https://next.amboss.com/us/article/RN0lag?q=cst#Zca06b6444bbee0166ab2850a0400b8ba
2 open suggestions to add recurrent variable decelerations because those are worrisome on NST, but for CST the most worrisome deceleration is late.
Extra info from ACOG and AMBOSS to help explain why it’s not recurrent variable as well
@Jwill
You’ve worked on lots of step 2 obgyn cards recently, any changes you would make to this suggestion?
Something that the same obgyn resident pointed out today out with the card word choice is that “worrisome” is too vague in the text field.
Which is the only deceleration on contraction stress testing (CST) that’s worrisome?
{{c1::Late decelerations}}
Could change text to something like this?
What finding on contraction stress testing (CST) is used to define a positive result?
Yeah I actually do have some thoughts 
- I think actually something like this would be better:
Variable decels happen all the time and are addressed and fixed quite often, which I interpret as “not worrisome” (usually).
- In regard to your “+ vs. - CST” edits in the extra, I think it could be tweaked to be a little more accurate.
bc concerning decels doesn’t necessarily mean “vaginal birth is contraindicated now head to the OR”. It just means that we need to get the baby out (which, depending on the stage of labor, might just mean vacuum or forceps)
Maybe its just me but I just feel like these are heavily implying:
(+) CST = → C-Section
(-) CST = → SVB
I was thinking about this too and was going to come back to make edit to keep “deceleration” in that edit. Just “findings” makes fetal bradycardia an answer as well.
Also agree with the heavily implying part and that can be removed from the extra field all together.
@Step2-AnKing-Maintainers
Last call before push
Might just be me but I prefer the wording to be “that is always worrisome” rather than “that’s always worrisome” (sorry for being picky haha)
Im okay with this too, either way