Time to address the knowledge gaps for late preterm birth

Late preterm babies, born between 34+0 and 36+6 weeks of gestation, account for around 6-7% of all births and for three quarters of all preterm births. It is perhaps surprising therefore that for years, such a large population of babies, has been regarded with a degree of disinterest by clinicians. However, the large majority appear well at birth, spend only a short time in hospital compared with their very preterm counterparts, and for the most part do not cause anxiety for neonatologists and paediatricians; in addition, many do well in the long term. Their larger size and apparent maturity, and presumed good outcomes have all led to these babies being managed postnatally in much the same way as those born at term

Uncharted territory: a narrative review of parental involvement in decision-making about late preterm and early term delivery

Almost 30% of live births in England and Wales occur late preterm or early term (LPET) and are associated with increased risks of adverse health outcomes throughout the lifespan. However, very little is known about the decision-making processes concerning planned LPET births or the involvement of parents in these. This aim of this paper is to review the evidence on parental involvement in obstetric decision-making in general, to consider what can be extrapolated to decisions about LPET delivery, and to suggest directions for further research. A comprehensive, narrative review of relevant literature was conducted using Medline, MIDIRS, PsycInfo and CINAHL databases. Appropriate search terms were combined with Boolean operators to ensure the following broad areas were included: obstetric decision-making, parental involvement, late preterm and early term birth, and mode of delivery. This review suggests that parents’ preferences with respect to their inclusion in decision-making vary. Most mothers prefer sharing decision-making with their clinicians and up to half are dissatisfied with the extent of their involvement. Clinicians’ opinions on the limits of parental involvement, especially where the safety of mother or baby is potentially compromised, are highly influential in the obstetric decision-making process. Other important factors include contextual factors (such as the nature of the issue under discussion and the presence or absence of relevant medical indications for a requested intervention), demographic and other individual characteristics (such as ethnicity and parity), the quality of communication; and the information provided to parents. This review highlights the overarching need to explore how decisions about potential LPET delivery may be reached in order to maximise the satisfaction of mothers and fathers with their involvement in the decision-making process whilst simultaneously enabling clinicians both to minimise the number of LPET births and to optimise the wellbeing of women and babies.</p

Does prefeed gastric residual evaluation impair enteral nutrition intake in very preterm infants?

Prefeed gastric residuals are routinely evaluated in many NICUs. Evaluation aims to detect feed intolerance that might be associated with early NEC, and to reduce aspiration and VAP. However, evidence behind this practice is limited. It may reduce nutritional intake when feeds are stopped based on subjective assessments. This is concerning because adequate nutrition is essential for growth and neurodevelopment<br

New techniques, new challenges – the dilemma of pain management for less invasive surfactant administration

Recent years have seen the increasing use of non-invasive respiratory support in preterm infants with the aim of minimising the risk of mechanical ventilation and subsequent bronchopulmonary dysplasia. Respiratory distress syndrome is the most common respiratory diagnosis in preterm infants, and is best treated by administration of surfactant. Until recently, this has been performed via an endotracheal tube using premedication, which has often included opiate analgesia; subsequently the infant has been ventilated. Avoidance of mechanical ventilation, however, does not negate the need for surfactant therapy. Less invasive surfactant administration (LISA) in spontaneously breathing infants is increasing in popularity, and appears to have beneficial effects. However, laryngoscopy is necessary, which carries adverse effects and is painful for the infant. Conventional methods of premedication for intubation tend to reduce respiratory drive, which increases the likelihood of ventilation being required. This has led to intense debate about the best strategy for providing appropriate treatment, taking into account both the respiratory needs of the infant, and the need to alleviate procedural pain. Currently, clinical practice varies considerably and there is no consensus with respect to optimal management. This review seeks to summarise the benefits, risks and challenges associated with this new approach.</p

UK maternity care experiences of ethnic minority and migrant women: Systematic review

BackgroundThe increasing population of immigrant and migrant women in the United Kingdom has implications to the provision of healthcare and for healthcare experiences. Eliciting women's experiences and perceptions of maternity care received is an important way of monitoring and evaluating the quality of maternity services. This study was designed to explore the maternity care experiences of ethnic minority and migrant women in the United Kingdom.MethodsA literature search for relevant studies was carried across seven databases. We included nine studies carried out between 2015 and February 2022 that met the inclusion criteria. Data were analyzed using a thematic analysis approach.ResultsFindings showed that ethnic minority women and migrant women have had mixed experiences while utilizing maternity services in the United Kingdom. However, most of the experiences were negative and included issues related to communication, discrimination, culture, access to care, physical comfort, and continuity of care. Only one of the studies reported that the respondents had a wholly positive communication experience, one found that a few women felt the staff were respectful and one reported that the midwives gave the women treatment options that would respect their cultural and religious beliefs.ConclusionThis study has highlighted some important gaps in the maternity care experiences specific to ethnic minority and migrant women in the United Kingdom which provides useful insights to future policy and clinical practice

