Weekly updates #4

Ok not even nearly weekly, but I am now back from vacation, and after clearing though my inbox pressing the delete button several hundred times, I am ready to start posting again.

van der Ham DP, Vijgen SM, Nijhuis JG, van Beek JJ, Opmeer BC, Mulder AL, Moonen R, Groenewout M, van Pampus MG, Mantel GD et al: Induction of labor versus expectant management in women with preterm prelabor rupture of membranes between 34 and 37 weeks: A randomized controlled trial. PLoS Med 2012, 9(4):e1001208.
536 women with ruptured membranes at 34 to 37 weeks were randomized. In many hospitals currently labour is induced in these circumstances. This study found no advantage of induction compared to expectant management.

Weisman LE, Leeming AH, Kong L: Approriate antibiotic therapy improves ureaplasma sepsis outcome in the neonatal mouse. Pediatr Res 2012.
As study in a neonatal mouse model of ureaplasma sepsis. Azithromycin was much more successful than erythromycin for eliminating ureaplasma, and this improved survival. I rarely treat ETT ureaplasma infections, and when I do it seems to be very difficult to eliminate them, maybe I have been using the wrong antibiotic!

Choi WW, McBride CA, Bourke C, Borzi P, Choo K, Walker R, Nguyen T, Davies M, Donovan T, Cartwright D et al: Long-term review of sutureless ward reduction in neonates with gastroschisis in the neonatal unit. Journal of Pediatric Surgery 2012, 47(8):1516-1520. This technique I think has been a major advance, what we call here umbilical flap closure, and this article calls sutureless ward reduction. This article shows that about 50% can be reduced using this method, and that the babies do very well. They do it mostly on non-intubated patients, and 3/4 remain extubated after the procedure. We are more ‘aggressive’ I think, with many of our babies requiring ventilation after the procedure, but we are able to reduce a larger proportion of the cases without going to the OR. Recovery times appear to be shorter, but maybe they are the less severe lesions…

Petraglia AL, Moravan MJ, Dimopoulos VG, Silberstein HJ: Ventriculosubgaleal shunting – a strategy to reduce the incidence of shunt revisions and slit ventricles: An institutional experience and review of the literature. Pediatric Neurosurgery 2011, 47(2):99-107. There is enormous variation between institutions in the frequency and indications for shunts for post hemorrhagic hydrocephalus. Part of this may be because of varying frequencies of complications, and how the individual surgeon weighs the balance between complications and benefits.  A new-ish technique which shunts to the subgaleal space appears to be a good temporizing measure, and has low complication and infection rates.

Posted in Neonatal Research | Leave a comment

Predicting Successful Extubation

A couple of years ago I wrote an editorial for the Jornal de Pediatria, a Brazilian journal, about extubation failure. (full text available free here). At that time the most promising test fo predicting extubation failure appeared to be some variant of the Spontaneous Breathing Test.

Tests of pulmonary mecahnics or lung volumes have been disappointing as a rule, and test of maximal inspiratory force have also not worked out. A variant of a test where the infant is switched to CPAP for a certain limited duration of time, and the infant then observed seems most useful. But what exactly to observe?

Lorna Gillespie and her colleagues measured minute ventilation during assisted ventilation, then repeated the measure during ETT CPAP for 10 minute, the minute ventilation test, MVT. If the CPAP minute ventilation was less than 50% of that during assisted ventilation then the baby is considered ready for extubation. This is one of the few (or perhaps the only) randomized controlled trials in this area. Infants randomized to have the MVT were extubated earlier than those randomized to be extubated when the clinical team thought they were ready.

The Melbourne group  (those guys again!) compared the measuring minute ventilation approach to observing the baby for hypoxia and bradycardia. Most of the babies who were reintubated had a VE ratio more than 0.5, so they would have passed the MVT. The test they devised, the spontaneous breathing test, SBT, requires switching to ETT CPAP for 3 minutes, and observing the baby. “A failed SBT was recorded if the infant had either a bradycardia for more than 15 seconds and/or a fall in SpO2 below 85% despite a 15% increase in FIO2″.

