Home Change in fetal behavior in response to vibroacoustic stimulation
Article
Licensed
Unlicensed Requires Authentication

Change in fetal behavior in response to vibroacoustic stimulation

  • Kaoru Ogo , Kenji Kanenishi , Nobuhiro Mori , Mohamed Ahmed Mostafa AboEllail and Toshiyuki Hata EMAIL logo
Published/Copyright: May 15, 2019
Journal of Perinatal Medicine
From the journal Journal of Perinatal Medicine Volume 47 Issue 5

Abstract

Objective

To assess fetal behavioral changes in response to vibroacoustic stimulation (VAS) in normal singleton pregnancies using four-dimensional (4D) ultrasound.

Methods

Ten types of fetal movements and facial expressions in 68 healthy pregnant women between 24 and 40 weeks were studied using 4D ultrasound for 3 min before and after 3-s VAS. The frequencies of mouthing, yawning, tongue expulsion, back arch, jerky arm movement, startle movement, smiling, scowling, hand-to-face movement, and blinking were evaluated. The fetuses were subdivided into four gestational age groups (24–27, 28–31, 32–35, and ≥36 weeks). Comparison of the frequencies of the fetal behaviors before and after the stimulation in each gestational age group was conducted to detect the response to stimulation with advancing gestation.

Results

There were no significant differences in the frequency of each fetal behavior before and after VAS at 24–27, 28–31, and 32–35 weeks of gestation. However, the frequencies of blinking and startle movements were significantly higher after VAS in the 36–40 gestational age group (P < 0.05).

Conclusion

The age of 36 weeks of gestation might represent an advanced stage of brain and central nervous system development and maturation as the response to stimuli is prominent at this age compared with earlier gestation.

Keywords: 4D ultrasound; fetal behavior; fetal CNS development; fetal CNS maturation; fetal stress; vibroacoustic stimulation
Corresponding author: Toshiyuki Hata, MD, PhD, Professor and Chairman, Department of Perinatology and Gynecology, Kagawa University Graduate School of Medicine, 1750-1 Ikenobe, Miki, Kagawa 761-0793, Japan, Tel.: +81-(0)87-891-2174, Fax: +81-(0)87-891-2175

  1. Author contributions: All the authors have accepted responsibility for the entire content of this submitted manuscript and approved submission.

  2. Research funding: None declared.

  3. Employment or leadership: None declared.

  4. Honorarium: None declared.

  5. Competing interests: The funding organization(s) played no role in the study design; in the collection, analysis, and interpretation of data; in the writing of the report; or in the decision to submit the report for publication.

References

1. Spencer JAD, Deans A, Nicolaidis P, Arulkumaran S. Fetal heart rate response to vibroacoustic stimulation during low and high heart rate variability episodes in late pregnancy. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1991;165:86–90.10.1016/0002-9378(91)90230-OSearch in Google Scholar

2. D’Elia A, Pighetti M, Vanacore F, Fabbrocini G, Arpaia L. Vibroacoustic stimulation in normal term human pregnancy. Early Hum Dev 2005;81:449–53.10.1016/j.earlhumdev.2004.04.017Search in Google Scholar

3. Umstad M, Bailey C, Permezel M. Intrapartum fetal stimulation testing. Aust N Z J Obstet Gynaecol 1992;32:222–4.10.1111/j.1479-828X.1992.tb01951.xSearch in Google Scholar

4. East CE, Smyth R, Leader LR, Henshall NE, Colditz PB, Tan KH. Vibroacoustic stimulation for fetal assessment in labour in the presence of a nonreassuring fetal heart rate trace. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2005;Article ID CD004664.10.1002/14651858.CD004664.pub2Search in Google Scholar

5. Arulkumaran S, Talbert D, Hsu TS, Chua S, Anandakumar C, Ratnam SS. In-utero sound levels when vibroacoustic stimulation is applied to the maternal abdomen: an assessment of the possibility of cochlea damage in the fetus. Br J Obstet Gynaecol 1992;99:43–5.10.1111/j.1471-0528.1992.tb14390.xSearch in Google Scholar

6. Arulkumaran S, Skurr B, Tong H, Kek LP, Yeoh KH, Ratnam SS. No evidence of hearing loss due to fetal acoustic stimulation test. Obstet Gynecol 1991;78:283–5.Search in Google Scholar

7. Visser GHA, Mulder HH, Wit HP, Mulder EJH, Prechtl HFR.Vibro-acoustic stimulation of the human fetus: effect on behavioural state organization. Early Hum Dev 1989;19:285–96.10.1016/0378-3782(89)90063-7Search in Google Scholar

