SummaryIn this study, 55 pregnant women in labor were classified into:Control group; 15 cases with uneventful pregnancy (9 showed normal CTG findings and 6 showed suspicious CTG). The remaining 40 cases were high risk pregnancies; 20 cases was pre-eclampsia and 20 cases was diabetic (7 showed normal CTG, 17 showed suspicious CTG findings and 16 showed pathological CTG findings).All cases were subjected to the following:- Routine history and clinical examination.- Routine laboratory investigations.- CTG.- Apgar score at one and five minutes.The validity of predictive value of CTG findings were assessed in relation to Apgar score < 7 at one and five minutes in the two groups. It has been found that:- There was no statistical significant difference in age, gravidity and gestational age between each of study and control groups.- There was significant difference in percentage of cases with Apgar score at one minute in suspicious compared with normal in control group (p = 0.2).- There was no significant difference in percentage of cases with Apgar score at one and five minutes in suspicious compared with normal in study group (p = 0.38-1).- There was significant difference in percentage of cases with Apgar score at one minutes and no significant difference at five minutes in pathological compared with normal in study group (p = 0.001-0.27).- The sensitivity, specificity positive predictive value and negative predictive value of CTG for detection of Apgar score < 7 at one minutes in control group (100%, 64%, 16.7% and 100%).- The sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value and negative predictive value of CTG for detection of Apgar score < 7 at one and five minutes in study group:For pathological CTG compared with normal; 88.9%, 100%, 100% and 71.4% compared to 100%, 36.8%, 25% and 100%.For suspicious compared with normal; 81.8%, 38.5%, 52.9% and 71.4% compared to 100%, 30.4%, 5.9% and 100%.Conclusion1. The identification of predictive value of CTG finding to be useful screening test in intrapartum surveillance for fetal asphyxia in high risk pregnancies.2. Exclusion of EFM from intrapartum care in low risk pregnancies.ReferencesSummaryIn this study, 55 pregnant women in labor were classified into:Control group; 15 cases with uneventful pregnancy (9 showed normal CTG findings and 6 showed suspicious CTG). The remaining 40 cases were high risk pregnancies; 20 cases was pre-eclampsia and 20 cases was diabetic (7 showed normal CTG, 17 showed suspicious CTG findings and 16 showed pathological CTG findings).All cases were subjected to the following:- Routine history and clinical examination.- Routine laboratory investigations.- CTG.- Apgar score at one and five minutes.The validity of predictive value of CTG findings were assessed in relation to Apgar score < 7 at one and five minutes in the two groups. It has been found that:- There was no statistical significant difference in age, gravidity and gestational age between each of study and control groups.- There was significant difference in percentage of cases with Apgar score at one minute in suspicious compared with normal in control group (p = 0.2).- There was no significant difference in percentage of cases with Apgar score at one and five minutes in suspicious compared with normal in study group (p = 0.38-1).- There was significant difference in percentage of cases with Apgar score at one minutes and no significant difference at five minutes in pathological compared with normal in study group (p = 0.001-0.27).- The sensitivity, specificity positive predictive value and negative predictive value of CTG for detection of Apgar score < 7 at one minutes in control group (100%, 64%, 16.7% and 100%).- The sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value and negative predictive value of CTG for detection of Apgar score < 7 at one and five minutes in study group:For pathological CTG compared with normal; 88.9%, 100%, 100% and 71.4% compared to 100%, 36.8%, 25% and 100%.For suspicious compared with normal; 81.8%, 38.5%, 52.9% and 71.4% compared to 100%, 30.4%, 5.9% and 100%.Conclusion1. The identification of predictive value of CTG finding to be useful screening test in intrapartum surveillance for fetal asphyxia in high risk pregnancies.2. Exclusion of EFM from intrapartum care in low risk pregnancies.ReferencesSummaryIn this study, 55 pregnant women in labor were classified into:Control group; 15 cases with uneventful pregnancy (9 showed normal CTG findings and 6 showed suspicious CTG). The remaining 40 cases were high risk pregnancies; 20 cases was pre-eclampsia and 20 cases was diabetic (7 showed normal CTG, 17 showed suspicious CTG findings and 16 showed pathological CTG findings).All cases were subjected to the following:- Routine history and clinical examination.- Routine laboratory investigations.- CTG.- Apgar score at one and five minutes.The validity of predictive value of CTG findings were assessed in relation to Apgar score < 7 at one and five minutes in the two groups. It has been found that:- There was no statistical significant difference in age, gravidity and gestational age between each of study and control groups.- There was significant difference in percentage of cases with Apgar score at one minute in suspicious compared with normal in control group (p = 0.2).- There was no significant difference in percentage of cases with Apgar score at one and five minutes in suspicious compared with normal in study group (p = 0.38-1).