Foreword on Updated Guidance: Fetal Blood Sampling (May 2025)
Guidance from ‘Fetal monitoring in labour, NICE guideline [NG229] Published: 14 December 2022’ is as follows (1) :
1.7 Fetal blood sampling
1.7.1 NICE is unable to make a recommendation about fetal blood sampling because of limited evidence. [2022]
Recent recommendations from NICE have suggested the removal of existing guidance advising the use of fetal blood sampling in assessment of fetal wellbeing in labour (2).
Reference is made to recent guidance from NICE on ‘Fetal Monitoring in Labour; Evidence review for fetal blood sampling’. The committee reviewed data comparing FBS to no FBS with or without CTG, and to digital fetal scalp stimulation (dFSS).
The evidence showed no important difference for most neonatal outcomes, with the exception of Apgar score <7 where FBS with CTG showed an important harm, compared to CTG alone. This was possibly due to delay in expediting birth, to allow the FBS to be carried out. When compared to dFSS with CTG, FBS with CTG showed an increase in caesarean births. The committee were unable to define whether this outcome was harmful or a benefit.
Quality of evidence ranged from very low to moderate and so experiential knowledge was taken into account when considering other disadvantages to FBS, including injury to baby, delay in expediting birth and maternal discomfort and anxiety. dFSS was agreed to be less invasive, required less time and was more acceptable to women in terms of their overall experience in labour. They clarified that dFSS should be used in conjunction with an assessment of other risk factors.
In conclusion, the committee supports the decision to no longer recommend FBS as a tool for assessing fetal wellbeing. Existing recommendations advising the use of FBS have been removed. They authors made reference to the ‘FIRSST’ study (Fetal Intrapartum Randomised Scalp Stimulation Trial).
FIRSST has since published in January 2025 (3). The authors concluded that they were unable to determine whether dFSS performs better as a second line test of fetal well-being in labour than FBS.
Main points to note:
1. The main limitation of the trial was the inability to match randomisation rates achieved in the pilot study, leading to the decision to close the study early. Therefore, the trial was insufficiently powered to draw conclusions on whether dFSS performed better than FBS as a second line test of fetal well-being in labour.
2. Data from non-randomised participants demonstrated a clinical preference for dFSS. The circulation of the aforementioned draft NICE guidance advising against the use of FBS in labour to assess fetal wellbeing, shortly after initiation of the trial, was felt to be an important contributing factor to this.
FIRSST suggests that further high-quality data on use of both dFSS and FBS is required to guide assessment of fetal wellbeing in labour. NICE have not made further recommendations following publication of the trial.
Guidance from the previous document (2017 NICE guideline) has been included below to provide advice on performing FBS, should the treating clinician feel it is required in a clinical scenario. NICE have not released any new guidance to supersede this (4).
1. Yambasu S, Boland F, O’Donoghue K, Curran C, Shahabuddin Y, Cotter A, et al. Digital Foetal Scalp Stimulation Versus Foetal Blood Sampling to Assess Foetal Well-Being in Labour: A Multicentre Randomised Controlled Trial. BJOG. 2025 Apr 1;
2. NICE. Fetal monitoring in labour guideline [NG 229]. 2022.
3. NICE. Fetal Blood Sampling in Labour evidence review to underpin recommendation 1.7.1 in the NICE Fetal monitoring in labour guideline. 2022.
4. NICE. Intrapartum care NICE guideline [NG 235]. 2023. Available from: www.nice.org.uk/guidance/ng235