Managerial thinking in neonatal care: a qualitative study of place of care decision-making for preterm babies born at 27-31 weeks gestation in England

  Objectives Preterm babies born between 27 and 31 weeks of gestation in England are usually born and cared for in either a neonatal intensive care unit or a local neonatal unit—with such units forming part of Operational Delivery Networks. As part of a national project seeking to optimise service delivery for this group of babies (OPTI-PREM), we undertook qualitative research to better understand how decisions about place of birth and care are made and operationalised. Design Qualitative analysis of ethnographic observation data in neonatal units and semi-structured interviews with neonatal staff. Setting Six neonatal units across two neonatal networks in England. Two were neonatal intensive care units and four were local neonatal units. Participants Clinical staff (n=15) working in neonatal units, and people present in neonatal units during periods of observation. Results In the context of real-world neonatal practice, with multiple (and rapidly-evolving) uncertainties relating to mothers, babies and unit/network capacity, ‘best place of care’ protocols were only one element of much more complex decision-making processes. Staff often made judgements from a less-than-ideal starting point, and were forced to respond to evolving clinical and organisational factors. In particular, we report that managerial considerations relating to demand and capacity organised decision-making; demand and capacity management was time-consuming and generated various pressures on families, and tensions between staff. Conclusions Researchers and policymakers should take account of the organisational context within which place of care decisions are made. The dominance of demand and capacity management considerations is likely to limit the impact of other improvement interventions, such as initiatives to integrate families into the neonatal care provision. Demand and capacity management is an important element of neonatal care that may be overlooked, but significantly organises how care is delivered.</p

Surfactant therapy in late preterm and term neonates with respiratory distress syndrome: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BackgroundThere are no evidence-based recommendations for surfactant use in late preterm (LPT) and term infants with respiratory distress syndrome (RDS).ObjectiveTo investigate the safety and efficacy of surfactant in LPT and term infants with RDS.MethodsSystematic review, meta-analysis and evidence grading.InterventionsSurfactant therapy versus standard of care.Main outcome measuresMortality and requirement for invasive mechanical ventilation (IMV).ResultsOf the 7970 titles and abstracts screened, 17 studies (16 observational studies and 1 randomised controlled trial (RCT)) were included. Of the LPT and term neonates with RDS, 46% (95% CI 40% to 51%) were treated with surfactant. We found moderate certainty of evidence (CoE) from observational studies evaluating infants supported with non-invasive respiratory support (NRS) or IMV that surfactant use may be associated with a decreased risk of mortality (OR 0.45, 95% CI 0.32 to 0.64). Very low CoE from observational trials in which surfactant was administered at FiO2 >0.30–0.40 to infants on Continuous Positive Airway Pressure (CPAP) indicated that surfactant did not decrease the risk of IMV (OR 1.20, 95% CI 0.40 to 3.56). Very low to low CoE from the RCT and observational trials showed that surfactant use was associated with a significant decrease in risk of air leak, persistent pulmonary hypertension of the newborn (PPHN), duration of IMV, NRS and hospital stay.ConclusionsCurrent evidence base on surfactant therapy in LPT and term infants with RDS indicates a potentially decreased risk of mortality, air leak, PPHN and duration of respiratory support. In view of the low to very low CoE and widely varying thresholds for deciding on surfactant replacement in the included studies, further trials are needed

Risk of Developmental Disorders in Children Born at 32 to 38 Weeks’ Gestation: A Meta-Analysis