8. Nijhuis JG, Prechtl HFR, Martin CB Jr, Bots RS. Are there behavioral states in the human fetus? Early Hum Dev 1982;6:177–95.10.1016/0378-3782(82)90106-2Search in Google Scholar

9. Horimoto N, Koyanagi T, Maeda H, Satoh S, Takashima T, Minami T, et al. Can brain impairment be detected by in utero behavioural patterns? Arch Dis Child 1993;69:3–8.10.1136/adc.69.1_Spec_No.3Search in Google Scholar

10. Prechtl HFR, Einspieler C. Is neurological assessment of the fetus possible? Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol 1997;75:81–4.10.1016/S0301-2115(97)00197-8Search in Google Scholar

11. Kurjak A, Andonotopo W, Hafner T, Salihagic-Kadic A, Stanojevic M, Azumeni G, et al. Normal standards for fetal neurobehavioral developments – longitudinal quantification by four-dimensional sonography. J Perinat Med 2006;34:56–65.10.1515/JPM.2006.007Search in Google Scholar PubMed

12. Hata T, Dai SY, Marumo G. Ultrasound for evaluation of fetal neurobehavioral development: from 2-D to 4-D. Infant Child Dev 2010;19:99–118.10.1002/icd.659Search in Google Scholar

13. Hata T, Kanenishi J, Hanoka U, Uematsu R, Marumo G, Tanaka H. HDlive study of fetal development and behavior. Donald School J Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2014;8:250–65.10.5005/jp-journals-10009-1363Search in Google Scholar

14. Sajapala S, AboEllail MAM, Kanenishi K, Mori N, Marumo G, Hata T. 4D ultrasound study of fetal movement early in the second trimester of pregnancy. J Perinat Med 2017;45:737–43.10.1515/jpm-2016-0250Search in Google Scholar

15. AboEllail MAM, Hata T. Fetal face as important indicator of fetal brain function. J Perinat Med 2017;45:729–36.10.1515/jpm-2016-0377Search in Google Scholar

16. Hata T, Kanenishi K, Sasaki M, Yanagihara T. Fetal reflex movement in twin pregnancies late in the first trimester: 4-D sonographic study. Ultrasound Med Biol 2011;237:1948–51.10.1016/j.ultrasmedbio.2011.06.005Search in Google Scholar

17. AboEllail MAM, Kanenishi K, Mori N, Mohamed OAK, Hata T. 4D ultrasound study of fetal facial expressions in the third trimester of pregnancy. J Matern Fetal Neonatal Med 2018;31:1856–64.10.1080/14767058.2017.1330880Search in Google Scholar

18. Morokuma S, Fukushima K, Kawai N, Tomonaga M, Satoh S, Nakano H. Fetal habituation correlates with functional brain development. Behav Brain Res 2004;153:459–63.10.1016/j.bbr.2004.01.002Search in Google Scholar

19. van Heteren CF, Boekkooi PF, Schiphorst RH, Jongsma HW, Nijhuis JG. Fetal habituation to vibroacoustic stimulation in uncomplicated postterm pregnancies. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol 2001;97:178–82.10.1016/S0301-2115(00)00543-1Search in Google Scholar

20. Gerhardt KJ, Abrams RM. Fetal exposure to sound and vibroacoustic stimulation. J Perinatol 2000;20:S21–30.10.1038/sj.jp.7200446Search in Google Scholar PubMed

21. Fox HE, Badalian SS. Fetal movement in response to vibroacuostic stimulation: a review. Obstet Gynecol Surv 1993;48:707–13.10.1097/00006254-199310000-00027Search in Google Scholar PubMed

22. Groome LJ, Bentz LS, Singh KP, Mooney DM. Behavioral state change in normal human fetuses following a single vibroacoustic stimulus: effect of duration of quiet sleep prior to stimulation. Early Hum Dev 1993;33:21–7.10.1016/0378-3782(93)90170-YSearch in Google Scholar

23. Pietrantoni M, Angel JL, Parsons MT, McClain L, Arango HA, Spellacy WN. Human fetal response to vibroacoustic stimulation as a function of stimulus duration. Obstet Gynecol 1991;87:807–11.Search in Google Scholar

24. Devoe L. Vibroacoustic stimuli and fetal behavior. Nurs Times 1991;87:36–7.Search in Google Scholar

25. Sadovsky E, Ohel G, Simon A. Ultrasonographical evaluation of the incidence of simultaneous and independent movements in twin fetuses. Gynecol Obstet Invest 1987;23:5–9.10.1159/000298826Search in Google Scholar

