Multidimensional assessment of infant, parent and staff outcomes during a family centered care enhancement project in a tertiary neonatal intensive care unit:study protocol of a longitudinal cohort study

Background: The therapeutic advances and progress in the care for preterm infants have enabled the regular survival of very immature infants. However, the high burden of lifelong sequelae following premature delivery constitutes an ongoing challenge. Regardless of premature delivery, parental mental health and a healthy parent–child relationship were identified as essential prerogatives for normal infant development. Family centered care (FCC) supports preterm infants and their families by respecting the particular developmental, social and emotional needs in the Neonatal Intensive Care Unit. Due to the large variations in concepts and goals of different FCC initiatives, scientific data on the benefits of FCC for the infant and family outcome are sparse and its effects on the clinical team need to be elaborated. Methods: This prospective single centre longitudinal cohort study enrols preterm infants ≤ 32 + 0 weeks of gestation and/or birthweight ≤ 1500 g and their parents at the neonatal department of the Giessen University Hospital, Giessen, Germany. Following a baseline period, the rollout of additional FCC elements is executed following a stepwise 6-months approach that covers the NICU environment, staff training, parental education and psychosocial support for parents. Recruitment is scheduled over a 5.5. year period from October 2020 to March 2026. The primary outcome is corrected gestational age at discharge. Secondary infant outcomes include neonatal morbidities, growth, and psychomotor development up to 24 months. Parental outcome measures are directed towards parental skills and satisfaction, parent-infant-interaction and mental health. Staff issues are elaborated with particular focus on the item workplace satisfaction. Quality improvement steps are monitored using the Plan- Do- Study- Act cycle method and outcome measures cover the infant, the parents and the medical team. The parallel data collection enables to study the interrelation between these three important areas of research. Sample size calculation was based on the primary outcome. Discussion: It is scientifically impossible to allocate improvements in outcome measures to individual enhancement steps of FCC that constitutes a continuous change in NICU culture and attitudes covering diverse areas of change. Therefore, our trial is designed to allocate childhood, parental and staff outcome measures during the stepwise changes introduced by a FCC intervention program. Trial registration: Clinicaltrials.gov, trial registration number NCT05286983, date of registration 03/18/2022, retrospectively registered, http://clinicaltrials.gov .</p

Research priorities in pediatric parenteral nutrition: a consensus and perspective from ESPGHAN/ESPEN/ESPR/CSPEN

