OBJECTIVES: We aimed to assess the effectiveness of co-bedding compared with separate (individual) care for stable preterm twins in the neonatal nursery in promoting growth and neurodevelopment and reducing short- and long-term morbidities, and to determine whether co-bedding is associated with significant adverse effects.As secondary objectives, we sought to evaluate effects of co-bedding via the following subgroup analyses: twin pairs with different weight ranges (very low birth weight [VLBW] < 1500 grams vs non-VLBW), twins with versus without significant growth discordance at birth, preterm versus borderline preterm twins, twins co-bedded in incubator versus cot at study entry, and twins randomized by twin pair versus neonatal unit.
SEARCH METHODS: We used the standard search strategy of the Cochrane Neonatal Review Group (CNRG). We used keywords and medical subject headings (MeSH) to search the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL; 2016, Issue 2), MEDLINE (via PubMed), EMBASE (hosted by EBSCOHOST), the Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL), and references cited in our short-listed articles, up to February 29, 2016.
SELECTION CRITERIA: We included randomized controlled trials with randomization by twin pair and/or by neonatal unit. We excluded cross-over studies.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: We extracted data using standard methods of the CNRG. Two review authors independently assessed the relevance and risk of bias of retrieved records. We contacted the authors of included studies to request important information missing from their published papers. We expressed our results using risk ratios (RRs) and mean differences (MDs) when appropriate, along with 95% confidence intervals (95% CIs). We adjusted the unit of analysis from individual infants to twin pairs by averaging measurements for each twin pair (continuous outcomes) or by counting outcomes as positive if developed by either twin (dichotomous outcomes).
MAIN RESULTS: Six studies met the inclusion criteria; however, only five studies provided data for analysis. Four of the six included studies were small and had significant limitations in design. As each study reported outcomes differently, data for most outcomes were effectively contributed by a single study. Study authors reported no differences between co-bedded twins and twins receiving separate care in terms of rate of weight gain (MD 0.20 grams/kg/d, 95% CI -1.60 to 2.00; one study; 18 pairs of twins; evidence of low quality); apnea, bradycardia, and desaturation (A/B/D) episodes (RR 0.85, 95% CI 0.18 to 4.05; one study; 62 pairs of twins; evidence of low quality); episodes in co-regulated states (MD 0.96, 95% CI -3.44 to 5.36; one study; three pairs of twins; evidence of very low quality); suspected or proven infection (RR 0.84, 95% CI 0.30 to 2.31; three studies; 65 pairs of twins; evidence of very low quality); length of hospital stay (MD -4.90 days, 95% CI -35.23 to 25.43; one study; three pairs of twins; evidence of very low quality); and parental satisfaction measured on a scale of 0 to 55 (MD -0.38, 95% CI -4.49 to 3.73; one study; nine pairs of twins; evidence of moderate quality). Although co-bedded twins appeared to have lower pain scores 30 seconds after heel lance on a scale of 0 to 21 (MD -0.96, 95% CI -1.68 to -0.23; two studies; 117 pairs of twins; I(2) = 75%; evidence of low quality), they had higher pain scores 90 seconds after the procedure (MD 1.00, 95% CI 0.14 to 1.86; one study; 62 pairs of twins). Substantial heterogeneity in the outcome of infant pain response after heel prick at 30 seconds post procedure and conflicting results at 30 and 90 seconds post procedure precluded clear conclusions.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Evidence on the benefits and harms of co-bedding for stable preterm twins was insufficient to permit recommendations for practice. Future studies must be adequately powered to detect clinically important differences in growth and neurodevelopment. Researchers should assess harms such as infection, along with medication errors and caregiver satisfaction.
OBJECTIVE: To determine the extent of unlicensed and off-label use of medicines in hospitalised children in the intensive care units of a tertiary care teaching hospital.
METHODS: A prospective, observational exploratory study was conducted on medicines prescribed to children admitted to the 3 intensive care units of Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia Medical Centre (UKMMC).