26. Tan KH, Smyth RM, Wei X. Fetal vibroacoustic stimulation for facilitation of tests of fetal wellbeing. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2013;12:CD002963.10.1002/14651858.CD002963Search in Google Scholar

27. DiPietro JA, Hodgson DM, Costigan KA, Johnson TR. Fetal antecedents of infant temperament. Child Dev 1996;67:2568–83.10.2307/1131641Search in Google Scholar

28. Kawai N, Morokuma S, Tomonaga M, Horimoto N, Tanada M. Associative learning and memory in a chimpanzee fetus: learning and long-lasting memory before birth. Dev Psychobiol 2004;44:116–22.10.1002/dev.10160Search in Google Scholar

29. Makino I, Matsuda Y, Yoneyama M, Hirasawa K, Takagi K, Ohta H, et al. Effect of maternal stress on fetal heart rate assessed by vibroacoustic stimulation. J Int Med Res 2009;37:1780–8.10.1177/147323000903700614Search in Google Scholar

30. Kiuchi M, Nagata N, Ikeno S, Terakawa N. The relationship between the response to external light stimulation and behavioral states in the human fetus: how it differs from vibroacoustic stimulation. Early Hum Dev 2000;58:153–65.10.1016/S0378-3782(00)00074-8Search in Google Scholar

31. Hata T, Kanenishi K, AboEllail MAM, Marumo G, Kurjak A. Fetal consciousness: four-dimensional ultrasound study. Donald School J Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2015;9:471–4.10.5005/jp-journals-10009-1434Search in Google Scholar

32. Reissland N, Francis B, Mason J. Can healthy fetuses show facial expressions of “pain” or “distress”? PLoS One 2013;8:e65530.10.1371/journal.pone.0065530Search in Google Scholar PubMed PubMed Central

33. Marx V, Nagy E. Fetal behavioural responses to maternal voice and touch. PLoS One 2015;10:e0129118.10.1371/journal.pone.0129118Search in Google Scholar PubMed PubMed Central

34. Kiuchi M, Nagata N, Ikeno S, Terakawa N. The relationship between the response to external light stimulation and behavioral states in the human fetus: how it differs from vibroacoustic stimulation. Early Hum Dev 2000;58:153–65.10.1016/S0378-3782(00)00074-8Search in Google Scholar

35. Lopez-Teijon M, Garcia-Faura A, Prats-Galino A. Fetal facial expression in response to intravaginal music emission.Ultrasound 2015;23:216–23.10.1177/1742271X15609367Search in Google Scholar

36. Gangon R, Hunse C, Carmichael L, Fellows F, Patrick J. Human fetal response to vibratory acoustic stimulation from twenty-six weeks to term. Am J Obstset Gynecol 1987;157:1375–81.10.1016/S0002-9378(87)80227-2Search in Google Scholar

37. Crade M, Lovett S. Fetal response to sound stimulation: preliminary report exploring use of sound stimulation in routine obstetrical ultrasound examinations. J Ultrasound Med 1988;7:499–503.10.7863/jum.1988.7.9.499Search in Google Scholar

38. Luz SH, Vasconcellos FC, Kreling T, Pacheco FS, Chaves ML. Evaluation of normal neurological development of human fetuses from 21 to 30 weeks’ gestation through fetal auditory evoked response. J Perinat Med 2009;37:270–5.10.1515/JPM.2009.048Search in Google Scholar

39. Divon MY, Platt LD, Cantrell CJ, Smith CV, Yeh Sze YA, Paul RH. Evoked fetal startle response: a possible intrauterine neurological examination. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1985;153:454–6.10.1016/0002-9378(85)90086-9Search in Google Scholar

40. Blumenthal TD, Goode CT. The startle eyeblink response to low intensity acoustic stimuli. Psychophysiology 1991;28: 296–306.10.1111/j.1469-8986.1991.tb02198.xSearch in Google Scholar PubMed

41. Valls-Solé J. Assessment of excitability in brainstem circuits mediating the blink reflex and the startle reaction. Clin Neurophysiol 2012;123:13–20.10.1016/j.clinph.2011.04.029Search in Google Scholar PubMed

Supplementary Material

The online version of this article offers supplementary material (https://doi.org/10.1515/jpm-2018-0344).

