TY - JOUR
T1 - A randomized trial of prenatal ultrasonographic screening
T2 - Impact on maternal management and outcome
AU - LeFevre, Michael L.
AU - Bain, Raymond P.
AU - Ewigman, Bernard G.
AU - Frigoletto, Frederic D.
AU - Crane, James P.
AU - McNellis, Donald
PY - 1993/9
Y1 - 1993/9
N2 - OBJECTIVES: This randomized clinical trial of 15,530 women was designed to test the hypothesis that screening ultrasonography in low-risk pregnancies would improve perinatal outcome. A secondary hypothesis addressed in this article was that screening ultrasonography would have a favorable impact on maternal management or outcome. STUDY DESIGN: Pregnant women without a specific indication for ultrasonographic examination in early pregnancy were randomly assigned to have either two screening sonograms or conventional obstetric care. Pregnancy interventions and maternal outcomes were compared in the two groups. RESULTS: No significant differences were found in maternal outcomes. Use of ultrasonography was markedly higher in the screened group. The rates of induced abortion, amniocentesis, tests of fetal well-being, external version, induction, and cesarean section and the distribution of total hospital days were similar in the two groups. Use of tocolytics and the rate of postdate pregnancy were both slightly lower in the screened group. CONCLUSION: Screening ultrasonography resulted in no clinically significant benefit.
AB - OBJECTIVES: This randomized clinical trial of 15,530 women was designed to test the hypothesis that screening ultrasonography in low-risk pregnancies would improve perinatal outcome. A secondary hypothesis addressed in this article was that screening ultrasonography would have a favorable impact on maternal management or outcome. STUDY DESIGN: Pregnant women without a specific indication for ultrasonographic examination in early pregnancy were randomly assigned to have either two screening sonograms or conventional obstetric care. Pregnancy interventions and maternal outcomes were compared in the two groups. RESULTS: No significant differences were found in maternal outcomes. Use of ultrasonography was markedly higher in the screened group. The rates of induced abortion, amniocentesis, tests of fetal well-being, external version, induction, and cesarean section and the distribution of total hospital days were similar in the two groups. Use of tocolytics and the rate of postdate pregnancy were both slightly lower in the screened group. CONCLUSION: Screening ultrasonography resulted in no clinically significant benefit.
KW - Prenatal ultrasonography
KW - mass screening
KW - pregnancy outcome
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=0027453983&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1016/0002-9378(93)90605-I
DO - 10.1016/0002-9378(93)90605-I
M3 - Article
C2 - 8372849
AN - SCOPUS:0027453983
SN - 0002-9378
VL - 169
SP - 483
EP - 489
JO - American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology
JF - American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology
IS - 3
ER -