A new study by Sanjay Chawla and coworkers evaluating the SBT has just been published. (Chawla S, Natarajan G, Gelmini M, Kazzi SNJ: Role of spontaneous breathing trial in predicting successful extubation in premature infants. Pediatric Pulmonology 2012:n/a-n/a.) They used an almost identical SBT, except that it lasted 5 minutes, and they do not mention the FiO2 in their definition of hypoxia. Nevertheless they found that an SBT pass was strongly predictive of successful extubation, and failing the SBT was modestly predictive of extubation failure (8 failed the test and of these 5 babies were later extubation failures).

I think this test deserves a modestly sized RCT to see if duration of intubation and lung injury can be improved by using the test, and the number of extubation/intubation episodes can also be decreased. I think the test seems sufficiently predictive that it could be used to encourage earlier extubation if the test is passed, and a serious consideration of delaying extubation if failed, although there are some extubation successes among infants who fail the test, so if everything else is optimal then a trial of extubation might still be worth it. Failing extubation isn’t such a bad thing if you can re-intubate the baby with minimal trauma, using pre-medication.

Posted in Neonatal Research | Leave a comment

Weekly Updates #3

A few new publications (I know it’s not quite weekly, but I am on vacation!):

Nguyen TP, Amon E, Al-Hosni M, Gavard JA, Gross G, Myles TD: “Early” versus “late” 23-week infant outcomes. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2012(0). Not too surprisingly, being born just after you reach 23 weeks gives you a lower chance of survival (25%) than being born just before 24 weeks (56%) in a single center retrospective cohort, n=126. Another good reason for throwing away guidelines that have intervention thresholds based on completed weeks of gestation!

Holsti L, Oberlander TF, Brant R: Does breastfeeding reduce acute procedural pain in preterm infants in the neonatal intensive care unit? A randomized clinical trial. Pain 2011, 152(11):2575-2581. For preterm infants in the NICU breastfeeding was no better than a soother during heel-lance (RCT n=57), the babies were not fully established on breast feeds, and those that were better at suckling may have had an effect. The controls did not receive sucrose: is this ethical?

Beeram MR, Loughran C, Cipriani C, Govande V: Utilization of Umbilical Cord Blood for the Evaluation of Group B Streptococcal Sepsis Screening. Clinical Pediatrics 2012, 51(5):447-453. You can use cord blood for the initial CBC and for the blood culture without worrying about contamination, prospective comparative study, n=200.

Bellieni CV, Tei M, Coccina F, Buonocore G: Sensorial saturation for infants’ pain. Journal of Maternal-Fetal and Neonatal Medicine 2012, 25(S1):79-81. A systematic review of multi-modal sensory stimulation as a pain control technique. This approach has been championed by Carlo Bellieni, See here for example, this SR shows that it is effective, and more effective than sweet solutions by themselves. It consists of giving the sucrose, and then talking gently to the baby, and massaging them (often a gentle stroking of the face). I don’t think this is much done in North America, but is part of some European guidelines, and probably should be more widely used, it is very simple to add to giving sugar.

Posted in Neonatal Research | Tagged , , , | Leave a comment

Improving outcomes of Preterm Infants, early post-discharge intervention programs