Received: 2018-10-19
Accepted: 2019-03-04
Published Online: 2019-05-15
Published in Print: 2019-07-26

©2019 Walter de Gruyter GmbH, Berlin/Boston

Articles in the same Issue

  1. Frontmatter
  2. Editorial
  3. Preterm premature rupture of membranes (PPROM)
  4. Original Articles – Obstetrics
  5. The value of amniotic fluid analysis in patients with suspected clinical chorioamnionitis
  6. Patients with acute cervical insufficiency without intra-amniotic infection/inflammation treated with cerclage have a good prognosis
  7. Maternal serum endocan concentrations are elevated in patients with preterm premature rupture of membranes
  8. The earlier the gestational age, the greater the intensity of the intra-amniotic inflammatory response in women with preterm premature rupture of membranes and amniotic fluid infection by Ureaplasma species
  9. Assessment of maternal GBS colonization and early-onset neonatal disease rate for term deliveries: a decade perspective
  10. Clinical importance of the 75-g glucose tolerance test (GTT) in the prediction of large for gestational age (LGA) fetuses in non-diabetic pregnancies
  11. Expression of genes involved in inflammation and growth – does sampling site in human full-term placenta matter?
  12. Impact of cell-free fetal DNA on invasive prenatal diagnostic tests in a real-world public setting
  13. Perinatal outcome in gestational diabetes according to different diagnostic criteria
  14. Original Articles – Fetus
  15. Change in fetal behavior in response to vibroacoustic stimulation
  16. Diagnostic accuracy of isolated clubfoot in twin compared to singleton gestations
  17. Original Article – Newborn
  18. Usefulness of transcutaneous bilirubin assessment measured in non-photo-exposed skin to guide the length of phototherapy: an observational study
  19. Letters to the Editor
  20. Methodological issues on the clinical importance of the 75-g glucose tolerance test (GTT) in the prediction of large for gestational age (LGA) fetuses in non-diabetic pregnancies
  21. Reply to the Letter to the Editor: methodological issues on the clinical importance of the 75-g glucose tolerance test (GTT) in the prediction of large-for-gestational-age (LGA) fetuses in non-diabetic pregnancies
https://doi.org/10.1515/jpm-2018-0344
Keywords for this article
4D ultrasound; fetal behavior; fetal CNS development; fetal CNS maturation; fetal stress; vibroacoustic stimulation

Articles in the same Issue

  1. Frontmatter
  2. Editorial
  3. Preterm premature rupture of membranes (PPROM)
  4. Original Articles – Obstetrics
  5. The value of amniotic fluid analysis in patients with suspected clinical chorioamnionitis
  6. Patients with acute cervical insufficiency without intra-amniotic infection/inflammation treated with cerclage have a good prognosis
  7. Maternal serum endocan concentrations are elevated in patients with preterm premature rupture of membranes
  8. The earlier the gestational age, the greater the intensity of the intra-amniotic inflammatory response in women with preterm premature rupture of membranes and amniotic fluid infection by Ureaplasma species
  9. Assessment of maternal GBS colonization and early-onset neonatal disease rate for term deliveries: a decade perspective
  10. Clinical importance of the 75-g glucose tolerance test (GTT) in the prediction of large for gestational age (LGA) fetuses in non-diabetic pregnancies
  11. Expression of genes involved in inflammation and growth – does sampling site in human full-term placenta matter?
  12. Impact of cell-free fetal DNA on invasive prenatal diagnostic tests in a real-world public setting
  13. Perinatal outcome in gestational diabetes according to different diagnostic criteria
  14. Original Articles – Fetus
  15. Change in fetal behavior in response to vibroacoustic stimulation
  16. Diagnostic accuracy of isolated clubfoot in twin compared to singleton gestations
  17. Original Article – Newborn
  18. Usefulness of transcutaneous bilirubin assessment measured in non-photo-exposed skin to guide the length of phototherapy: an observational study
  19. Letters to the Editor
  20. Methodological issues on the clinical importance of the 75-g glucose tolerance test (GTT) in the prediction of large for gestational age (LGA) fetuses in non-diabetic pregnancies
  21. Reply to the Letter to the Editor: methodological issues on the clinical importance of the 75-g glucose tolerance test (GTT) in the prediction of large-for-gestational-age (LGA) fetuses in non-diabetic pregnancies
Sign up now to receive a 20% welcome discount
Institutional Access
How does access work?
Have an idea on how to improve our website?
Please write us.
© 2025 De Gruyter Brill
Downloaded on 26.11.2025 from https://www.degruyterbrill.com/document/doi/10.1515/jpm-2018-0344/html?lang=en
Scroll to top button