Categorizing Fetal Heart Rate Variability with and without Visual Aids

Abstract Objective This study examined the ability of clinicians to correctly categorize images of fetal heart rate (FHR) variability with and without the use of exemplars. Study Design A sample of 33 labor and delivery clinicians inspected static FHR images and categorized...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Amanda J. Ashdown, Mark W. Scerbo, Lee A. Belfore II, Stephen S. Davis, Alfred Z. Abuhamad
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: Thieme Medical Publishers, Inc. 2016-10-01
Series:American Journal of Perinatology Reports
Subjects:
Online Access:http://www.thieme-connect.de/DOI/DOI?10.1055/s-0036-1593605
_version_ 1818148365310885888
author Amanda J. Ashdown
Mark W. Scerbo
Lee A. Belfore II
Stephen S. Davis
Alfred Z. Abuhamad
author_facet Amanda J. Ashdown
Mark W. Scerbo
Lee A. Belfore II
Stephen S. Davis
Alfred Z. Abuhamad
author_sort Amanda J. Ashdown
collection DOAJ
description Abstract Objective This study examined the ability of clinicians to correctly categorize images of fetal heart rate (FHR) variability with and without the use of exemplars. Study Design A sample of 33 labor and delivery clinicians inspected static FHR images and categorized them into one of four categories defined by the National Institute of Child Health and Human Development (NICHD) based on the amount of variability within absent, minimal, moderate, or marked ranges. Participants took part in three conditions: two in which they used exemplars representing FHR variability near the center or near the boundaries of each range, and a third control condition with no exemplars. The data gathered from clinicians were compared with those from a previous study using novices. Results Clinicians correctly categorized more images when the FHR variability fell near the center rather than the boundaries of each range, F (1,32) = 71.69, p < 0.001, partial η2 = 0.69. They also correctly categorized more images when exemplars were available, F (2,64) = 5.44, p = 0.007, partial η2 = 0.15. Compared with the novices, the clinicians were more accurate and quicker in their category judgments, but this difference was limited to the condition without exemplars. Conclusion The results suggest that categorizing FHR variability is more difficult when the examples fall near the boundaries of each NICHD-defined range. Thus, clinicians could benefit from training with visual aids to improve judgments about FHR variability and potentially enhance safety in labor and delivery.
first_indexed 2024-12-11T12:49:59Z
format Article
id doaj.art-3151cfb08f0e420b8a65abaeeec8ebb3
institution Directory Open Access Journal
issn 2157-6998
2157-7005
language English
last_indexed 2024-12-11T12:49:59Z
publishDate 2016-10-01
publisher Thieme Medical Publishers, Inc.
record_format Article
series American Journal of Perinatology Reports
spelling doaj.art-3151cfb08f0e420b8a65abaeeec8ebb32022-12-22T01:06:43ZengThieme Medical Publishers, Inc.American Journal of Perinatology Reports2157-69982157-70052016-10-010604e359e36610.1055/s-0036-1593605Categorizing Fetal Heart Rate Variability with and without Visual AidsAmanda J. Ashdown0Mark W. Scerbo1Lee A. Belfore II2Stephen S. Davis3Alfred Z. Abuhamad4Department of Psychology, Old Dominion University, Norfolk, VirginiaDepartment of Psychology, Old Dominion University, Norfolk, VirginiaDepartment of Electrical and Computer Engineering, Old Dominion University, Norfolk, VirginiaDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Eastern Virginia Medical School, Norfolk, VirginiaDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Eastern Virginia Medical School, Norfolk, VirginiaAbstract Objective This study examined the ability of clinicians to correctly categorize images of fetal heart rate (FHR) variability with and without the use of exemplars. Study Design A sample of 33 labor and delivery clinicians inspected static FHR images and categorized them into one of four categories defined by the National Institute of Child Health and Human Development (NICHD) based on the amount of variability within absent, minimal, moderate, or marked ranges. Participants took part in three conditions: two in which they used exemplars representing FHR variability near the center or near the boundaries of each range, and a third control condition with no exemplars. The data gathered from clinicians were compared with those from a previous study using novices. Results Clinicians correctly categorized more images when the FHR variability fell near the center rather than the boundaries of each range, F (1,32) = 71.69, p < 0.001, partial η2 = 0.69. They also correctly categorized more images when exemplars were available, F (2,64) = 5.44, p = 0.007, partial η2 = 0.15. Compared with the novices, the clinicians were more accurate and quicker in their category judgments, but this difference was limited to the condition without exemplars. Conclusion The results suggest that categorizing FHR variability is more difficult when the examples fall near the boundaries of each NICHD-defined range. Thus, clinicians could benefit from training with visual aids to improve judgments about FHR variability and potentially enhance safety in labor and delivery.http://www.thieme-connect.de/DOI/DOI?10.1055/s-0036-1593605categorizationcuesclinical judgmentexemplarsfetal heart rate variability
spellingShingle Amanda J. Ashdown
Mark W. Scerbo
Lee A. Belfore II
Stephen S. Davis
Alfred Z. Abuhamad
Categorizing Fetal Heart Rate Variability with and without Visual Aids
American Journal of Perinatology Reports
categorization
cues
clinical judgment
exemplars
fetal heart rate variability
title Categorizing Fetal Heart Rate Variability with and without Visual Aids
title_full Categorizing Fetal Heart Rate Variability with and without Visual Aids
title_fullStr Categorizing Fetal Heart Rate Variability with and without Visual Aids
title_full_unstemmed Categorizing Fetal Heart Rate Variability with and without Visual Aids
title_short Categorizing Fetal Heart Rate Variability with and without Visual Aids
title_sort categorizing fetal heart rate variability with and without visual aids
topic categorization
cues
clinical judgment
exemplars
fetal heart rate variability
url http://www.thieme-connect.de/DOI/DOI?10.1055/s-0036-1593605
work_keys_str_mv AT amandajashdown categorizingfetalheartratevariabilitywithandwithoutvisualaids
AT markwscerbo categorizingfetalheartratevariabilitywithandwithoutvisualaids
AT leeabelforeii categorizingfetalheartratevariabilitywithandwithoutvisualaids
AT stephensdavis categorizingfetalheartratevariabilitywithandwithoutvisualaids
AT alfredzabuhamad categorizingfetalheartratevariabilitywithandwithoutvisualaids