The history of early intervention programs is rather mixed. Do they actually help to improve outcomes? The most recent cochrane review was published in 2007 by the amazingly productive Lex Doyle and his colleagues, and was followed by an updated review by the same authors in 2009 (Orton J, Spittle A, Doyle LEX, Anderson P, Boyd R: Do early intervention programmes improve cognitive and motor outcomes for preterm infants after discharge? A systematic review. Developmental Medicine & Child Neurology 2009, 51(11):851-859). There are quite a few studies, 18 in all, but several were quasi-randomised, and the quality of several was low. Many were very small studies, but there was one study with nearly 1,000 babies, and another with just over 300, these were both high quality studies with follow up to school age. The largest study, the US Infant Health and Development Program (IHDP), has reported outcomes to 18 years of age, that study included infants less than 2.5 kg and less than 37 weeks; they randomized them 2:1 to get control more frequently than the intervention, I am not sure why. About half of the babies were less than 2 kg. Overall from the meta-analyses it seems that early cognitive scores are improved by around 0.5 of a standard deviation, up to pre-school testing. Scores at school age are not improved. There was some benefit in the larger babies at 18 years in the IHDP study, but not in the smaller ones. One of the higher quality studies in the systematic review was by Karen Koldewijn and her colleagues. In 2009 they had only published the 6 month outcomes, but they have very recently added preschool results. (Verkerk G, Jeukens-Visser M, Houtzager B, Koldewijn K, van Wassenaer A, Nollet F, Kok J: The infant behavioral assessment and intervention program in very low birth weight infants; outcome on executive functioning, behaviour and cognition at preschool age. Early Human Development 2012, 88(8):699-705.) For this publication there was an extensive analysis of the infants, including tests of executive functioning, behavior, visual motor integration and cognition. There were 151 infants of the originally randomized 176 who were examined (2 had died). They also had a number of term controls, about 40. The overall analysis showed no effect of the intervention program at this age. They did perform subgroup analyses which suggested some benefit in more high risk infants (with BPD or less than 28 weeks, or when the mother was of a low SES), but as always you have to take such analyses with a pinch of salt. Why would this be? An effect on cognitive development that does not generally seem to translate into longer term cognitive outcomes? I think that we are seeing is that there is an overall improvement in cognitive scores as these children age, particularly before they start school, as we showed in the CAP 5 year follow up. Some of that is because of the use of different tests. In the CAP 5 year follow up we examined some variables that were associated with improving cognitive scores and the social and educational background of the parents was important. So it seems that having an enriched environment at home after discharge is very important, but when the home environment is already good, then adding an early intervention program doesn’t have much long term effect. For those children with a more limited home environment these types of programs may have a benefit. Such programs are fairly expensive, but I think the data are positive enough that infants from families of lower socioeconomic status do benefit from early intervention and should be targeted. Who will pay is a question for the health care system where you are.

Posted in Neonatal Research | Tagged , , | Leave a comment

A life worth living? Who would want a child like that?

A troubling tale from an adult with a handicap has just been published. (Peace WJ: Comfort care as denial of personhood. Hastings Center Report 2012, 42(4):14-17.) When admitted to an acute care hospital with a serious wound the author was offered the option of not treating the infection by a well-meaning physician who assumed that his life was not worth very much, so he might want to die. He discusses his experience in this article and makes a heartfelt plea that the medical community should listen to the voices of the disabled. He was rather shaken by the assumption that he might be better off dead.

But in Pediatrics and Neonatology we make that assumption all the time. We assume that having a developmental delay as a result of an intracranial hemorrhage is worse than being dead, so withdrawing active care is justifiable. Even when we acknowledge that our predictions are very imperfect, and that many infants with very similar findings might have little impairment, we still offer limitation of care to parents with the goal that the infant will not survive.

Annie Janvier was guest editor of an edition of ‘Current Problems in Pediatrics and Adolescent Health Care‘ last year she  asked several parents to write their stories. Many of these stories recount the positive impact of a baby with impairments on their families.

One brief essay was entitled who would want a child like that? (Roy C: Who Would Want a Child Like That? Current Problems in Pediatric and Adolescent Health Care 2011, 41(4):127-127). In response to the question from a doctor which became the title Claire Roy gives an answer which in part is this: ‘A parent wants a child like that … their child … and they want to have every chance to do their job well. They deserve every support medical and social, emotional, and financial that it takes to bring “that child’s” life to fruition, to bring “that child’s” gifts to the world into which “that child,” for whatever reason, chose to enter.’

