Evidence-Based Answer Intermittent and continuous amnioinfusion were found to have equal benefit with regard to maternal and neonatal outcomes (SOR: C, single small RCT).
Our website uses cookies to enhance your experience. By continuing to use our site, or clicking "Continue," you are agreeing to our Cookie Policy | Continue JAMA Pediatrics HomeNew OnlineCurrent IssueFor Authors Podcast Publications JAMA JAMA Network Open JAMA Cardiology JAMA Dermatology JAMA Health Forum JAMA Internal Medicine JAMA Neurology JAMA Oncology JAMA Ophthalmology JAMA Otolaryngology–Head & Neck Surgery JAMA Pediatrics JAMA Psychiatry JAMA Surgery Archives of Neurology & Psychiatry (1919-1959) JN Learning / CMESubscribeJobsInstitutions / LibrariansReprints & Permissions Terms of Use | Privacy Policy | Accessibility Statement 2023 American Medical Association. All Rights Reserved Search All JAMA JAMA Network Open JAMA Cardiology JAMA Dermatology JAMA Forum Archive JAMA Health Forum JAMA Internal Medicine JAMA Neurology JAMA Oncology JAMA Ophthalmology JAMA Otolaryngology–Head & Neck Surgery JAMA Pediatrics JAMA Psychiatry JAMA Surgery Archives of Neurology & Psychiatry Input Search Term Sign In Individual Sign In Sign inCreate an Account Access through your institution Sign In Purchase Options: Buy this article Rent this article Subscribe to the JAMA Pediatrics journal
Introduction Having an infant admitted to the neonatal intensive care unit (NICU) is associated with increased parental stress, anxiety and depression. Enhanced support for parents may decrease parental stress and improve subsequent parent and child outcomes. The Coached, Coordinated, Enhanced Neonatal Transition (CCENT) programme is a novel bundled intervention of psychosocial support delivered by a nurse navigator that includes Acceptance and Commitment Therapy-based coaching, care coordination and anticipatory education for parents of high-risk infants in the NICU through the first year at home. The primary objective is to evaluate the impact of the intervention on parent stress at 12 months. Methods and analysis This is a multicentre pragmatic randomised controlled superiority trial with 1:1 allocation to the CCENT model versus control (standard neonatal follow-up). Parents of high-risk infants (n=236) will be recruited from seven NICUs across three Canadian provinces. Intervention participants are assigned a nurse navigator who will provide the intervention for 12 months. Outcomes are measured at baseline, 6 weeks, 4, 12 and 18 months. The primary outcome measure is the total score of the Parenting Stress Index Fourth Edition Short Form at 12 months. Secondary outcomes include parental mental health, empowerment and health-related quality of life for calculation of quality-adjusted life years (QALYs). A cost-effectiveness analysis will examine the incremental cost of CCENT versus usual care per QALY gained. Qualitative interviews will explore parent and healthcare provider experiences with the intervention. Ethics and dissemination Research ethics approval was obtained from Clinical Trials Ontario, Children’s Hospital of Eastern Ontario Research Ethics Board (REB), The Hospital for Sick Children REB, UBC Children’s and Women’s REB and McGill University Health Centre REB. Results will be shared with Canadian level III NICUs, neonatal follow-up programmes and academic forums. Trial registration number ClinicalTrials.gov Registry ( NCT03350243 ).
