Am J Perinatol 2024; 41(S 01): e180-e186
DOI: 10.1055/a-1863-2312
Original Article

Identifying Gaps in Resuscitation Practices Across Level-IV Neonatal Intensive Care Units

Authors

  • Noorjahan Ali

    1   Division of Perinatal-Neonatal Medicine, Department of Pediatrics, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, Texas
  • Elizabeth Schierholz

    2   Division of Neonatal-Perinatal Medicine, Department of Pediatrics, School of Medicine, Children's Hospital Colorado, University of Colorado Anschutz Medical Campus, Aurora, Colorado
  • Danielle Reed

    3   Division of Perinatal-Neonatal Medicine, Department of Pediatrics, Children's Mercy-Kansas City, Kansas City, Missouri
  • Hannah Hightower

    4   Division of Neonatology, Department of Pediatrics, Children's of Alabama, University of Alabama at Birmingham School of Medicine, Birmingham, Alabama
  • Beth A. Johnson

    5   Division of Neonatology and Pulmonary Biology, Department of Pediatrics, University of Cincinnati, Cincinnati Children's Hospital Medical Center, Cincinnati, Ohio
  • Ruby Gupta

    6   Division of Neonatal/Perinatal Medicine, Department of Pediatrics, Medical College of Wisconsin, Milwaukee, Wisconsin
  • Megan Gray

    7   Division of Neonatology, Department of Pediatrics, University of Washington School of Medicine, Seattle, Washington
  • Anne Ades

    8   Division of Neonatology, Department of Pediatrics, Children's Hospital of Philadelphia, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania
  • Elizabeth A. Wetzel

    9   Division of Neonatal-Perinatal Medicine, Department of Pediatrics, Indiana University School of Medicine, Indianapolis, Indiana
  • on behalf of the Children's Hospitals Neonatal Consortium Resuscitation Focus Group

Funding None.
Preview

Abstract

Objectives This study aimed to describe resuscitation practices in level-IV neonatal intensive care units (NICUs) and identify possible areas of improvement.

Study Design This study was a cross-sectional cohort survey and conducted at the Level-IV NICUs of Children's Hospital Neonatal Consortium (CHNC). The survey was developed with consensus from resuscitation and education experts in the CHNC and pilot tested. An electronic survey was sent to individual site sponsors to determine unit demographics, resuscitation team composition, and resuscitation-related clinical practices.

Results Of the sites surveyed, 33 of 34 sites responded. Unit average daily census ranged from less than 30 to greater than 100, with the majority (72%) of the sites between 30 and 75 patients. A designated code response team was utilized in 18% of NICUs, only 30% assigned roles before or during codes. The Neonatal Resuscitation Program (NRP) was the exclusive algorithm used during codes in 61% of NICUs, and 34% used a combination of NRP and the Pediatric Advanced Life Support (PALS). Most (81%) of the sites required neonatal attendings to maintain NRP training. A third of sites (36%) lacked protocols for high-acuity events. A code review process existed in 76% of participating NICUs, but only 9% of centers enter code data into a national database.

Conclusion There is variability among units regarding designated code team presence and composition, resuscitation algorithm, protocols for high-acuity events, and event review. These inconsistencies in resuscitation teams and practices provide an opportunity for standardization and, ultimately, improved resuscitation performance. Resources, education, and efforts could be directed to these areas to potentially impact future neonatal outcomes of the complex patients cared for in level-IV NICUs.

Key Points

  • Resuscitation practice is variable in level-IV NICUs.

  • Resuscitation algorithm training is not uniform

  • Standardized protocols for high-acuity low-occurrence (HALO) events are lacking

Ethical Approval

Study was exempt by Indiana University's Institutional Review Board (IRB; IRB identifier: 1809591028).


Authors' Contributions

N.A. and E.A.W. conceptualized and designed the study, coordinated data collection, drafted the initial manuscript, and reviewed the manuscript.


D.R., H.H., B.A.J., R.G., and A.A. designed the study and critically reviewed the manuscript.


E.S. and M.G. analyzed the data and critically reviewed the manuscript.


All authors approved the final manuscript as submitted and agree to be accountable for all aspects of the work.




Publikationsverlauf

Eingereicht: 24. Mai 2022

Accepted Manuscript online:
26. Mai 2022

Artikel online veröffentlicht:
23. Juni 2022

© 2022. Thieme. All rights reserved.

Thieme Medical Publishers, Inc.
333 Seventh Avenue, 18th Floor, New York, NY 10001, USA