Physician counselling practices and decision-making for extremely preterm infants in the Pacific Rim

2005 ◽  
Vol 41 (4) ◽  
pp. 209-214 ◽  
Author(s):  
Alma M Martinez ◽  
J Colin Partridge ◽  
Victor Yu ◽  
Keng Wee Tan ◽  
Chap-Yung Yeung ◽  
...  
2020 ◽  
Vol 46 (11) ◽  
pp. 773-779
Author(s):  
Eric Vogelstein

This paper proposes and employs a framework for determining whether life-saving treatment at birth is in the best interests of extremely preterm infants, given uncertainty about the outcome of such a choice. It argues that given relevant data and plausible assumptions about the well-being of babies with various outcomes, it is typically in the best interests of even the youngest preterm infants—those born at 22 weeks gestational age—to receive life-saving treatment at birth.


2021 ◽  
Vol 22 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Alice Cavolo ◽  
Bernadette Dierckx de Casterlé ◽  
Gunnar Naulaers ◽  
Chris Gastmans

Abstract Background Deciding whether to resuscitate extremely preterm infants (EPIs) is clinically and ethically problematic. The aim of the study was to understand neonatologists’ clinical–ethical decision-making for resuscitation of EPIs. Methods We conducted a qualitative study in Belgium, following a constructivist account of the Grounded Theory. We conducted 20 in-depth, face-to-face, semi-structured interviews with neonatologists. Data analysis followed the qualitative analysis guide of Leuven. Results The main principles guiding participants’ decision-making were EPIs’ best interest and respect for parents’ autonomy. Participants agreed that justice as resource allocation should not be considered in resuscitation decision-making. The main ethical challenge for participants was dealing with the conflict between EPIs’ best interest and respect for parents’ autonomy. This conflict was most prominent when parents and clinicians disagreed about births within the gray zone (24–25 weeks). Participants’ coping strategies included setting limits on extent of EPI care provided and rigidly following established guidelines. However, these strategies were not always feasible or successful. Although rare, these situations often led to long-lasting moral distress. Conclusions Participants’ clinical–ethical reasoning for resuscitation of EPIs can be mainly characterized as an attempt to balance EPIs’ best interest and respect for parents’ autonomy. This approach could explain why neonatologists considered conflicts between these principles as their main ethical challenge and why lack of resolution increases the risk of moral distress. Therefore, more research is needed to better understand moral distress in EPI resuscitation decisions. Clinical Trial Registration: The study received ethical approval from the ethics committee of UZ/KU Leuven (S62867). Confidentiality of personal information and anonymity was guaranteed in accordance with the General Data Protection Regulation of 25 May 2018.


2019 ◽  
Vol 24 (Supplement_2) ◽  
pp. e55-e55
Author(s):  
Shannon Bucking ◽  
Emily Mardian ◽  
Gregory Moore ◽  
Brigitte Lemyre ◽  
Sandra Dunn ◽  
...  

Author(s):  
Joe Fawke ◽  
Robert J Tinnion ◽  
Victoria Monnelly ◽  
Sean B Ainsworth ◽  
Jonathan Cusack ◽  
...  

In October 2019, the British Association of Perinatal Medicine (BAPM) published a Framework1 and associated infographic2 for ‘Practice on Perinatal Management of Extreme Preterm Birth Before 27 Weeks of Gestation’. This outlined an approach, based on data from the UK and abroad, to assist clinicians in decision-making relating to perinatal care at ≤26+6 weeks gestation. Many frontline providers of delivery room care of extremely preterm infants will have completed a Resuscitation Council UK (RCUK) Newborn Life Support or Advanced Resuscitation of the Newborn Infant course. This RCUK response to the BAPM Framework highlights how this might impact on their approach.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document