HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS		QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced] Author: Keyword(s): Year:  Vol:  Page:

This Article Full Text (PDF) Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Services Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Download to citation manager Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by MANNING, F. A. Articles by HARMAN, C. R. Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by MANNING, F. A. Articles by HARMAN, C. R.

Fetal Biophysical Profile Score and the Nonstress Test

A Comparative Trial

From the Perinatal Research Group, Division of Maternai-Fetal Medicine, Department of Obstetrics, Gynecology, and Reproductive Sciences, University of Manitoba, Winnipeg, Manitoba, Canada.

Abstract

In this prospective blind study, 735 patients with high-risk pregnancies referred for antepartum testing of fetal well-being were randomly assigned to either a fetal biophysical profile scoring (375 patients) or a nonstress testing scheme (360 patients). Management was based on the results of antepartum tests, but the method of testing used was not disclosed. Fetal biophysical profile scoring resulted in a significantly higher positive predictive value in regards to low Apgar scores. Sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy, although higher with fetal biophysical profile scoring, did not demonstrate significant differences when compared with the nonstress test. The negative predictive value between the two methods was similar. All major anomalies were detected during ultrasound scanning, whereas none of these anomalies were detected by heart rate testing alone.

This article has been cited by other articles:

				S. Georgeson, F. A. Sonnenberg, M. Feingold, and S. G. Pauker Twisted Sisters: When Is the Optimal Time for Delivery? Med Decis Making, December 1, 1990; 10(4): 294 - 302. [PDF]

				M. Craig Everything You Need to Know About Biophysical Profiles Journal of Diagnostic Medical Sonography, September 1, 1989; 5(5): 261 - 268. [PDF]