Topic: Electronic Fetal Monitoring in Developing Nations – A Public Health Threat
The 24th World Association for Medical Law (WAML) Congress was held in Tel Aviv, Israel on 2-6 September 2018. Leading international experts discussed topics related to Global Health, Medical Law and Bioethics, with a focus on Public Health concerns.
James C. Johnston, MD, JD, reviewed the use of electronic fetal monitoring (EFM) in Africa, and presented a paper co-authored with pre-eminent medical malpractice attorney Thomas P. Sartwelle, renowned medical ethicist Professor Dr. Berna Arda, and leading neurologist Dr. Mehila Zebenigus from Ethiopia.
Dr. James C. Johnston raised the concern that EFM has no proven efficacy in childbirth yet it is being increasingly employed in sub-Saharan Africa in a misguided approach to reduce perinatal morbidity and mortality. In fact, EFM has a 99.8% false positive rate, and does not prevent or predict cerebral palsy or any other neonatal neurological disorder. It does cause significant harm by dramatically increasing the cesarean section rate with all of the attendant risks and complications of that procedure, as well as increasing the risk that babies born in this manner may have a higher incidence of developing chronic diseases such as juvenile arthritis, asthma, inflammatory bowel disease, and neurodevelopmental problems.
After reviewing the overwhelming evidence against EFM, Dr. James Christopher Johnston discussed the recent trend of developed countries to stop this procedure through specific guidelines published by birth-related professional organizations in the United States, United Kingdom, Canada, Australia and New Zealand. For example, the United Kingdom National Institute for Health and Care Excellence states “Do not offer electronic fetal monitoring to women at low risk.”
And yet, EFM is rapidly increasing throughout sub-Saharan Africa due to a combination of intense marketing from the EFM manufacturing companies, and the failure of the medical community to understand that the procedure causes more harm than good to mothers and babies. Dr. James C. Johnston provided specific examples of the marketing, including the Allied Market Research ‘Global Fetal Monitoring Report’ which concluded that the fetal monitoring market is expected “to reach USD 3.6 Billion by 2022,” that the market in “developing countries is lucrative,” and there is a “perpetual need” for these EFM machines.
Dr. James Christopher Johnston and his colleagues concluded that the WHO should establish guidelines stating that EFM is an experimental procedure that is not scientifically reliable, the standard of care does not warrant EFM in low risk pregnancies, and it should not be performed. This will allow local health boards in each country to adopt the guidelines, and ensure the medical community stops harming mothers and babies through this procedure. Then, the resources wasted on EFM can be properly allocated to provide additional training of midwives and healthcare workers, and provide care for children with cerebral palsy and related conditions.