A comparison of two controlled trials concerning the efficacy of fetal 6 ( 1978 ) 149 intensive care

In a recent Journal of Perinatal Medicine, HOCHULI et al, [2] state that there is no doubt that intranatal monitoring iseffective and that the reduction of perinatal mortality amply demonstrates this. The authors quote 14 articles to support this Statement. None of the series quoted give more than circumstantial evidence based upon the coincidence of a reduction of mortality with the introduction of intranatal monitoring and this does not exclude the possibility of other factors contributing partiaUy or wholly to the decline in perinatal mortality. The following may influence perinatal mortality: Social characteristics of the population, general health of the obstetric population, clinical expertise of staff and Organisation of obstetrics Services. The authors of the papers concerned with intranatal monitoring were unable to exclude the possibility of one or more of these factors causing the decline of perinatal mortality. Only properly controlled prospective trials can test the efficacy of newly introduced techniques. Two randomised controlled trials testing the efficacy of intranatal monitoring have been completed; unfortunately, the results differed [2, 3]. Therefore the value of fetal monitoring is not äs clear cut äs HOCHULI and other authors claim. The purpose of the present article is to compare the two controlled trials and to determine, if possible, why the results differed.