THE RESPONSES OF TERM FETUSES TO DIFFERENT ACOUSTIC STIMULATIONS
Ye Haihui,Wang Zhengping,Xie Xing
DOI: https://doi.org/10.3760/cma.j.issn.1007-9408.2005.06.005
2005-01-01
Abstract:Objective To explore the characteristics of fetal movement and FHR variation elicited by acoustic stimulation and whether acoustic stimulation can replace vibroacoustic stimulation. Methods Ninety-four and seventy-six normal pregnant women for antenatal visit were recruited from the Woman's Hospital, School of Medicine, Zhejiang University from April 2002 to February 2003. All subjects were divided into 5 groups to be exposed to five different intensities of acoustic stimulations at 95,100,105,110,115 dB respectively and self-control of blank and vibroacoustic stimulation were designed. The fetal movements and FHR were recorded during the study. Results (1) The percentage of fetal movement evoked by 95,100,105,110,115 dB airborne sound was 15% , 89%, 83% , 83% , 95% respectively. The total percentage of fetal movement evoked by vibroacoustic stimulation was 99% for all subjects. The percentages of evoked fetal movement by 100,105,110,115 dB airborne sound were not significantly different from those by vibroacoustic stimulation. (2)The percentages of FHR acceleration ≥15 bpm in 100,105,110 and 115 dB airborne sound groups were 39%, 61%, 56% and 85%, respectively, while 92% for all cases evoked by vibroacoustic stimulation was significantly higher than those evoked by 100,105 and 110 dB airborne sound group but with no significant difference to 115 dB airborne sound group. (3)The peak value in FHR evoked by 95,100,105, 110 and 115 dB airborne sound were -4. 5 bpm, 12 bpm, 17 bpm, 14 bpm and 20. 5 bpm, respectively. The peak FHR acceleration evoked by vibroacoustic stimulation was 23 bpm which was significantly higher than those by 100,105,110 dB airborne sound and no significant difference was detected between 115 dB airborne sound and vibroacoustic stimulation group. (4)Compared with 115 dB airborne sound, vibroacoustic stimulation evoked significantly longer duration of FHR tachycardia (42. 5 s vs 5 s, P = 0. 011) and fetal movement (270 s vs 100 s, P = 0. 000). Conclusions Acoustic stimulation at 115 dB is able to elicit efficient fetal movement and FHR acceleration without prolonged tachycardia, fetal behavioral disorganization or excessive fetal movement and is reasonable to replace vibroacoustic stimulation for awaking fetuses combined with NST.