- There was significant difference in percentage of cases with Apgar score at one minutes and no significant difference at five minutes in pathological compared with normal in study group (p = 0.001-0.27).- The sensitivity, specificity positive predictive value and negative predictive value of CTG for detection of Apgar score < 7 at one minutes in control group (100%, 64%, 16.7% and 100%).- The sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value and negative predictive value of CTG for detection of Apgar score < 7 at one and five minutes in study group:For pathological CTG compared with normal; 88.9%, 100%, 100% and 71.4% compared to 100%, 36.8%, 25% and 100%.For suspicious compared with normal; 81.8%, 38.5%, 52.9% and 71.4% compared to 100%, 30.4%, 5.9% and 100%.Conclusion1. The identification of predictive value of CTG finding to be useful screening test in intrapartum surveillance for fetal asphyxia in high risk pregnancies.2. Exclusion of EFM from intrapartum care in low risk pregnancies.ReferencesSummaryIn this study, 55 pregnant women in labor were classified into:Control group; 15 cases with uneventful pregnancy (9 showed normal CTG findings and 6 showed suspicious CTG). The remaining 40 cases were high risk pregnancies; 20 cases was pre-eclampsia and 20 cases was diabetic (7 showed normal CTG, 17 showed suspicious CTG findings and 16 showed pathological CTG findings).All cases were subjected to the following:- Routine history and clinical examination.- Routine laboratory investigations.- CTG.- Apgar score at one and five minutes.The validity of predictive value of CTG findings were assessed in relation to Apgar score < 7 at one and five minutes in the two groups. It has been found that:- There was no statistical significant difference in age, gravidity and gestational age between each of study and control groups.- There was significant difference in percentage of cases with Apgar score at one minute in suspicious compared with normal in control group (p = 0.2).- There was no significant difference in percentage of cases with Apgar score at one and five minutes in suspicious compared with normal in study group (p = 0.38-1).- There was significant difference in percentage of cases with Apgar score at one minutes and no significant difference at five minutes in pathological compared with normal in study group (p = 0.001-0.27).- The sensitivity, specificity positive predictive value and negative predictive value of CTG for detection of Apgar score < 7 at one minutes in control group (100%, 64%, 16.7% and 100%).- The sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value and negative predictive value of CTG for detection of Apgar score < 7 at one and five minutes in study group:For pathological CTG compared with normal; 88.9%, 100%, 100% and 71.4% compared to 100%, 36.8%, 25% and 100%.For suspicious compared with normal; 81.8%, 38.5%, 52.9% and 71.4% compared to 100%, 30.4%, 5.9% and 100%.Conclusion1. The identification of predictive value of CTG finding to be useful screening test in intrapartum surveillance for fetal asphyxia in high risk pregnancies.2. Exclusion of EFM from intrapartum care in low risk pregnancies.ReferencesSummaryIn this study, 55 pregnant women in labor were classified into:Control group; 15 cases with uneventful pregnancy (9 showed normal CTG findings and 6 showed suspicious CTG). The remaining 40 cases were high risk pregnancies; 20 cases was pre-eclampsia and 20 cases was diabetic (7 showed normal CTG, 17 showed suspicious CTG findings and 16 showed pathological CTG findings).All cases were subjected to the following:- Routine history and clinical examination.- Routine laboratory investigations.- CTG.- Apgar score at one and five minutes.The validity of predictive value of CTG findings were assessed in relation to Apgar score < 7 at one and five minutes in the two groups. It has been found that:- There was no statistical significant difference in age, gravidity and gestational age between each of study and control groups.- There was significant difference in percentage of cases with Apgar score at one minute in suspicious compared with normal in control group (p = 0.2).- There was no significant difference in percentage of cases with Apgar score at one and five minutes in suspicious compared with normal in study group (p = 0.38-1).- There was significant difference in percentage of cases with Apgar score at one minutes and no significant difference at five minutes in pathological compared with normal in study group (p = 0.001-0.27).- The sensitivity, specificity positive predictive value and negative predictive value of CTG for detection of Apgar score < 7 at one minutes in control group (100%, 64%, 16.7% and 100%).- The sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value and negative predictive value of CTG for detection of Apgar score < 7 at one and five minutes in study group:For pathological CTG compared with normal; 88.9%, 100%, 100% and 71.4% compared to 100%, 36.8%, 25% and 100%.For suspicious compared with normal; 81.8%, 38.5%, 52.9% and 71.4% compared to 100%, 30.4%, 5.9% and 100%.Conclusion1. The identification of predictive value of CTG finding to be useful screening test in intrapartum surveillance for fetal asphyxia in high risk pregnancies.2. Exclusion of EFM from intrapartum care in low risk pregnancies.ReferencesSummaryIn this study, 55 pregnant women in labor were classified into:Control group; 15 cases with uneventful pregnancy (9 showed normal CTG findings and 6 showed suspicious CTG). The remaining 40 cases were high risk pregnancies; 20 cases was pre-eclampsia and 20 cases was diabetic (7 showed normal CTG, 17 showed suspicious CTG findings and 16 showed pathological CTG findings).All cases were subjected to the following:- Routine history and clinical examination.