Posted in Neonatal Research | Tagged , , | 4 Comments

Weekly Updates #2

Recent things that I have noted:

Dennington D, Vali P, Finer NN, Kim JH: Ultrasound confirmation of endotracheal tube position in neonates. Neonatology 2012, 102(3):185-189. Bed-side ultrasound by the NICU team can confirm ETT position quickly and without radiation. This could be done out on transport, or in the delivery room as well as in the NICU, using handheld equipment with instant results.

Berry CA, Suki B, Polglase GR, Jane Pillow J: Variable ventilation enhances ventilation without exacerbating injury in preterm lambs with respiratory distress syndrome. Pediatr Res 2012. This confirms work in adult dogs, and shows less lung injury if you allow tidal volume to vary around an average value rather than keeping it identical for each breath. I thought of looking at this in babies a long time ago, but I realized that tidal volume already varies a lot, unless you have the baby paralyzed.

Newburger JW, Sleeper LA, Bellinger DC, Goldberg CS, Tabbutt S, Lu M, Mussatto KA, Williams IA, Gustafson KE, Mital S et al: Early developmental outcome in children with hypoplastic left heart syndrome and related anomalies: The single ventricle reconstruction trial. Circulation 2012, 125(17):2081-2091. 14 month follow up of an RCT comparing 2 different ways of doing the Norwood procedure. Bayley scores were not affected very much by how the procedure was done, or by other intra-operative management variables. They were mostly affected by innate patient variables (such as syndromes) and by patient morbidity over the first year of life. Bayley 2 MDI scores at 14 months averaged about 90, with 16% being below 70.

Beal J, Silverman B, Bellant J, Young TE, Klontz K: Late Onset Necrotizing Enterocolitis in Infants following Use of a Xanthan Gum-Containing Thickening Agent. J Pediatr 2012, 161(2):354-356. Even things that you think should be innocuous may be dangerous for preterm babies. This report documents a possible association between NEC and a milk thickening agent used for reflux. As previously noted, very few babies who have reflux need any treatment at all. Please don’t use something that might be toxic.

Parker M, Kamholz K, Brodsky D, Zuckerman B: Neonatal Intensive Care Unit Graduate Home Visit: A Learning Opportunity for Pediatric Interns. The Journal of Pediatrics 2012, 161(2):177-178.e171. What a good idea. Send pediatric residents to do home visits with families who have an ex-preterm infant to see what the home life of such a family is really like. We should do the same thing with families coping with children with impairments as well.

Posted in Neonatal Research | Leave a comment

‘Our children are not a diagnosis’ – what an amazing response!

This blog was initially intended mostly for health professionals (especially neonatologists and pediatricians in training) and others interested in academic neonatology, with the hope that some other people might find it interesting.

The reaction to my post on Annie Janvier’s paper has been humbling; over 1600 page views in 60 hours, and the counter is still mounting.

I would encourage anyone who interacts with families of children with serious chronic medical conditions to read the comments under the post.  I started trying to respond to all the parents’ comments, but then there were so many (and I have also just gone on vacation) that it became impossible, but I have read them all, (and rescued 3 from the automatic spam filter that were not spam, so they appeared out of chronological order). What is very evident is that most of the families who posted comments had very similar, but also very individual experiences. Most of them had negative initial contacts with their doctors, obstetricians, family doctors, pediatricians, or neonatologists; despite this they tried to get for their children what they felt was in the infant’s best interest, and finally most have found someone supportive, positive and helpful, who had made a big difference in their lives. They all report what a positive experience it was (or is) to live with a child with very serious limitations. Unfortunately one or two are still battling doctors who are convinced that their children would be better off dead, but they are a minority.