We acknowledge all the authors of the ESPGHAN/ESPR/ESPEN/CSPEN pediatric parenteral nutrition guidelines for their contributions and vote (Christian Braegger, University Children’s Hospital, Zurich, Switzerland; Jiri Bronsky, University Hospital Motol, Prague, Czech Republic; Cristina Campoy, Department of Paediatrics, School of Medicine, University of Granada, Granada, Spain; Magnus Domellof, Department of Clinical Sciences, Pediatrics, Umeå University, Sweden; Nicholas Embleton, Newcastle University, Newcastle upon Tyne, UK; Mary Fewtrell, UCL Great Ormond Street Institute of Child Health, London, UK; Natasa Fidler, University Medical Centre Ljubljana, Ljubljana, Slovenia; Axel Franz, University Children’s Hospital, Tuebingen, Germany; Oliver Goulet, University Sordonne-Paris-Cite; Paris-Descartes Medical School, Paris, France; Corina Hartmann, Schneider Children’s Medical Center of Israel, Petach Tikva, Israel and Carmel Medical Center, Israel; Susan Hill, Great Ormond Street Hospital for Children, NHS Foundation Trust and UCL Institute of Child Health, London, UK; Iva Hojsak, Children’s Hospital Zagreb, University of Zagreb School of Medicine, University of J. J. Strossmayer School of Medicine Osijek, Croatia; Sylvia Iacobelli, CHU La Reunion, Saint Pierre, France; Frank Jochum, Ev. Waldkrankenhaus Spandau, Berlin, Germany; Koen Joosten, Department of Pediatrics and Pediatric Surgery, Intensive Care, Erasmus MC Sophia Children’s Hospital, Rotterdam, The Netherlands; Sanja Kolacek, Children’s Hospital, University of Zagreb School of Medicine, Zagreb, Croatia; Alexandre Lapillone, Paris-Descartes University, Paris, France; Szimonetta Lohner, Department of Pediatrics, University of Pecs, Pecs, Hungary; Dieter Mesotten, KU Leuven, Leuven, Belgium; Walter Mihatsch, Ulm University, Ulm, and Helios Hospital, Pforzheim, Germany; Francis Mimouni, Department of Pediatrics, Division of Neonatology, The Wilf Children’s Hospital, the Shaare Zedek Medical Center, Jerusalem, and the Tel Aviv University, Tel Aviv, Israel; Christian Molgaard, Department of Nutrition, Exercise and Sports, University of Copenhagen, and Paediatric Nutrition Unit, Rigshospitalet, Copenhagen, Denmark; Sissel Moltu, Oslo University Hospital, Oslo, Norway; Antonia Nomayo, Ev. Waldkrankenhaus Spandau, Berlin, Germany; John Puntis, The General Infirmary at Leeds, Leeds, UK; Arieh Riskin, Bnai Zion Medical Center, Rappaport Faculty of Medicine, Technion, Haifa, Israel; Miguel Saenz de Pipaon, Department of Neonatology, La Paz University Hospital, Red de Salud Materno Infantil y Desarrollo e SAMID, Universidad Autonoma de Madrid, Madrid, Spain; Raanan Shamir, Schneider Children’s Medical Center of Israel, Petach Tikva, Israel; Tel Aviv University, Tel Aviv, Israel; Peter Szitanyi, General University Hospital, First Faculty of Medicine, Charles University in Prague, Czech Republic; Merit Tabbers, Emma Children’s Hospital, Amsterdam UMC, Amsterdam, The Netherlands; Chris van den Akker, Emma Children’s Hospital, Amsterdam UMC, Amsterdam, The Netherlands; Hans van Goudoever, Emma Children’s Hospital, Amsterdam UMC, Amsterdam, The Netherlands; Sacha Verbruggen, Department of Pediatrics and Pediatric Surgery, Intensive Care, Erasmus MC-Sophia Children’s Hospital, Rotterdam, The Netherlands; Cai Wei, Shanghai Jiao Tong University, Shanghai, China; Weihui Yan, Department of Gastroenterology and Nutrition, Xinhua Hospital, School of Medicine, Shanghai Jiao Tong University, Shanghai, China) and the members of the ESPR Section on Nutrition, Gastroenterology and Metabolism (Fredrik Ahlsson, Uppsala University Children’s Hospital and Department of Women’s and Children’s Health, Uppsala University, Uppsala, Sweden; Sertac Arslanoglu, Division of Neonatology, Department of Pediatrics, Istanbul Medeniyet University, Istanbul, Turkey; Wolfgang Bernhard, Department of Neonatology, Children’s Hospital, Faculty of Medicine, Eberhard-Karls- University, Tübingen, Germany; Janet Berrington, Newcastle Neonatal Service, Newcastle upon Tyne Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Newcastle upon Tyne, UK; Signe Bruun, Hans Christian Andersen Hospital for Children and Adolescents, Odense University Hospital, Odense, Denmark; Christoph Fusch, Department of Pediatrics, Paracelsus Medical School, General Hospital of Nuremberg, Nuremberg, Germany; Shalabh Garg, South Tees Hospitals, Middlesborough, UK; Maria Gianni, Department of Clinical Sciences and Community Health, University of Milan, Milan, Italy; Ann Hellstrom, Institute of Neuroscience and Physiology, Sahlgrenska Academy at University of Gothenburg, Gothenburg, Sweden; Claus Klingenberg, Department of Pediatrics and Adolescence Medicine, University Hospital of North Norway, Tromsø, Norway; Helen Mactier, Neonatal Unit, Princess Royal Maternity Hospital, Glasgow, UK; Neena Modi, Section of Neonatal Medicine, Department of Medicine, Chelsea and Westminster Campus, Imperial College London, London, UK; Niels Rochow, Division of Neonatology, Department of Pediatrics, McMaster University, Hamilton, Ontario, Canada; Paola Rogerro, Department of Clinical Sciences and Community Health, University of Milan, Milan, Italy; Umberto Simeoni, Division of Pediatrics, CHUV & University of Lausanne, Lausanne, Switzerland; Atul Singhal, Paediatric Nutrition, UCL Great Ormond Street Institute of Child Health, London, UK.; Ulrich Thome, Department of Neonatology, Universitatsklinikum Leipzig, Leipzig, Germany; Anne Twomey, Department of Neonatology, The National Maternity Hospital, Dublin, Ireland; Mireille Vanpee, Karolinska University Hospital, Stockholm, Sweden; Gitte Zachariassen, Hans Christian Andersen Hospital for Children and Adolescents, Odense University Hospital, Odense, Denmark) for their vote.Parenteral nutrition is used to treat children that cannot be fully fed by the enteral route. While the revised ESPGHAN/ ESPEN/ESPR/CSPEN pediatric parenteral nutrition guidelines provide clear guidance on the use of parenteral nutrition in neonates, infants, and children based on current available evidence, they have helped to crystallize areas where research is lacking or more studies are needed in order to refine recommendations. This paper collates and discusses the research gaps identified by the authors of each section of the guidelines and considers each nutrient or group of nutrients in turn, together with aspects around delivery and organization. The 99 research priorities identified were then ranked in order of importance by clinicians and researchers working in the field using a survey methodology. The highest ranked priority was the need to understand the relationship between total energy intake, rapid catch-up growth, later metabolic function, and neurocognitive outcomes. Research into the optimal intakes of macronutrients needed in order to achieve optimal outcomes also featured prominently. Identifying research priorities in PN should enable research to be focussed on addressing key issues. Multicentre trials, better definition of exposure and outcome variables, and long-term metabolic and developmental follow-up will be key to achieving this

