Use of Non-stress Test Alone Versus Biophysical Profile in Management of High-risk Pregnancy: A Comparative Study
Issue: 2023 - Volume 6 [Issue 1]
Krishna Pada Das *
Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Khulna Medical College, Khulna, Bangladesh.
Department of Community Medicine, Khulna Medical College, Khulna, Bangladesh.
*Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Background: Choosing between the Non-Stress Test (NST) alone and the Biophysical Profile (BPP) in high-risk pregnancy management has garnered considerable attention. Both methodologies are crucial tools for assessing fetal well-being and guiding clinical decisions. The comparative effectiveness of utilizing NST alone versus integrating the more comprehensive BPP approach has become a pivotal research and medical discourse subject. This exploration delves into each approach's merits and potential limitations, shedding light on their respective roles in optimizing maternal and fetal care for high-risk pregnancies.
Aim of the Study: The aim of the study was to compare the efficacy of non-stress tests and Biophysical profiles in the management of high-risk pregnancy.
Methods: This descriptive research was undertaken at the Department of Gynecology and Obstetrics within Rajshahi Medical College and Hospital in Rajshahi, Bangladesh. The investigation spanned from January 2007 to December 2008, encompassing one year. The study comprised a cohort of 100 patients identified as high-risk pregnant individuals. These participants were segregated into two distinct categories, denoted as Group A and Group B. Each group consisted of 50 patients. Group A adhered to the Biophysical Profile Protocol (BPP), while Group B followed the Non-stress Test (NST) approach.
Results: The study included 100 high-risk pregnancy cases at gestational ages 32 to 43 weeks. The biophysical profile (Group A, n=50) and a non-stress test (Group B, n=50) were compared. Demographics and obstetric features varied slightly between groups. Group A's mean±SE age was 25±0.82 years; Group B's was 24.66±0.73. Parity and gravidity showed minor differences. Indications and gestational age determination methods differed between groups. Group A saw more postdated pregnancies (32.00%), while Group B had higher pre-eclampsia cases. Delivery methods also varied; Group A had 64.00% LUCS and 36.00% vaginal deliveries, while Group B had 68.00% LUCS and 32.00% vaginal deliveries.
Conclusion: Managing high-risk pregnancies requires vigilant care. Antenatal assessment's vital role in outcome prediction and timely intervention is highlighted by comparing two fetal assessment methods. Abnormal test results better predicted abnormal outcomes, emphasizing the need for larger-scale studies to enhance method evaluation.
Keywords: Non-stress test, biophysical profile, management, high-risk pregnancy
How to Cite
Malhotra D, Gopalan S, Narang A. Preterm breech delivery in a developing country. International Journal of Gynecology & Obstetrics. 1994;45(1):27-34.
Wilson RW, Schifrin BS. Is any pregnancy low risk?. Obstetrics & Gynecology. 1980;55(5):653-5.
Kurman RJ, Shah KH, Lancaster WD, Jenson AB. Immunoperoxidase localization of papillomavirus antigens in cervical dysplasia and vulvar condylomas. American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology. 1981;140(8):931-5.
Roy JS, Das PP, Datta A. SLE in Pregnancy. Bangabandhu Sheikh Mujib Medical University Journal. 2010;3(1):54-9.
Bucciarelli RI. Neonatology in the United States: Scope and organization, In: Avery GB. Fletcher MA. MacDonald MC. editors. Neonatology; Pathophysiology and management of the newborn. 4th ed. Philadelphia. JB Lippincott company. 1994;20-31.
Snyder EY, Cloherty JP. Perinan et al asphyxia, In: Choherty JP, Stark AR, editors. Masnal of neonatal care. 4 ed. Graw fordsville: RR Donnelley. 1998;515-533.
Hammacher K, Hüter KA, Bokelmann J, Werners PH. Foetal heart frequency and perinatal condition of the foetus and newborn. Gynecologic and Obstetric Investigation. 1968;166(4):349-60.
Nochimson DJ, Turbeville JS, Terry JE, Petric RH, Lurdy LE. The non stress test. Obstet Gynecol. 1978;51:419-421.
Evertson LR. Ganthier RJ. Schitrin BS, Paul RH. Autepartum Fetal heart rate testing. 1. Evolvtion of the non-stress test. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1979;133:29-33.
Siles C, Boyd PA, Manning N, Tsang T, Chamberlain P. Omphalocele and pericardial effusion: possible sonographic markers for the pentalogy of Cantrell or its variants. Obstetrics & Gynecology. 1996;87(5 Part 2):840-2.
Dawes G, Meeir YJ, Mandruzzato GP. Computerized evaluation of fetal heart rate patterns. J Perinat Med 1994;22:491-9.
Manning FA, Platt LO, Sipos L. Antepartum fetal evaluation: development of a fetal biophysical profile. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1980;136:787-95.
Manning FA, Morrison I, Harman CR, Lange IR, Menticoglou S. Fetal assessment based on fetal biophysical profile scoring: In 19,221 referred high-risk pregnancies: II: An analysis of false-negative fetal deaths. American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology. 1987;157(4):880-4.
Lee CY, Drukker B. The nonstress test for the antepartum assessment of fetal reserve. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1979;134: 460-70.
Platt LD, Walla CA, Paul RH, Trujillo ME, Loesser CV, Jacobs ND, Broussard PM. A prospective trial of the fetal biophysical profile versus the nonstress test in the management of high-risk pregnancies. American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology. 1985;153(6):624-33.
Hadlock FP, Harrist RB, Shah YP, King DE, Park SK, Sharman RS. Estimating fetal age using multiple parameters: A prospective evaluation in a racially mixed population. American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology. 1987;156(4):955-7.
Coopland AT, Peddle LJ, Baskett TF, Rollwagen R, Simpson A, Parker E. A simplified antepartum high-risk pregnancy scoring form: Statistical analysis of 5459 cases. Canadian Medical Association Journal. 1977;116(9):999.
Lytton RL, Uzan J, Fernando EG, Roque R, Hiltunen D, Stoffels SM. Development and validation of performance prediction models and specifications for asphalt binders and paving mixes. Washington, DC: Strategic Highway Research Program; 1993.
Shamsuddin L, Islam A, Dewan F, Nessa J. Perinatal mortality in a teaching hospital in Bangladesh. 1991;15:60-3.
Thacker SB, Berkelman RI. Assessing the diagnostic accuracy and efficacy of selected antepartum fetal surveillance techniques. Obstet Gynecol Suvr. 1986;41:121-6.
Phelan JP. The nonstress test: A review of 3,000 tests. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1981; 139:7-12.