My sincere hope is that some of the health care providers reading this blog will have their attitudes changed, and that we will all have a deeper appreciation of the love and happiness surrounding children with serious conditions, be they chromosomal, genetic, or multifactorial, and an understanding of what a positive contribution they can make to our society. I don’t think you can read the stories in these comments and not be deeply moved: unless you have a heart of stone, and if so, you shouldn’t be in health care!

Just a brief additional note. If you leave a comment for the first time I have to approve it and  thereafter you can leave comments without approval, but I still read them all, and I will delete anything that is abusive. I have seen some distressing comments on youtube and other sites, and I have no intention of giving a forum to anyone who abuses a parent of a child with impairments, or that child. On the other hand if you want to disagree with me or correct me (or even abuse me;-)) that is OK, and I will approve anything that is on topic. So far I have not had any hesitation in approving any comments.

Posted in Advocating for impaired children | 3 Comments

“Our children are not a diagnosis”: the family experience of trisomy 13 and 18

Annie Janvier, Barb Farlow and Ben Wilfond have just published a rather disturbing study. At least I feel a bit disturbed. (Janvier A, Farlow B, Wilfond BS: The experience of families with children with trisomy 13 and 18 in social networks. Pediatrics 2012.) It is one of those studies that challenges many assumptions. They set up an internet questionnaire and contacted parents of infants with trisomy 18 and trisomy 13 who belonged to various internet-based support groups.

In this new publication; 332 parents completed the questionnaire, some had prenatal diagnosis and others postnatal. Those with prenatal diagnosis may or may not have had access to abortion services, but if they did, they had obviously chosen not to terminate because the study only included parents of infants who had been born alive.

About half of the parents had opted for palliative care and a quarter for limited medical care after birth, the remaining 25% had wanted full intervention. Interestingly, survival duration was not much different between these families.

One of their important findings was that they asked parents if they regretted their choices regarding the extent of medical intervention. The parents who regretted their choices were overwhelmingly those who chose to limit the medical interventions to comfort care only, or less than full intervention.

Also of note the children did show signs of developmental progress, and all were able to communicate with their parents at some level.

The parents report overwhelmingly, that the experience of living with these children had made a positive contribution to their family life, irrespective of the length of their lives, and even though it had created substantial financial costs. They also report their child as being a happy child.

What is most distressing is how negative the families’ interactions with health care providers were. Although 2/3 of the families did meet at least one provider who was helpful; most had received misinformation, and many of those who chose to have active care felt that they were judged negatively by providers for daring to make that decision. Providers also often referred to their baby in de-humanising terms, calling their baby ‘it’ or ‘a T18’. They recount interactions with providers who never learnt their baby’s name, instead referring to the child by their diagnosis.

This study points out the uniqueness of each of these children and the heterogeneity of condition and survival. The emphasize that we cannot be definite about the duration of survival or the capacities of an individual.

They conclude: Parents who engage with parental support groups may discover an alternative, positive, description about children with T13-18.

I conclude; we need to rethink how we present diagnoses of serious conditions to parents.

I must admit to an enhanced interest in this publication, I know Barb Farlow personally, she contacted Annie and me a few years ago, after her family had a distressing interaction with healthcare providers. Her own daughter was born with trisomy 13 and eventually died after a re-admission, when a do not resuscitate order was placed in her baby’s chart without her knowledge or consent (or that of her husband; she has written about the experience here and here and here). Interacting with Barb and then going on to review the websites, youtube videos and personal stories of families who had a child with one or other of these trisomies has really enhanced my understanding of how some families with such children react. One very touching video, which has become quite well known, is 99 balloons, another is here. I encourage anyone who has to care for  families whose children have severe impairments to spend  some time listening to the parent stories, the videos and the websites.

So here are some guidelines to use when talking with parents who have received a diagnosis, prenatal or postnatal, guidelines that you could develop as a result of these families’ reports of their experiences:

1. Don’t say that this is ‘incompatible with life’ or ‘lethal’; anyone can go on the internet and find very quickly that you lied to them.