- Routine laboratory investigations.- CTG.- Apgar score at one and five minutes.The validity of predictive value of CTG findings were assessed in relation to Apgar score < 7 at one and five minutes in the two groups. It has been found that:- There was no statistical significant difference in age, gravidity and gestational age between each of study and control groups.- There was significant difference in percentage of cases with Apgar score at one minute in suspicious compared with normal in control group (p = 0.2).- There was no significant difference in percentage of cases with Apgar score at one and five minutes in suspicious compared with normal in study group (p = 0.38-1).- There was significant difference in percentage of cases with Apgar score at one minutes and no significant difference at five minutes in pathological compared with normal in study group (p = 0.001-0.27).- The sensitivity, specificity positive predictive value and negative predictive value of CTG for detection of Apgar score < 7 at one minutes in control group (100%, 64%, 16.7% and 100%).- The sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value and negative predictive value of CTG for detection of Apgar score < 7 at one and five minutes in study group:For pathological CTG compared with normal; 88.9%, 100%, 100% and 71.4% compared to 100%, 36.8%, 25% and 100%.For suspicious compared with normal; 81.8%, 38.5%, 52.9% and 71.4% compared to 100%, 30.4%, 5.9% and 100%.Conclusion1. The identification of predictive value of CTG finding to be useful screening test in intrapartum surveillance for fetal asphyxia in high risk pregnancies.2. Exclusion of EFM from intrapartum care in low risk pregnancies.ReferencesSummaryIn this study, 55 pregnant women in labor were classified into:Control group; 15 cases with uneventful pregnancy (9 showed normal CTG findings and 6 showed suspicious CTG). The remaining 40 cases were high risk pregnancies; 20 cases was pre-eclampsia and 20 cases was diabetic (7 showed normal CTG, 17 showed suspicious CTG findings and 16 showed pathological CTG findings).All cases were subjected to the following:- Routine history and clinical examination.- Routine laboratory investigations.- CTG.- Apgar score at one and five minutes.The validity of predictive value of CTG findings were assessed in relation to Apgar score < 7 at one and five minutes in the two groups. It has been found that:- There was no statistical significant difference in age, gravidity and gestational age between each of study and control groups.- There was significant difference in percentage of cases with Apgar score at one minute in suspicious compared with normal in control group (p = 0.2).- There was no significant difference in percentage of cases with Apgar score at one and five minutes in suspicious compared with normal in study group (p = 0.38-1).- There was significant difference in percentage of cases with Apgar score at one minutes and no significant difference at five minutes in pathological compared with normal in study group (p = 0.001-0.27).- The sensitivity, specificity positive predictive value and negative predictive value of CTG for detection of Apgar score < 7 at one minutes in control group (100%, 64%, 16.7% and 100%).- The sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value and negative predictive value of CTG for detection of Apgar score < 7 at one and five minutes in study group:For pathological CTG compared with normal; 88.9%, 100%, 100% and 71.4% compared to 100%, 36.8%, 25% and 100%.For suspicious compared with normal; 81.8%, 38.5%, 52.9% and 71.4% compared to 100%, 30.4%, 5.9% and 100%.Conclusion1. The identification of predictive value of CTG finding to be useful screening test in intrapartum surveillance for fetal asphyxia in high risk pregnancies.2. Exclusion of EFM from intrapartum care in low risk pregnancies.ReferencesSummaryIn this study, 55 pregnant women in labor were classified into:Control group; 15 cases with uneventful pregnancy (9 showed normal CTG findings and 6 showed suspicious CTG). The remaining 40 cases were high risk pregnancies; 20 cases was pre-eclampsia and 20 cases was diabetic (7 showed normal CTG, 17 showed suspicious CTG findings and 16 showed pathological CTG findings).All cases were subjected to the following:- Routine history and clinical examination.- Routine laboratory investigations.- CTG.- Apgar score at one and five minutes.The validity of predictive value of CTG findings were assessed in relation to Apgar score < 7 at one and five minutes in the two groups. It has been found that:- There was no statistical significant difference in age, gravidity and gestational age between each of study and control groups.- There was significant difference in percentage of cases with Apgar score at one minute in suspicious compared with normal in control group (p = 0.2).