ESPGHAN/ESPEN/ESPR/CSPEN guidelines on pediatric parenteral nutrition

Background: Previous guidelines on Paediatric Parenteral Nutrition (PN) were published in 2010, by the European Society of Paediatric Gastroenterology, Hepatology and Nutrition (ESPGHAN) and the European Society for Clinical Nutrition and Metabolism (ESPEN), supported by the European Society of Paediatric Research (ESPR) were published. The aim of the present paper was to provide up-to-date evidence for health professionals working with infants, children and adolescents receiving PN. Methods: The current document is a revision of the 2005 guidelines produced by the same 3 organizations (ESPEN, ESPGHAN, ESPR) together with the Chinese Society of Parenteral and Enteral Nutrition (CSPEN). Experts participating in the guideline updating process were all professionals with extensive experience in managing PN from a wide range of European countries, Israel and China. The guideline development process was coordinated by a guideline steering committee. Each chapter of the guideline was prepared by a separate author group. These author groups were responsible for screening titles and abstracts identified by a systematic literature search for inclusion, for conducting additional expert searches (including secondary sources such as other published valid guidelines), for evaluating the quality of studies included in the given chapter and assigning evidence levels to the literature. Based on the evidence level of included studies experts formulated and graded recommendations. A consensus conference was held in February 2015. All chapter manuscripts were revised following the recommendations of the consensus conference and then reviewed and edited by the project steering committee. Final consensus on each individual guideline and its individual recommendations was achieved and assessed by online voting. This process lasted until January 2018. Funding for the consensus conference (including travel expenses for participants) was provided by all participating societies. No other funding was received for the guideline updating process and participants received no payment. Support was provided by the Hungarian Cochrane organization. Results/conclusions: The present document provides guideline for the use of PN across the wide range of pediatric patients, ranging from extremely premature infants up to teenagers weighing up to and over 100 kg [1]. It covers their individual macro- and micronutrient needs [2], [3], [4], [5], [6], [7], [8], fluid requirements [9], venous access [10], organizational aspects [11], home parenteral nutrition [12], standardized vs. individualized PN [13], and last but not least a wide range of safety considerations for prevention and management of complications such central line associated bloodstream infections (CLABSI) [14]

Prevention of vitamin K deficiency bleeding in newborn infants: a position paper by the ESPGHAN committee on nutrition