CONTEXT Very preterm birth (<32 weeks) is associated with increased risk of developmental disorders. Emerging evidence suggests children born 32 to 38 weeks might also be at risk. OBJECTIVES To determine the relative risk and prevalence of being diagnosed with, or screening positive for, developmental disorders in children born moderately preterm, late preterm, and early term compared with term (≥37 weeks) or full term (39–40/41 weeks). DATA SOURCES Medline, Embase, Psychinfo, Cumulative Index of Nursing, and Allied Health Literature. STUDY SELECTION Reported ≥1 developmental disorder, provided estimates for children born 32 to 38 weeks. DATA EXTRACTION A single reviewer extracted data; a 20% sample was second checked. Data were pooled using random-effects meta-analyses. RESULTS Seventy six studies were included. Compared with term born children, there was increased risk of most developmental disorders, particularly in the moderately preterm group, but also in late preterm and early term groups: the relative risk of cerebral palsy was, for 32 to 33 weeks: 14.1 (95% confidence intervals [CI]: 12.3–16.0), 34 to 36 weeks: 3.52 (95% CI: 3.16–3.92) and 37 to 38 weeks: 1.44 (95% CI: 1.32–1.58). LIMITATIONS Studies assessed children at different ages using varied criteria. The majority were from economically developed countries. All were published in English. Data were variably sparse; subgroup comparisons were sometimes based on single studies. CONCLUSIONS Children born moderately preterm are at increased risk of being diagnosed with or screening positive for developmental disorders compared with term born children. This association is also demonstrated in late preterm and early term groups but effect sizes are smaller

Parenting through place-of-care disruptions: a qualitative study of parents’ experiences of neonatal care.

Introduction Neonatal care is complex, involving multiple people and technologies within a community of care. When preterm babies are cared for far from home and/or transferred between units, the whole community of care (and particularly parent participation) is disrupted. Although previous studies have captured subjective experiences of parents, there has been little research exploring the material practices undertaken by parents as a consequence of place-of-care decisions, or the social organisation of those practices. Methods As part of a wider study exploring optimal place-of-care, semistructured interviews were conducted between July 2018 and October 2019 with 48 parents (36 families) with one or more preterm babies (born at 27–31 weeks gestation) cared for in a neonatal unit in the last 12 months. Findings We highlight parents' labour-intensive and stressful work to: (1) parent in the neonatal care community (an oversight role that goes beyond contemporary notions of ‘involvement’); (2) create continuity amid place-of-care disruptions; and (3) adapt to the managerial logics of neonatal care settings. Our analysis focuses on the work generated by managerial systems that organise place-of-care decision-making and other efficiency-focused practices. Parents are absorbed into negotiating institutional systems and diverted from routine parenting activities. Conclusion Those involved in the organisation and management of neonatal care should take account of how managerial systems impact parents' workload, ability to participate in their baby's community of care and, ultimately, on the wellbeing and development of babies and their families. Patient or Public Contribution The OPTI-PREM study embedded parents' experiences of neonatal care into the research, through a discrete workstream that employed qualitative methodology to capture parents' experiences—as reported in this paper. The OPTI-PREM project was also supported by a Bliss volunteer parent panel, which was involved in designing and overseeing the research. Bliss ‘champion[s] the right for every baby born premature or sick to receive the best care by supporting families, campaigning for change and supporting professionals and enabling life-changing research’ (https://www.bliss.org.uk/about-us/about-bliss). A representative of Bliss is a co-author of this manuscript, and a parent representative (named in the Acknowledgements) provided feedback during its preparation.</p

Evaluation of the use of a parent questionnaire to provide later health status data: The Panda Study

Background: Routine comparable outcome data collection relating to the later health status of babies born very preterm has long been considered important, but has not been achieved in the UK. Aim: To test the potential for a parental questionnaire to provide these data for all eligible babies from a geographical population. Methods: Consent for follow-up by questionnaire (using the Parent Report of Children's Abilities-Revised combined with questions derived from the Oxford minimum dataset) was sought for all babies ≤30 weeks of gestation, discharged from a hospital in the East Midlands and Yorkshire regions of the UK, having been born between 1 January 2007 and 31 December 2011. Results: The rate of consent to participate in follow-up showed a steady increase over time to 83.1% in 2011. However, the response rate in terms of completion and return of the questionnaire at 2 years, as a proportion of those eligible, showed little change over time, varying between 42% and 46%. Among those children where a questionnaire was returned, the rate of disability was broadly consistent over time: lowest in 2009, 21.0% (95% CI 16.8% to 25.6%) and highest in 2011, 25.5% (95% CI 21.5% to 31.2%). The instruments used appeared effective with the capability of discriminating between children with physical and/or cognitive disability. Conclusions: The overall response rate in terms of returned questionnaires was disappointing and inadequate to recommend for implementation. It is possible that response rates would have been higher had clinical follow-up been linked to the data obtained from the questionnaires rather than running as a parallel process