), ACOG, Washington, DC
7. Society of Obstetricians and Gynecologists of Canada. Fetal health surveillance in labor. SOGC Journal 17 (1995) 859-901
8. Schmidt J.V., and McCartney P.R. History and development of fetal heart assessment: a composite. J Obstet Gynecol Neonatal Nurs 29 3 (2000) 295-305
9. Murray M. Fetal and maternal monitoring equipment. Antepartal and intrapartal fetal monitoring (1999), Learning Resources International, Albuquerque, NM 87-143
10. Woolley D. Fetal monitoring. In: Nichol F.H., and Zwelling E. (Eds). Maternal newborn nursing: theory and practice (1997), WB Saunders, Philadelphia 932-964
11. Gaffney S.E., Salinger L., and Vintzileos A. The biophysical profile for fetal surveillance. American Journal Maternal Child Nursing 15 (1990) 356
12. Lowdermilk D., Perry S., and Jensen M.D. Maternity Nursing. ed 6 (1999), Mosby, Philadelphia
13. Manning F.A. General principles and applications of ultrasound. In: Creasey R., and Resnick R. (Eds). Maternal-fetal medicine (1999), WB Saunders, Philadelphia 169-206
14. Gebuer C.L., and Lowe N.K. The biophysical profile: antepartal assessment of fetal well-being. J Obstet Gynecol Neonatal Nurs 2 (1993) 115-123
15. Murray M. Antepartal fetal monitoring. Antepartal and intrapartal fetal monitoring (1999), Learning Resources International, Albuquerque, NM 430-432
16. Cunningham F.G., MacDonald P.C., Gant N., et al. Williams obsetrics (1997), Appleton & Lange, Stamford, CT
17. Cibils L.A. On intrapartum fetal monitoring. Am J Obstet Gynecol 174 (1996) 1382-1389
18. Gagnon R., Campbell M.K., and Hunse C. A comparison between visual and computer analysis of antepartum fetal heart rate tracings. Am J Obstet Gynecol 168 (1993) 842-847
19. McCartney P.R. Computer analysis of fetal heart rate. J Obstet Gynecol Neonatal Nurs 29 5 (2000) 527-536
20. Ewingman B.G., Crane P., Frigoletto F.D., et al. Effect of prenatal ultrasound screening on perinatal outcome. N Engl J Med 329 (1993) 821
21. Fleisher A., Manning F., Jeanty P., et al. Vaginal ultrasonography and pregnancy. In: Gervasi M., Romero R., Pacora P., et al. (Eds). Sonography in obstetrics and gynecology: principles and practice (2001), McGraw Hill, New York 821-844
22. Kurtzman J.T., Goldsmith L.J., Gall S.A., et al. Transvaginal versus transperineal ultrasonography: a blinded comparison in the assessment of cervical length at midgestation. Obstet Gynecol 179 (1998) 852-857
23. Gabbe S., Niebyl J., Simpson J., et al. Obstetrics: normal and problem pregnancies (1996), Churchill Livingstone, New York
24. Menihan C.A. Limited sonography in obstetric and gynecologic triage (1998), Lippencott-Raven, Philadelphia
25. Manning F.A. Fetal biophysical profile score. In: Creasey R., and Resnick R. (Eds). Maternal-fetal medicine (1999), WB Saunders, Philadelphia 319-330
26. Creasey R., and Resnik R. Maternal-fetal medicine. ed 4 (1999), Saunders, Philadelphia
27. Sawyer M.M., Lipshitz J., Anderson G.D., et al. Diurnal and short-term variation of blood pressure: a comparison of preeclamptic, chronic hypertensive, and normotensive patients. Obstet Gynecol 58 3 (1981) 291-296
28. Olofsson P., and Persson K. A comparison between conventional and 24-hour automatic blood pressure monitoring in hypertensive pregnancy. Acta Obstetrica et Gynecologica Scandinavica 74 6 (1995) 429-433
29. Mallinckrodt, Inc. (Healthy Mother and Baby Division). Fetal oxygen physiology. Pleasanton, CA:2000.
30. Simpson K.R., and Porter M.L. Fetal oxygen saturation monitoring. Lifelines 5 2 (2001) 26-33
31. Garite T.J., Dildy G.A., McNamara H., et al. A multicentered controlled trial of fetal pulse oximetry in the intrapartum management of nonreassuring fetal heart rate patterns. Am J Obstet Gynecol 183 5 (2000) 1049-1058
32. American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists. Fetal pulse oximetry. ACOG Committee Opinion No. 258 (2001), ACOG, Washington, DC
33. Davis L.K. Nursing care protocols and procedures. In: Mandeville L.K., and Troiano N.H. (Eds). High-risk intrapartum nursing (1992), JB Lippincott Company, Philadelphia 309-316
34. Britt R., and Pasero C. Pregnancy, childbirth, postpartum, and breastfeeding. In: McCaffery M., and Pasero C. (Eds). Pain: clinical management. ed 2 (1992), Mosby, St. Louis 619-621
35. Haggerty L.A. Continuous electronic fetal monitoring: contradictions between practice and research. J Obstet Gynecol Neonatal Nurs 28 4 (1999) 409-416
36. American College of Nurse-Midwives. The appropriate use of technology in childbirth. ACNM Position Statement (1997), ACNM, Washington, DC