Vitamin K deficiency bleeding (VKDB) due to physiologically low vitamin K plasma concentrations is a serious risk for newborn and young infants and can be largely prevented by adequate vitamin K supplementation. The aim of this position paper is to define the condition, describe the prevalence, discuss current prophylaxis practices and outcomes, and to provide recommendations for the prevention of VKDB in healthy term newborns and infants. All newborn infants should receive vitamin K prophylaxis and the date, dose, and mode of administration should be documented. Parental refusal of vitamin K prophylaxis after adequate information is provided should be recorded especially because of the risk of late VKDB. Healthy newborn infants should either receive 1 mg of vitamin K1 by intramuscular injection at birth; or 3 × 2 mg vitamin K1 orally at birth, at 4 to 6 days and at 4 to 6 weeks; or 2 mg vitamin K1 orally at birth, and a weekly dose of 1 mg orally for 3 months. Intramuscular application is the preferred route for efficiency and reliability of administration. The success of an oral policy depends on compliance with the protocol and this may vary between populations and healthcare settings. If the infant vomits or regurgitates the formulation within 1 hour of administration, repeating the oral dose may be appropriate. The oral route is not appropriate for preterm infants and for newborns who have cholestasis or impaired intestinal absorption or are too unwell to take oral vitamin K1, or those whose mothers have taken medications that interfere with vitamin K metabolism. Parents who receive prenatal education about the importance of vitamin K prophylaxis may be more likely to comply with local procedures

Critical systematic review of the level of evidence for routine use of probiotics for reduction of mortality and prevention of necrotizing enterocolitis and sepsis in preterm infants

BACKGROUND &#38; AIMS: Probiotics have been suggested to prevent severe necrotizing enterocolitis (NEC) and decrease mortality in preterm infants. The aim of this paper was to systematically analyze the level of evidence (LoE) of published controlled randomized trials (RCTs) on probiotics in preterm infants. METHODS: Literature searches were made up to November 2010. LoE of recommendations based on single trials or meta-analyses were scored following the Oxford Center for Evidence based Medicine approach (1a - meta-analyses of 1b LoE studies; 1b - well designed RCT; 2a - meta-analyses which include 2b LoE studies; 2b - lesser quality RCT). RESULTS: Fifteen trials were included (Two 1b LoE trials and thirteen 2b LoE trials). Methodological assessment revealed considerable heterogeneity. Some probiotics may be beneficial in relation to reduction of severe NEC (2b LoE) and reduction of mortality (2b LoE). Probiotics do not accelerate feeding advancement (1b and 2b LoE). There was no convincing benefit with regard to prevention of sepsis (1b and 2b LoE). CONCLUSION: There is insufficient evidence to recommend routine probiotics. However, there is encouraging data (2b LoE) which justifies the further investigation regarding the efficacy and safety of specific probiotics in circumstances of high local incidence of severe NEC

Probiotics for the management of pediatric gastrointestinal disorders: position paper of the ESPGHAN Special Interest Group on Gut Microbiota and Modifications

BACKGROUND: Probiotics, defined as live microorganisms that, when administered in adequate amounts, confer a health benefit on the host, are widely used despite uncertainty regarding their efficacy and discordant recommendations about their use. The ESPGHAN Special Interest Group on Gut Microbiota and Modifications provides updated recommendations for the use of probiotics for the management of selected pediatric gastrointestinal disorders. METHODS: All systematic reviews and/or meta-analyses, as well as subsequently published randomized controlled trials (RCTs) (until December 2021), that compared the use of probiotics in all delivery vehicles and formulations, at any dose, with no probiotic (i.e., placebo or no treatment), were eligible for inclusion. The recommendations were formulated only if at least two RCTs on a similar well-defined probiotic strain were available. The modified Delphi process was used to establish consensus on the recommendations. RESULTS: Recommendations for the use of specific probiotic strains were made for the management of acute gastroenteritis, prevention of antibiotic-associated diarrhea, nosocomial diarrhea and necrotizing enterocolitis, management of H pylori infection, and management of functional abdominal pain disorders and infant colic. CONCLUSIONS: Despite evidence to support the use of specific probiotics in some clinical situations, further studies confirming the effect(s) and defining the type, dose, and timing of probiotics are still often required. The use of probiotics with no documented health benefits should be discouraged

