Remote home cardiotocography: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Cardiotocography (CTG) is a common investigative modality in obstetrics to evaluate the fetal condition. Advancements in digital technology has enabled the innovation of CTG monitoring for usage in the home setting. This review aims to comprehensively examine the current evidence on the effectiveness and applicability of home antenatal CTG monitoring. MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane, Web of Science, and PubMed databases were searched from inception to June 2025. Primary studies examining home antenatal CTG were included. For randomised controlled trials (RCTs), the joint primary outcomes were perinatal mortality and emergency caesarean section. For observational studies, the feasibility, diagnostic accuracy, qualitative and economic burden of home CTG were evaluated. RCTs were eligible for meta-analysis using risk ratio or mean difference, with 95% confidence intervals. Included observational studies were narratively described due to significant methodological heterogeneity. 39 studies (28 observational, seven RCTs and four qualitative studies), comprising of 7240 participants were included. Home antenatal CTG monitoring was non-inferior to conventional care across all meta-analysed maternal, perinatal and healthcare usage outcomes. GRADE assessments were low/very low quality of evidence. Home CTG monitoring was feasible in several settings and remote interpretation was graded as moderate to excellent. Transmission failures were frequently low but commonly occurred due to infrastructure and/or equipment errors. Remote CTG monitoring demonstrated comparative capabilities to conventional CTG with respect to coincidence and beat-to-beat variability. Overall acceptability ratings were high for patient and providers. Often implementation costs were high but accrued back by non-fixed savings when compared against routine care. High-quality studies were underrepresented, particularly when assessing service-led and safety outcomes. Home antenatal CTG monitoring demonstrates noninferiority to conventional care across several outcomes, representing a promising avenue for antenatal management However, current evidence is of low quality and additional high-quality evidence with sufficient methodological detail and standardised outcome assessment is required prior to making definitive recommendations.