Key result
Uterine electromyography and cervical light-induced fluorescence produced high positive and negative predictive values for predicting term and preterm labor compared to currently-used methods.
Why the study?
Do uterine EMG and cervical LIF accurately predict term or preterm labor and delivery in term and pre-term animals and humans?
Do uterine EMG and cervical LIF accurately predict term or preterm labor and delivery in term and pre-term animals and humans?
Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Uterine EMG and cervical LIF show promise as diagnostic tests for predicting term and preterm labor.
No current objective measures exist to determine uterine or cervical function during pregnancy, or to accurately predict term or preterm labor and delivery. Uterine electromyography (EMG) and cervical light-induced fluorescence (LIF) studies were performed in term and pre-term animals and humans to evaluate the state and function of the uterus and cervix, and to determine the predictive capability of measurements made using these new technologies. Both uterine EMG and cervical LIF produced high positive and negative predictive values, compared to other currently-used methods. Uterine EMG and cervical LIF show great promise as diagnostic tests during pregnancy and for patient monitoring in obstetrics.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Garfield et al. (2006) conducted a review in Pregnancy (term and preterm labor). Uterine electromyography (EMG) and cervical light-induced fluorescence (LIF) vs. Currently-used methods was evaluated on Predictive capability for term or preterm labor and delivery. Uterine electromyography and cervical light-induced fluorescence produced high positive and negative predictive values for predicting term and preterm labor compared to currently-used methods.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: