• Login
    View Item 
    •   Mak IR Home
    • College of Health Sciences (CHS)
    • School of Health Sciences (Health-Sciences)
    • School of Health Sciences (Health-Sciences) Collections
    • View Item
    •   Mak IR Home
    • College of Health Sciences (CHS)
    • School of Health Sciences (Health-Sciences)
    • School of Health Sciences (Health-Sciences) Collections
    • View Item
    JavaScript is disabled for your browser. Some features of this site may not work without it.

    Fetal heart rate monitoring practices at a public hospital in Northern Uganda – what health workers document, do and say

    Thumbnail
    View/Open
    Research article (1.426Mb)
    Date
    2020-01-20
    Author
    Ayebare, Elizabeth
    Jonas, Wibke
    Ndeezi, Grace
    Nankunda, Jolly
    Hanson, Claudia
    Tumwine, James K.
    Hjelmstedt, Anna
    Metadata
    Show full item record
    Abstract
    Background: In Uganda, perinatal mortality is 38 per 1000 pregnancies. One-third of these deaths are due to birth asphyxia. Adequate fetal heart rate (FHR) monitoring during labor may detect birth asphyxia but little is known about monitoring practices in low resource settings. Objective: To explore FHR monitoring practices among health workers at a public hospital in Northern Uganda. Methods: A sequential explanatory mixed methods study was conducted by reviewing 251 maternal records and conducting 11 interviews and two focus group discussions with health workers complemented by observations of 42 women in labor until delivery. Quantitative data were summarized using frequencies and percentages. Content analysis was used for qualitative data. Results: FHR was assessed in 235/251 (93.6%) of records at admission. Health workers documented the FHR at least once in 175/228 (76.8%) of cases during the first stage of labor compared to observed 17/25 (68.0%) cases. Median intervals between FHR monitoring were 30 (IQR 30–120) minutes in patients’ records versus 139 (IQR 87–662) minutes according to observations. Observations suggested no monitoring of FHR during the second stage of labor but records indicated monitoring in 3.2% of cases. Reported barriers to adequate FHR monitoring were inadequate number of staff and monitoring devices, institutional challenges such as few beds, documentation problems and perceived non-compliant women not reporting for repeated checks during the first stage of labor. Health workers demonstrated knowledge of national FHR monitoring guidelines and acknowledged that practice was different. Conclusions: When compared to national and international guidelines, FHR monitoring is sub-optimal in the studied setting. Approximately one in four women was not monitored during the first stage of labor. Barriers to appropriate FHR monitoring included shortage of staff and devices, institutional challenges and mother’s negative attitudes. These barriers need to be addressed in order to reduce neonatal mortality.
    URI
    https://doi.org/10.1080/16549716.2020.1711618
    http://hdl.handle.net/10570/11517
    Collections
    • School of Health Sciences (Health-Sciences) Collections

    DSpace 5.8 copyright © Makerere University 
    Contact Us | Send Feedback
    Theme by 
    Atmire NV
     

     

    Browse

    All of Mak IRCommunities & CollectionsTitlesAuthorsBy AdvisorBy Issue DateSubjectsBy TypeThis CollectionTitlesAuthorsBy AdvisorBy Issue DateSubjectsBy Type

    My Account

    LoginRegister

    Statistics

    Most Popular ItemsStatistics by CountryMost Popular Authors

    DSpace 5.8 copyright © Makerere University 
    Contact Us | Send Feedback
    Theme by 
    Atmire NV