2. Don’t say that if they survive ‘they will live a life of suffering’, parents do think that their child had more pain than others, but they also had many positive times, and their overall evaluation was positive.

3. Human beings are not vegetables. These children are conscious and interact, even if at very limited levels. Carrots don’t.

4. Don’t predict marital disharmony, or family breakdown. You can’t see the future, there is no evidence at all that this occurs more when a family has a baby with severe impairments, and indeed in this admittedly biased sample the divorce rate was far lower than the US or Canadian average.

4. Families find meaning in the lives of their children. Whether those lives are unimpaired or lived with severe impairments. Whether they are very short or not.

5. Don’t suggest that the child is replaceable. Sometimes parents will bring up the idea that they can have another child, that is fine if they do so, but for you to suggest it really shows that you think this child is worthless.

6. Don’t say that there is nothing you can do for them. There is a lot you can do. Empathy and a positive attitude can be a great help. Finding resources, respite care, enabling appropriate medical care, these are all things that you can do for them.

7. Be very explicit about medical decision making, come to an agreement about the limits of medical interventions (if you can’t, then find them another doctor who can); and be open to changing the plan as time goes on.

8. Refer to the child by name if there is a name. (Annie has often recounted to me that when she sees parents antenatally with a serious diagnosis she will ask them what the baby’s name is. They often become teary and tell her it is the first time anyone has recognized their fetus as being a real potential human being, it is one of the many things she has taught me.)

9. Above all recognize that these babies are human beings who will be loved, who will be cared for, who will leave a positive mark on their families, and who deserve respect.

Posted in Advocating for impaired children | Tagged , , | 104 Comments

Ventilation during Resuscitation, sustained inflations?

I don’t post much about animal studies, but there are some things which are extremely difficult to study in human babies and at least for preliminary studies they may be essential and very informative. That great Melbourne group has been looking at the effects of prolonged inflation time on response to resuscitation. Both in preterm animal models, and in asphyxiated near-term models.

They have shown that in rabbit cage experiments, preterm rabbits using a sustained inflation, of for example 20 seconds achieves an FRC much faster. The publications from 2009 show a fascinating series of images from phase-contrast x-rays showing the difference in lung volumes: I reproduce one here

Phase contrast x-ray images from prematurely delivery newborn rabbit pups ventilated from birth. Top panel are the images from the group with no SI (1 s in duration; images A, B, C, and D). Bottom panel are the images from the group with SI of 20 s (images E, F, G, and H). Images were acquired at 1 (A and E), 5 (B and F), 10 (C and G), and 20 (D and H) s after birth. The double asterisks (**) indicate images acquired at the end of the first inflation. Images acquired after the first inflation were acquired at end inspiration.

One could reasonably ask if that is  a good thing? Does achieving a good FRC faster really help? Well a new study from the group, this time in asphyxiated near-term lambs, would certainly suggest that a clinical benefit is very much a possibility (Klingenberg C, Sobotka KS, Ong T, Allison BJ, Schmölzer GM, Moss TJM, Polglase GR, Dawson JA, Davis PG, Hooper SB: Effect of sustained inflation duration; resuscitation of near-term asphyxiated lambs. Archives of Disease in Childhood – Fetal and Neonatal Edition 2012.) In this study lambs ventilated with  a single ventilation of 30 seconds had a much more rapid recovery of their heart rate and blood pressure than did those with 5 x 3 second inflations with 1 sec expiratory time, or those ventilated at a rate of 60 per min with 0.5 sec inflations. So as well as increasing FRC cardiovascular recovery is faster with sustained inflations.

