Cumulative effect of evidence-based practices on outcomes of preterm infants born at <29 weeks’ gestational age

2020 ◽  
Vol 222 (2) ◽  
pp. 181.e1-181.e10 ◽  
Author(s):  
Angelo Rizzolo ◽  
Prakesh S. Shah ◽  
Isabelle Boucorian ◽  
Brigitte Lemyre ◽  
Valerie Bertelle ◽  
...  
Neonatology ◽  
2021 ◽  
pp. 1-7
Author(s):  
Di Jin ◽  
Xinyue Gu ◽  
Siyuan Jiang ◽  
Yanchen Wang ◽  
Tongling Yang ◽  
...  

<b><i>Introduction:</i></b> Very preterm infants are at high risk of early death or severe brain injury, with potential for impaired long-term neurodevelopmental function and physical health. There are evidence-based healthcare practices that can reduce the incidence. <b><i>Materials and Methods:</i></b> Infants born at 24–31<sup>6</sup> weeks gestational age and admitted within 24 h to NICUs participating in the Chinese Neonatal Network in 2019 were included. We examined the association between 4 evidence-based practices: inborn (born in a tertiary hospital in the Chinese Neonatal Network), ACS (any antenatal corticosteroid), MgSO<sub>4</sub> (prenatal magnesium sulfate), and NT (normothermic temperature [36.0–37.5°C] at admission) and early death and/or severe brain injury in the study population. <b><i>Results:</i></b> Of 6,035 eligible infants, the incidence of early death and/or severe brain injury was 10.6%. Exposure to ACS only was associated with significant lower incidence of death and/or severe brain injury than none (aOR, 0.71; 95% CI: 0.57–0.88), but not MgSO<sub>4</sub> only (aOR, 0.97; 95% CI: 0.81–1.17), NT only (aOR, 0.91; 95% CI: 0.76–1.08), or inborn only (aOR, 0.91; 95% CI: 0.72–1.15). The association between number of practices and incidence of early death and/or severe brain injury is as follows: none = 23% (31/138), any 1 = 14% (84/592), any 2 = 12% (185/1,538), any 3 = 9% (202/2,285), and all 4 = 9% (140/1,482). <b><i>Discussion/Conclusion:</i></b> More comprehensive use of evidence-based practices was associated with improved survival without severe brain injury among very preterm infants born at &#x3c;32 weeks gestational age.


2019 ◽  
Vol 24 (Supplement_2) ◽  
pp. e46-e47
Author(s):  
Angelo Rizzolo ◽  
Prakesh Shah ◽  
Brigitte Lemyre ◽  
Valérie Bertelle ◽  
Ermelinda Pelausa ◽  
...  

BMJ ◽  
2016 ◽  
pp. i2976 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jennifer Zeitlin ◽  
Bradley N Manktelow ◽  
Aurelie Piedvache ◽  
Marina Cuttini ◽  
Elaine Boyle ◽  
...  

2021 ◽  
Vol 8 (7) ◽  
pp. 381-385
Author(s):  
Sumandeep Kaur ◽  
Navdeep S Sidhu

Preterm neonates are the neonates born alive before completion of 37 weeks of gestation. Prematurity is the real threat for survival of these neonates, especially those who are very-preterm (less than 32 weeks). In developing countries due to lack of basic care such as maintenance of warm chain, breast feeding support, infection control and scarcity of resources to tackle respiratory difficulties; the mortality in preterm infants is very high. Good skin care is a critical component of the basic neonatal care, that can directly reduce complications of prematurity as well address issues arising during the handling of these preterm infants such as injuries due to adhesives or devices, skin dryness, the use of skin emollients and disinfectants etc. In contemporary era, evidence-based practices are the need of hour to guide clinical practice. There are limited research articles dealing with skin care in preterm neonates that offer strong recommendations for skin care modalities. In this short review, the authors have compiled the recent evidences to address various issues related to skin care in very preterm neonates. In this article the evidences related to bathing practices in preterm infants, and the use of disinfectants and emollients for premature skin care has been discussed; besides making general recommendation related to skin care in preterm infants. Keywords: Preterm, skin care, emollients, disinfectant, neonate, prematurity, premature skin.


2009 ◽  
Vol 16 (1) ◽  
pp. 28-36 ◽  
Author(s):  
Gary A. Troia

Abstract This article first provides an overview of components of self-regulation in writing and specific examples of each component are given. The remainder of the article addresses common reasons why struggling learners experience trouble with revising, followed by evidence-based practices to help students revise their papers more effectively.


2003 ◽  
Vol 92 (5) ◽  
pp. 1-1 ◽  
Author(s):  
GMSJ Stoelhorst ◽  
SE Martens ◽  
M Rijken ◽  
van Zwieten PHT ◽  
AH Zwinderman ◽  
...  

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document