Back to Search Start Over

Automated fetal heart rate analysis for baseline determination and acceleration/deceleration detection: A comparison of 11 methods versus expert consensus

Authors :
Denis Houzé de l’Aulnoit
Agathe Houzé de l’Aulnoit
Michaël Genin
Samuel Boudet
Régis Beuscart
Aline Delgranche
Laurent Peyrodie
Romain Demailly
Groupement des Hôpitaux de l'Institut Catholique de Lille (GHICL)
Université catholique de Lille (UCL)
Santé Publique : épidémiologie et qualité des soins (EA 2694)
Faculté de Médecine Henri Warembourg - Université de Lille-Centre d'Etudes et de Recherche en Informatique Médicale [Lille] (CERIM)
Unité de traitement des signaux Biomédicaux (UTSB)
Université Catholique de Lille - Faculté de Médecine, Maïeutique, Sciences de la santé (FMMS)
Institut Catholique de Lille (ICL)
Université catholique de Lille (UCL)-Université catholique de Lille (UCL)-Institut Catholique de Lille (ICL)
Université catholique de Lille (UCL)-Université catholique de Lille (UCL)
Evaluation des technologies de santé et des pratiques médicales - ULR 2694 (METRICS)
Université de Lille-Centre Hospitalier Régional Universitaire [Lille] (CHRU Lille)
Hautes Etudes d’Ingénieur [Lille] (HEI)
JUNIA (JUNIA)
Source :
Biomedical Signal Processing and Control, Biomedical Signal Processing and Control, 2019, 49, pp.113-123. ⟨10.1016/j.bspc.2018.10.002⟩
Publication Year :
2019
Publisher :
Elsevier BV, 2019.

Abstract

Background The fetal heart rate (FHR) serves as a guide to fetal well-being during the first stage of delivery. The visual morphological analysis of the FHR during labor is subject to inter- and intra-observer variability – particularly when the FHR is abnormal. It has been suggested that automatic analysis of the FHR can reduce this variability. Objectives To compare 11 morphological FHR analyses (baseline computation, and detection of FHR decelerations and accelerations) produced by automatic analysis methods (AAMs) with an expert consensus. Materials and methods Eleven AAMs were reprogrammed (using the description published in the literature) and applied to 90 FHR recordings collected during the early phase of labor. Furthermore, the recordings were divided into three tertiles, according to the difficulty of analysis. The results of the morphological FHR analyses produced by the AAMs were compared with a consensus morphological analysis performed by four experts. In addition to standard discriminant criteria, a new morphological analysis discriminant index (MADI) was introduced; it provides an overall evaluation that collates all the individual criteria. Results The AAM developed by Lu and Wei's gave better results than the other AAMs for baseline computation. Regarding this method's detection of FHR decelerations and accelerations, the F-measure [95% confidence interval] was respectively 0.73 [0.67; 0.76] and 0.70 [0.64; 0.76]. The MADI indicated that Lu and Wei's AAM agreed best with the expert consensus (discordance: 7.3% [6.10; 8.60]). Conclusion Our study demonstrated the superiority of Lu and Wei's method for baseline computation and deceleration/acceleration detection, although there was still a significant degree of discordance versus expert consensus. The MADI appears to be a good overall index for evaluating AAMs with regard to the quality of baseline computation and acceleration/deceleration detection. The application of precise criteria and the methodology and software tools developed here should facilitate the evaluation of new AAMs and their comparison with other methods.

Details

ISSN :
17468094
Volume :
49
Database :
OpenAIRE
Journal :
Biomedical Signal Processing and Control
Accession number :
edsair.doi.dedup.....6d8802a3722ea5b1f1e9f27b41fc2f75
Full Text :
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bspc.2018.10.002