Objectives: To compare triage level assignments, using simulated written case scenarios, in a pediatric emergency department (ED) among registered nurses (RNs) and pediatric emergency physicians (PEPs) and to compare the triage level assignments among RNs and PEPs with a consensus criterion standard. Methods: This was a cross‐sectional mailed questionnaire survey. The study was conducted at a pediatric tertiary care center with more than 65,000 annual patient visits. Participants were PEPs and RNs working in the ED. Dillman's Total Design Method, with three mailouts, was used for questionnaire construction and implementation. The survey included 55 case scenarios of patients presenting to the ED. Participants were instructed to assign triage level on each case, using the following four‐level triage scale: 1 = resuscitation / emergent, 2 = urgent, 3 = less‐urgent, and 4 = non‐urgent. A priori, all cases were assigned a triage level by consensus agreement of three PEPs, using established triage guidelines from the RNs' teaching manual. Kappa statistics (95% CI) and the mean percentage of correct responses (±1 SD) were calculated. Results: There was a 100% response rate (39 RNs, 24 PEPs). The kappa level of agreement (95% CI) was 0.453 (0.447 to 0.459) among the RNs and was 0.419 (0.409 to 0.429) among the PEPs. The mean percentage of correct responses (±1 SD) for the RNs was 64.2% (±8.0%) and for the PEPs was 53.5% (±8.1%, p < 0.01). There was no significant difference within groups by experience level (<10 vs. ≥10 years) or by the type of work schedule (day vs. evening vs. overnight) or full‐time vs. part‐time status. Conclusions: The level of agreement and accuracy of triage assignment was only moderate for both RNs and PEPs. Triage, a crucial step in emergency care, requires improved measurement.
To the Editor.
We thank Bialik and colleagues1 for emphasizing the naturally high spontaneous resolution rate of developmental dysplasia of the hip (DDH) in otherwise healthy, term newborns. However, their findings are hardly new. Since the 1960s, it has been recognized that up to 90% of infants with DDH identified at birth, by any diagnostic method, require absolutely no intervention.2–11 Given that the rate of spontaneous resolution appears to be most rapid in the first 3 months of life, the reported incidence of DDH obviously depends highly on the age at which the infant was tested.
Ultrasound technology has complicated matters by identifying sonographic abnormalities in otherwise clinically normal infants. Not surprisingly, the abduction splinting rates in populations …
To review the effectiveness of, and make practice recommendations for, serial clinical examination and ultrasound screening for developmental dysplasia of the hip (DDH) in newborns. The effectiveness of selective screening of high-risk infants with hip and pelvic radiographs and treatment with abduction therapy are also examined.Screening: serial clinical examination, ultrasound screening, radiographic evaluation.abduction therapy.Rates of operative intervention, abduction splinting, delayed diagnosis of DDH (beyond 3-6 months), treatment complications and false diagnostic labelling. Long-term functional outcomes were considered important.MEDLINE was searched for relevant English-language articles published from 1966 to November 2000 using the key words "screening," "hip," "dislocation," "dysplasia," "congenital" and "ultrasound." Comparative and descriptive studies and key reviews were retrieved, and their bibliographies were manually searched for further studies.Because most infants will have spontaneous resolution of nonteratologic DDH, early identification and intervention results in unnecessary labelling of newborns as having the problem and unnecessary treatment. Ultrasound screening is a highly sensitive but poorly specific measure of clinically relevant DDH. Abduction splinting is associated with a variety of problems, and its effectiveness in treating DDH is not clearly known. At least 20% of infants requiring operative intervention have had splint therapy. The harms of labelling, repetitive investigations, unnecessary splinting and resource consumption associated with screening are substantial.The strength of evidence was evaluated using the evidence-based methods of the Canadian Task Force on Preventive Health Care.There is fair evidence to include serial clinical examination of the hips by a trained clinician in the periodic health examination of all infants until they are walking independently (level II-1 and III evidence; grade B recommendation). There is fair evidence to exclude general ultrasound screening for DDH from the periodic health examination of infants (level II-1 and III evidence; grade D recommendation). There is fair evidence to exclude selective screening for DDH from the periodic health examination of high-risk infants (level II-1 and III evidence; grade D recommendation). There is fair evidence to exclude routine radiographic screening for DDH from the periodic health examination of high-risk infants (level III evidence; grade D recommendation). There is insufficient evidence to evaluate the effectiveness of abduction therapy (level III evidence; grade C recommendation), but good evidence to support a period of close observation for newborns with clinically detected DDH (level I evidence; grade A recommendation). However, there is insufficient evidence to determine the optimal duration of observation (level III evidence; grade C recommendation).The members of the Canadian Task Force on Preventive Health Care reviewed the findings of this analysis through an iterative process. The task force sent the final review and recommendations to selected external expert reviewers, and their feedback was incorporated in the final draft of the manuscript.The Canadian Task Force on Preventive Health Care is funded through a partnership between the Provincial and Territorial Ministries of Health and Health Canada.