This card bugs me because both are worrisome. I was about to suggest the change but figured it was probably already suggested. There’s 2 open suggestions for this change.
https://next.amboss.com/us/search?q=recurrent+variable+decelerations&v=overview
For a contraction stress test (CST) to be negative the FHR needs to have absences of late decelerations or significant variable decelerations. (Per AMBOSS article below)
significant variable decelerations = recurrent variable decelerations; just means more than >50% of contractions cause a variable decel
https://next.amboss.com/us/article/RN0lag?q=cst#Zca06b6444bbee0166ab2850a0400b8ba
Support. Removed a nbsp
Did a deeper dive on this and asked one of the obgyn residents I am working with about it. but per ACOG and AMBOSS(same link above) a positive CST is specifically late decelerations after ≥ 50 % of contractions, but for a CST to be negative you need absence of late decelerations or significant variable decelerations. Resident said for purpose of boards/shelf etc. the answer for worrisome CST is late decelerations and beyond that is getting in the weeds.
@AnKing-Maintainers
I think we should leave this card’s text field as is and add info about recurrent variable decels to extra field because we do have 2 open suggestions.
Need that resident to join the slack and become a maintainer too