Management and Outcome of Reduced Fetal Movements-is Ultrasound Necessary?

Objective: To review the management and outcome of pregnancies of women presenting to obstetrical triage with decreased fetal movements (DFM). Study Design: A retrospective review of women presenting with DFMs to two large Canadian obstetrical centres with a combined 9490 deliveries per year. The charts were reviewed for compliance with the Canadian guidelines for demographics (age, parity, GA, comorbidities, etc.), pregnancy management (admission vs. discharge, need to deliver), and pregnancy outcomes (mortality, morbidity, GA at delivery, Apgar scores, etc.). Patients who did not comply with the Canadian guidelines (requiring the patient to count six movements within two hours) were not excluded. Results: The charts of 579 patients who self-reported DFMs between January 2012 and December 2012 were reviewed. The distribution of ages was between 18 and 47 year old. The majority of these patients had no comorbidities (454/579). A significant minority of patients had FM in the triage area (231/579). The Canadian guidelines were interpreted differently in the two centres. In one (level 3), the protocol was to have a biophysical profile (BPP) on all patients prior to discharge, whereas in the other (level 2), only patients with a non-reactive non-stress test (NST) and/or oligohydramnios or intrauterine growth restriction (IUGR) underwent a BPP. All patients had an evaluation by an RN and MD and had a NST on arrival. A combination of NST and BPP was performed on 235/579. The frequency of DFM was 6.1% (level 3 centre: 5.6%, level 2 centre: 7.8%). There were 8 stillbirths on arrival. The 187 patients who had a reactive NST and a normal BPP and were sent home did not have a single stillbirth within 2 weeks. In the level 3 centre, 19 patients were sent home without a BPP and one had a stillbirth within 2 days (5%); in the level 2 hospital, there was only one stillbirth among the NST-only group (0.35%). There were 65 admissions; 46 of them (71%) were delivered, and 50% of them had a Caesarean delivery (baseline around 30%). Conclusions: This is the first study looking at the performance of the Canadian guidelines of 2007. We found that the DFM rate was compatible with the literature (6.1% vs. 5%). The frequency of stillbirth on arrival was 1.4% (8/579). Patients discharged after normal NST and BPP did extremely well (no stillbirths), whereas those admitted following DFM had a relatively high Caesarean delivery rate (50%). This study was not designed to address changes in stillbirth rate, but it outlines the patients who experience DFM and their eventual outcomes.