Probiotics for Preterm Infants : A Strain-Specific Systematic Review and Network Meta-analysis

OBJECTIVES: Several randomized controlled trials (RCTs) on the use of probiotics to reduce morbidity and mortality in preterm infants have provided inconsistent results. Although meta-analyses that group all of the used strains together are suggesting efficacy, it is not possible to determine the most effective strain that is more relevant to the clinician. We therefore used a network meta-analysis (NMA) approach to identify strains with greatest efficacy. METHODS: A PubMed search identified placebo-controlled or head-to-head RCTs investigating probiotics in preterm infants. From trials that recorded mortality, necrotizing enterocolitis, late-onset sepsis, or time until full enteral feeding as outcomes, data were extracted and Bayesian hierarchical random-effects models were run to construct a NMA. RESULTS: Fifty-one RCTs involving 11,231 preterm infants were included. Most strains or combinations of strains were only studied in one or a few RCTs. Only 3 of 25 studied probiotic treatment combinations showed significant reduction in mortality rates. Seven treatments reduced necrotizing enterocolitis incidence, 2 reduced late-onset sepsis, and 3 reduced time until full enteral feeding. There was no clear overlap of strains, which were effective on multiple outcome domains. CONCLUSIONS: This NMA showed efficacy in reducing mortality and morbidity only in a minority of the studied strains or combinations. This may be due to an inadequate number, or size, of RCTs, or due to a true lack of effect for certain species. Further large and adequately powered RCTs using strains with the greatest apparent efficacy will be needed to more precisely define optimal treatment strategies

Research priorities in pediatric parenteral nutrition: a consensus and perspective from ESPGHAN/ESPEN/ESPR/CSPEN

Abstract: Parenteral nutrition is used to treat children that cannot be fully fed by the enteral route. While the revised ESPGHAN/ESPEN/ESPR/CSPEN pediatric parenteral nutrition guidelines provide clear guidance on the use of parenteral nutrition in neonates, infants, and children based on current available evidence, they have helped to crystallize areas where research is lacking or more studies are needed in order to refine recommendations. This paper collates and discusses the research gaps identified by the authors of each section of the guidelines and considers each nutrient or group of nutrients in turn, together with aspects around delivery and organization. The 99 research priorities identified were then ranked in order of importance by clinicians and researchers working in the field using a survey methodology. The highest ranked priority was the need to understand the relationship between total energy intake, rapid catch-up growth, later metabolic function, and neurocognitive outcomes. Research into the optimal intakes of macronutrients needed in order to achieve optimal outcomes also featured prominently. Identifying research priorities in PN should enable research to be focussed on addressing key issues. Multicentre trials, better definition of exposure and outcome variables, and long-term metabolic and developmental follow-up will be key to achieving this. Impact: The recent ESPGHAN/ESPEN/ESPR/CSPEN guidelines for pediatric parenteral nutrition provided updated guidance for providing parenteral nutrition to infants and children, including recommendations for practice.However, in several areas there was a lack of evidence to guide practice, or research questions that remained unanswered. This paper summarizes the key priorities for research in pediatric parenteral nutrition, and ranks them in order of importance according to expert opinion

Reevaluating the FDA's warning against the use of probiotics in preterm neonates : a societal statement by ESPGHAN and EFCNI

The recent advisory issued by the United States Food and Drug Administration, cautioning against the routine administration of probiotics in preterm neonates, has sparked a lively debate within the scientific community. This commentary presents a perspective from members of the Special Interest Group on Gut Microbiota and Modifications within the European Society for Paediatric Gastroenterology, Hepatology and Nutrition (ESPGHAN) and other authors who contributed to the ESPGHAN position paper on probiotics for preterm infants, as well as representatives from the European Foundation for the Care of Newborn Infants. We advocate for a more nuanced and supportive approach to the use of certain probiotics in this vulnerable population, balancing the demonstrated benefits and risks