RESULTS: A total of 194 patients were admitted to UKMMC, 168 of them received one or more drugs. Of 1,295 prescriptions, 353 (27.3 %) were unlicensed and 442 (34.1 %) were for off-label use. Forty-four percent of patients received at least one medicine for unlicensed use and 82.1 % received at least one medicine off-label. Preterm infants, children aged 28 days to 23 months, patients with hospital stays of more than 2 weeks, and those prescribed increasing numbers of medicines were more likely to receive medicines for unlicensed use. Term neonates and patients prescribed increasing numbers of medicines had increased risk of receiving medicines for off-label use.
CONCLUSION: Prescribing of medicines in an unlicensed or off-label fashion to the children in the intensive care units of UKMMC was common. Further detailed studies are necessary to ensure the delivery of safe and effective medicines to children.
SUBJECTIVE: Thirty-nine VLBW infants who were admitted to our NICU in 2013 were retrospectively analyzed.
RESULTS: Mean birth weight and gestational age was 1042.7 gram and 28.5 weeks, respectively. Total duration of indwelling PIDLCC was 1121 days (mean 28.5+18.2 days) with 85 PIDLCCs used. Dressing at the insertion site was done twice weekly with 10% povidone iodine. Four (10.3% with mean of 48 days) infants had catheter-related blood stream infection (CRBSI), with a 3.57 infection per 1000 catheter-day. The mean for days of PIDLCC in 35 infants without CRBSI was 26.5 days. Organisms isolated were Staphylococcus epidermidis, Staphylococcus aureus and Staphylococcus capitis ureolytic. Our study showed significant difference in the duration of indwelling catheter (p = 0.023) and intraventricular hemorrhage (p = 0.043) between the CRBSI group and non-CRBSI group. Five (12.8%) infants had abnormal thyroid function test, in which two infants required thyroxine supplementation upon discharge. However, duration of PIDLCC and abnormal thyroid function test was not statistically significant (p = 0.218). One (2.5%) infant died (death was not related to CRBSI). There was no serious adverse effects secondary to PIDLCC.
CONCLUSION: It is concluded that the use and maintenance of PIDLCC is safe for VLBW infants, but close monitoring should be observed to detect early signs of infection.
METHODS: A web-based survey was sent to neonatologists from 16 provinces representing 59.6% (824.2 million) of the total population of China on October 2015 and December 2017.
RESULTS: A total of 117 and 219 responses were received in 2015 and 2017, respectively. Compared to 2015, respondents in 2017 were more likely to resuscitate infants <25 weeks of gestation (86% vs. 72%; p < 0.05), but few would resuscitate infants ≤23 weeks of gestation in either epoch (10% vs. 6%). In both epochs, parents were responsible for >50% of the costs of intensive care, but in 2017, significantly fewer clinicians would cease intensive care (75% vs. 88%; p < 0.05) and more would request for economic aid (40% vs. 20%; p < 0.05) if parents could not afford to pay. Resource availability (e.g. ventilators) was not an important factor in either initiation or continuation of intensive care (~60% in both epochs).
CONCLUSION: Cost is an important factor in the initiation and continuation of neonatal intensive care in a developing country like China. Such factors need to be taken into consideration when interpreting outcome data from these regions.
METHODS: This was a cross-sectional study conducted over a period of 18 months. A self-administered questionnaire assessing knowledge and perception regarding neonatal pain was used.
RESULTS: Twenty-four hospitals participated in the study, with 423 respondents. The response rate was 85%. One hundred and ninety-seven respondents (47%) were aware of tools for neonatal pain assessment, but only 6% used them in daily practice. Doctors with >4 years of experience in neonatal care had better awareness of available pain assessment tools (59.4% vs 40.9%, P = 0.001). Sixteen statements regarding knowledge were assessed. Mean score obtained was 10.5 ± 2.5. Consultants/specialists obtained a higher mean score than medical officers (11.9 vs 10.4, P < 0.001). More than 80% of respondents were able to discriminate painful from non-painful procedures.
CONCLUSION: Clinicians involved in neonatal care, especially those with longer experience were knowledgeable about neonatal pain. Gaps between knowledge and its application, however, remain. Implementation of clinical guidelines to improve the quality of assessment and adequate pain management in neonates is recommended.
DESIGN AND METHODS: A cross-sectional survey was conducted in two hospitals in Jordan among 310 parents of infants in the NICU by using PSS: NICU and PROMIS.