I must admit, that despite the lack of RCT evidence I have been doing this for many years, often I will take over ventilation when a baby is not responding immediately to the initial attempts (by a resident or someone following NRP guidelines) I will give a long inflation of 20 to 30 seconds (which is very long during a resuscitation) with a gradually increasing pressure. I have been doing this following the research from many years ago of Vyas and Milner. They showed that the apparent opening pressure of the lungs could be eliminated by such an inflation, and the lungs developed an FRC as a result of this maneuver. There has never been any poof that this improves outcomes of resuscitation, but given this physiologic evidence I have tried it many times, and very often a baby who was difficult to ventilate and bradycardic has responded with good chest movements (which I now know are probably excessive tidal volumes!) and improvements in circulation.

The next stage should surely be to examine the use of prolonged inflations in human resuscitation.

But please see Carlos Blanco’s comment on this post.

Posted in Neonatal Research | 1 Comment

Weekly Update #1

There are a number of interesting and/or important publications that I don’t get the time to blog about. I was thinking that maybe a weekly update which lists them with just a little description rather than a full blog post might be interesting.

I will try this out, let me know if you find this helpful. As this is the first one I will go back a few weeks, and try to outline publications since the beginning of June.

van Vonderen JJ, Kleijn TA, Schilleman K, Walther FJ, Hooper SB, te Pas AB: Compressive force applied to a manikin’s head during mask ventilation. Archives of Disease in Childhood – Fetal and Neonatal Edition 2012, 97(4):F254-F258. Around 2 kg of force are applied during mask ventilation of the mannikin, before and after adjusting mask position.

Nijman J, de Vries LS, Koopman-Esseboom C, Uiterwaal CSPM, van Loon AM, Verboon-Maciolek MA: Postnatally acquired cytomegalovirus infection in preterm infants: A prospective study on risk factors and cranial ultrasound findings. Archives of Disease in Childhood – Fetal and Neonatal Edition 2012, 97(4):F259-F263. Around 10% of very preterm babies <32 weeks acquired CMV in the NICU, mostly from breast milk, most remained asymptomatic.

Mirea L, Sankaran K, Seshia M, Ohlsson A, Allen AC, Aziz K, Lee SK, Shah PS, Canadian Neonatal N: Treatment of patent ductus arteriosus and neonatal mortality/morbidities: Adjustment for treatment selection bias. J Pediatr 2012(0). Surgical ligation is associated with increased BPD risk, even after trying to account for all potential confounders, whether it really is possible to correct I am not sure, but they tried hard.

Pineda RG, Stransky KE, Rogers C, Duncan MH, Smith GC, Neil J, Inder T: The single-patient room in the nicu: Maternal and family effects. J Perinatol 2012, 32(7):545-551. Parents whose babies were assigned to single patient rooms visited more, but experienced more stress.

 Tillman S, Brandon DH, Silva SG: Evaluation of human milk fortification from the time of the first feeding: Effects on infants of less than 31 weeks gestational age. J Perinatol 2012, 32(7):525-531. After changing their protocol and fortifying milk from the very first feeding, there was less biochemical evidence of osteopenia, and it was well tolerated.

Caeymaex L, Jousselme C, Vasilescu C, Danan C, Falissard B, Bourrat M-M, Garel M, Speranza M: Perceived role in end-of-life decision making in the nicu affects long-term parental grief response. Archives of Disease in Childhood – Fetal and Neonatal Edition 2012. When interviewed a couple of years after their child’s death, parents who described their involvement in decision making as being “shared decision making” experienced less grief than those who thought it was mostly a medical decision, or those who thought it was mostly their decision.

Lyall AE, Woolson S, Wolfe HM, Goldman BD, Reznick JS, Hamer RM, Lin W, Styner M, Gerig G, Gilmore JH: Prenatal isolated mild ventriculomegaly is associated with persistent ventricle enlargement at ages 1 and 2. Early Human Development 2012, 88(8):691-698. Prenatal mild ventriculomegaly leads to persistent mild postnatal ventriculomegaly. Up to 2 years of age. But there is little effect if any on development.

Posted in Neonatal Research | 3 Comments