- There was no significant difference in percentage of cases with Apgar score at one and five minutes in suspicious compared with normal in study group (p = 0.38-1).- There was significant difference in percentage of cases with Apgar score at one minutes and no significant difference at five minutes in pathological compared with normal in study group (p = 0.001-0.27).- The sensitivity, specificity positive predictive value and negative predictive value of CTG for detection of Apgar score < 7 at one minutes in control group (100%, 64%, 16.7% and 100%).- The sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value and negative predictive value of CTG for detection of Apgar score < 7 at one and five minutes in study group:For pathological CTG compared with normal; 88.9%, 100%, 100% and 71.4% compared to 100%, 36.8%, 25% and 100%.For suspicious compared with normal; 81.8%, 38.5%, 52.9% and 71.4% compared to 100%, 30.4%, 5.9% and 100%.Conclusion1. The identification of predictive value of CTG finding to be useful screening test in intrapartum surveillance for fetal asphyxia in high risk pregnancies.2. Exclusion of EFM from intrapartum care in low risk pregnancies.ReferencesSummaryControl group; 15 cases with uneventful pregnancy (9 showed normal CTG findings and 6 showed suspicious CTG). The remaining 40 cases were high risk pregnancies; 20 cases was pre-eclampsia and 20 cases was diabetic (7 showed normal CTG, 17 showed suspicious CTG findings and 16 showed pathological CTG findings).All cases were subjected to the following:- Routine history and clinical examination.- Routine laboratory investigations.- CTG.- Apgar score at one and five minutes.The validity of predictive value of CTG findings were assessed in relation to Apgar score < 7 at one and five minutes in the two groups. It has been found that:- There was no statistical significant difference in age, gravidity and gestational age between each of study and control groups.- There was significant difference in percentage of cases with Apgar score at one minute in suspicious compared with normal in control group (p = 0.2).- There was no significant difference in percentage of cases with Apgar score at one and five minutes in suspicious compared with normal in study group (p = 0.38-1).- There was significant difference in percentage of cases with Apgar score at one minutes and no significant difference at five minutes in pathological compared with normal in study group (p = 0.001-0.27).- The sensitivity, specificity positive predictive value and negative predictive value of CTG for detection of Apgar score < 7 at one minutes in control group (100%, 64%, 16.7% and 100%).- The sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value and negative predictive value of CTG for detection of Apgar score < 7 at one and five minutes in study group:For pathological CTG compared with normal; 88.9%, 100%, 100% and 71.4% compared to 100%, 36.8%, 25% and 100%.For suspicious compared with normal; 81.8%, 38.5%, 52.9% and 71.4% compared to 100%, 30.4%, 5.9% and 100%.Conclusion1. The identification of predictive value of CTG finding to be useful screening test in intrapartum surveillance for fetal asphyxia in high risk pregnancies.2. Exclusion of EFM from intrapartum care in low risk pregnancies.ReferencesSummaryIn this study, 55 pregnant women in labor were classified into:Control group; 15 cases with uneventful pregnancy (9 showed normal CTG findings and 6 showed suspicious CTG). The remaining 40 cases were high risk pregnancies; 20 cases was pre-eclampsia and 20 cases was diabetic (7 showed normal CTG, 17 showed suspicious CTG findings and 16 showed pathological CTG findings).All cases were subjected to the following:- Routine history and clinical examination.- Routine laboratory investigations.- CTG.- Apgar score at one and five minutes.The validity of predictive value of CTG findings were assessed in relation to Apgar score < 7 at one and five minutes in the two groups. It has been found that:- There was no statistical significant difference in age, gravidity and gestational age between each of study and control groups.- There was significant difference in percentage of cases with Apgar score at one minute in suspicious compared with normal in control group (p = 0.2).- There was no significant difference in percentage of cases with Apgar score at one and five minutes in suspicious compared with normal in study group (p = 0.38-1).- There was significant difference in percentage of cases with Apgar score at one minutes and no significant difference at five minutes in pathological compared with normal in study group (p = 0.001-0.27).- The sensitivity, specificity positive predictive value and negative predictive value of CTG for detection of Apgar score < 7 at one minutes in control group (100%, 64%, 16.7% and 100%).- The sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value and negative predictive value of CTG for detection of Apgar score < 7 at one and five minutes in study group:For pathological CTG compared with normal; 88.9%, 100%, 100% and 71.4% compared to 100%, 36.8%, 25% and 100%.For suspicious compared with normal; 81.8%, 38.5%, 52.9% and 71.4% compared to 100%, 30.4%, 5.9% and 100%.Conclusion1. The identification of predictive value of CTG finding to be useful screening test in intrapartum surveillance for fetal asphyxia in high risk pregnancies.2. Exclusion of EFM from intrapartum care in low risk pregnancies.