RESULTS: Both parents experienced high levels of stress, anxiety, depression and sleep disturbance. There was a significant difference in stress level between mothers and fathers [t (308)=3.471, p=0.001], with the mothers experiencing higher stress than the fathers [mean: mothers=108.58; fathers=101.68]. The highest and lowest sources of stress were infant behavior and appearance (M=4.09) and sights and sounds in the NICU (M=3.54), respectively. The correlation between stress levels with anxiety (r=0.79) and depression (r=0.75) was strong and positive while sleep disturbance was significant and moderate (r=0.43).
CONCLUSIONS: The mothers experienced higher levels of stress compared to fathers, with positive correlations between stress and anxiety, depression and sleep disturbance.
PRACTICAL IMPLICATIONS: The findings of this study create nursing awareness of parent stress and its impact, which will help them to improve nursing care for parents.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: A retrospective cross-sectional study was carried out on 645 women with DC twins, excluding pregnancies complicated by one or both fetuses with demise (n = 22) or congenital anomalies (n = 9), who gave birth after 28 complete gestational weeks between 1 January 2001 and 31 December 2018. Univariable and multiple logistic regression analyses were carried out.
RESULTS: Maternal age >34 years (adjusted odds ratio 2.52; 95% confidence interval 1.25-5.07) and pre-pregnancy body mass index >24.9 kg/m2 (adjusted odds ratio 2.83, 95% confidence interval 1.47-5.46) were independent risk factors for GDM in women with DC twins. Newborns from women with GDM DC twins were more likely to be admitted to the neonatal intensive care unit (adjusted odds ratio 1.70, 95% confidence interval 1.06-2.72) than newborns from women with non-GDM DC twins. Other pregnancy and neonatal outcomes were similar between the two groups.
CONCLUSIONS: Advanced maternal age and pre-pregnancy overweight or obesity are risk factors for GDM in women with DC twins. Except for a nearly twofold increased risk of neonatal intensive care unit admission of newborns, the pregnancy and neonatal outcomes for women with GDM DC twins are similar to those for women with non-GDM DC twins.
BACKGROUND: Mothers of premature infants may face stress having premature infants, and their infants may be admitted to the NICU for a few weeks or months. The mothers' experience of stress would be worse if they have low knowledge and poor NICU-related maternal ability. Mothers of infants admitted to the NICU require well-planned interventions to cope with psychological matters arising after an infant hospitalisation.
DESIGN: Quasi-experimental design.
METHODS: A total of 216 mothers were consecutively assigned to control and intervention groups. Each group consisted of 108 mothers. The mothers in both groups received questionnaire concerning maternal stress and NICU-related ability during their first visit to NICU (within 48 hr of admission). A structured nursing intervention was implemented for 10 days on mothers in the intervention group. The control group continued to receive existing practice nursing care. Mothers of both groups were again given the questionnaire on maternal stress and NICU-related ability after 14 days of admission.
RESULTS: In the intervention group, the difference between the mean total score of maternal stress and parental role and relationship subscale decreased significantly, compared to the control group (p = 0.04; p = 0.01) respectively. Maternal ability improved significantly in mothers in the intervention group 2 weeks postintervention, p
SUBJECTS AND METHODS: The package known as "Preemie Mom: A Guide for You" was designed based on Stufflebeam's model and has four phases: (1) content evaluation from available sources of information, (2) input evaluation based on mothers' need related to premature baby care, (3) process evaluation for package designing and content drafting, and (4) product evaluation to determine its feasibility. The contents were extracted and collated for validation by consulting various specialists in related fields. A final draft was drawn based on comments given by experts. Comments from the mothers were taken for formatting, visual appearance, and content flow for easy understanding and usage.
RESULTS: All ten existing articles and eight relevant documents were gathered and critically appraised. The package was designed based on 11 main components related to the care of premature baby after discharge. The content validation was accepted at a minimum score of 0.85 for the item-level content validity index analysis. Both experts and mothers were agreed that the package is easy to use and well accepted as a guide after discharge. The agreement rate by the mothers was at 93.33% and greater for the front page, writing style, structure, presentation, and motives of the package.
CONCLUSIONS: "Preemie Mom: A Guide for You" is a validated health educational package and ready to be used to meet the needs of the mother for premature baby care at home.