Kathryn W. Bianculli

Cooper University Hospital

Author Statistics

Papers

Citation

H-Index

i-10 index

Research Trends

Author Order

Document Type

Co-Authors

Richard L. Fischer

Cooper University Hospital

Mary L. Hediger

Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development

Harish M. Sehdev

Pennsylvania Hospital

M McDonnell

Athlone Institute of Technology

To Scholl

Centers for Disease Control and Prevention

M L Hediger

University of Bern

Rachel Perry

University of California, Irvine

Cooperative Institutions

Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development

National Institutes of Health

University of Pennsylvania

Cooper University Hospital

Eunice Kennedy Shriver Center

Office of Extramural Research

Office of the Director

Children's Hospital of Philadelphia

Karger Publishers (Switzerland)

National Center for Advancing Translational Sciences

Author Statistics

Papers

Citation

H-Index

i-10 index

Research Field

Does light pressure effleurage reduce pain and anxiety associated with genetic amniocentesis? A randomized clinical trial

The Journal of Maternal-Fetal Medicine (2000)

Richard L. Fischer Kathryn W. Bianculli Harish M. Sehdev Mary L. Hediger

Objective To determine if light pressure effleurage (leg rubbing) during genetic amniocentesis reduces procedure-related pain and anxiety. Methods Two hundred women with singleton gestations undergoing genetic amniocentesis between 15–22 weeks recorded their level of anticipated pain and anxiety on a 10-cm linear visual analog scale prior to the amniocentesis. Subjects were then randomized to receive effleurage or no effleurage by the assisting nurse during the procedure. Subjects were blinded to the effleurage nature of the study. Following the amniocentesis, subjects repeated the pain and anxiety scoring. Results The two groups were similar with respect to subject and procedure characteristics, as well as anticipated pain or anxiety prior to amniocentesis. Postamniocentesis pain and anxiety scoring were similar in the two groups. The mean effleurage acceptance score was 8.3 ± 1.8 (out of 10), and 90.2% of subjects reported that they would want effleurage with future amniocenteses. Conclusions Although well accepted by women, light pressure effleurage during genetic amniocentesis does not reduce procedure-related pain or anxiety. J. Matern.-Fetal Med. 2000;9:294–297. © 2000 Wiley-Liss, Inc.

Amniocentesis

10.1002/1520-6661(200009/10)9:5<294::aid-mfm8>3.0.co;2-3

Cite

Citations (24)

Does Light Pressure Effleurage Reduce Pain and Anxiety Associated with Genetic Amniocentesis? A Randomized Clinical Trial

The Journal of Maternal-Fetal & Neonatal Medicine (2000)

Richard L. Fischer Kathryn W. Bianculli Harish M. Sehdev Mary L. Hediger

AbstractObjective: To determine if light pressure effleurage (leg rubbing) during genetic amniocentesis reduces procedure-related pain and anxiety.Methods: Two hundred women with singleton gestations undergoing genetic amniocentesis between 15-22 weeks recorded their level of anticipated pain and anxiety on a 10-cm linear visual analog scale prior to the amniocentesis. Subjects were then randomized to receive effleurage or no effleurage by the assisting nurse during the procedure. Subjects were blinded to the effleurage nature of the study. Following the amniocentesis, subjects repeated the pain and anxiety scoring.Results: The two groups were similar with respect to subject and procedure characteristics, as well as anticipated pain or anxiety prior to amniocentesis. Postamniocentesis pain and anxiety scoring were similar in the two groups. The mean effleurage acceptance score was 8.3 ± 1.8 (out of 10), and 90.2% of subjects reported that they would want effleurage with future amniocenteses.Conclusions: Although well accepted by women, light pressure effleurage during genetic amniocentesis does not reduce procedure-related pain or anxiety.Key Words: genetic amniocentesiseffleuragepain perception

Amniocentesis

10.3109/14767050009053450

Cite

Citations (1)

Amniotic fluid volume estimation in the postdate pregnancy: a comparison of techniques.

PubMed (1993)

Richard L. Fischer M McDonnell Kathryn W. Bianculli Rachel Perry M L Hediger

To determine the amniotic fluid (AF) volume estimation technique with the greatest diagnostic value with respect to perinatal outcome in the postdate pregnancy.One hundred ninety-eight women who were at least 40 weeks' gestation based on ultrasound confirmation or establishment of dates were evaluated twice weekly with nonstress tests (NSTs) and AF volume estimation. Various indices of AF volume were measured and correlated with perinatal outcome. Receiver operating characteristic curves were used to determine optimal cutoff values.There was a significantly larger maximal vertical pocket in those pregnancies with a normal perinatal outcome than in those with abnormal outcome (4.2 +/- 1.4 versus 3.2 +/- 2.0 cm; P = .02). A statistically significant difference was also seen with the AF index (10.0 +/- 4.5 versus 7.5 +/- 5.0 cm; P = .01). Analysis revealed that the optimal cutoff for identifying clinically significant oligohydramnios was a largest vertical pocket less than 2.7 cm, with an adjusted odds ratio for abnormal perinatal outcome of 7.11 (95% confidence interval [CI] 2.79-18.16). Its sensitivity of 50.0% and specificity of 87.9% were superior to the diagnostic value of the AF index of 5 cm, which had a sensitivity of 29.2% and specificity of 89.1%.A largest vertical pocket threshold of 2.7 cm had the greatest diagnostic value for identifying the postdate pregnancy at risk for abnormal perinatal outcome, surpassing the AF index and the 2-cm largest vertical pocket rule.

Cut-off

Amniotic fluid index

Source

Cite

Citations (24)

Does light pressure effleurage reduce pain and anxiety associated with genetic amniocentesis? A randomized clinical trial

The Journal of Maternal-Fetal Medicine (2000)

Richard L. Fischer Kathryn W. Bianculli Harish M. Sehdev Mary L. Hediger

Amniocentesis

10.1002/1520-6661(200009/10)9:5<294::aid-mfm8>3.3.co;2-v

Cite

Citations (8)