Laryngeal Mask Use in the Neonatal Population: A Survey of Practice Providers at a Regional Tertiary Care Center in the United States.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to evaluate the level of training, awareness, experience, and confidence of neonatal practice providers in the use of laryngeal mask (LM), and to identify the barriers in its implementation in the neonatal population. STUDY DESIGN: Descriptive observational study utilizing an anonymous online questionnaire among healthcare providers at the Oklahoma Children's Hospital who routinely respond to newborn deliveries and have been trained in the Neonatal Resuscitation Program (NRP). Participants included physicians, trainees, nurse practitioners, nurses, and respiratory therapists. RESULTS: Ninety-five participants completed the survey (27.5% response rate). The sample consisted of 77 NRP providers (81%), 11 instructors (12%), and 7 instructor mentors (7%). Among 72 respondents who had undergone LM training, 51 (54%) had hands-on manikin practice, 4 (4%) watched the American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP) NRP educational video, and 17 (18%) did both. Nurses (39 out of 46) were more likely to have completed LM training than were physicians (31 out of 47). With only 11 (12%) participants having ever placed a LM in a newly born infant, the median confidence for LM placement during neonatal resuscitation was 37 on a 0 to 100 scale. Frequently reported barriers for LM use in neonates were limited experience (81%), insufficient training (59%), preference for endotracheal tube (57%), and lack of awareness (56%). CONCLUSION: While the majority of the neonatal practice providers were trained in LM placement, only a few had ever placed one in a live newborn, with a low degree of confidence overall. Future practice improvement should incorporate ongoing interdisciplinary LM education, availability of LM in the labor and delivery units, and promotion of awareness of LM as an alternative airway. KEY POINTS: · LM is underutilized as an alternative airway.. · Insufficient experience and training limit LM use.. · Providers confidence with LM placement is low..

Tele-Echocardiography for Congenital Heart Disease Screening in a Level II Neonatal Intensive Care Unit with Hybrid Telemedicine System.

Introduction: The nationwide shortage of pediatric cardiologists in medically underserved areas poses a challenge to congenital heart disease (CHD) screening requiring echocardiography, resulting in transfer of neonates to regional Level III/IV Neonatal Intensive Care Units (NICUs). This study aimed to evaluate the accuracy, safety, and cost-effectiveness of tele-echocardiography for advanced CHD screening at a Level II NICU managed by a hybrid telemedicine system. Methods: Retrospective chart review of infants requiring tele-echocardiography at a Level II NICU. Patient demographics, echocardiography indications, and findings were analyzed. Agreement between tele-echocardiography and conventional echocardiography findings was assessed. Transport cost savings were calculated based on preventable transfers to Level IV NICU. Descriptive statistics were computed for demographic and clinical variables. Results: Over 5 years, 52 infants were screened for CHD. Thirty-two infants (62%) had findings consistent with minor CHD or normal neonatal transitional physiology. Twenty infants (38%) had abnormal findings requiring follow-up with either a conventional echocardiography as inpatient at the regional Level IV NICU or as outpatient after discharge. Only 5 infants (10%) required transfer to a Level IV NICU for CHD management, whereas 15 infants (29%) were scheduled for outpatient follow-up. Strong agreement was noted between tele-echocardiography and conventional echocardiography findings. No case of critical congenital heart disease (CCHD) was missed. Tele-echocardiography saved $260,000 in transport costs. Conclusions: Tele-echocardiography can be accurate, safe, and effective in CHD screening, preventing unnecessary transfer of most infants to regional Level III/IV NICUs, saving transfer costs.

Changes in reasons for visits to primary care after the start of the COVID-19 pandemic: An international comparative study by the International Consortium of Primary Care Big Data Researchers (INTRePID).

BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 pandemic has reshaped healthcare delivery worldwide. OBJECTIVE: To explore potential changes in the reasons for visits and modality of care in primary care settings through the International Consortium of Primary Care Big Data Researchers (INTRePID). METHODS: We conducted a cross-sectional, retrospective study from 2018-2021. We examined visit volume, modality, and reasons for visits to primary care in Argentina, Australia, Canada, China, Peru, Norway, Singapore, Sweden, and the USA. The analysis involved a comparison between the pre-pandemic and pandemic periods. RESULTS: There were more than 215 million visits from over 38 million patients during the study period in INTRePID primary care settings. Most INTRePID countries experienced a decline in monthly visit rates during the first year of the pandemic, with rate ratios (RR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) ranging from RR:0.57 (95%CI:0.49-0.66) to RR:0.90 (95%CI:0.83-0.98), except for in Canada (RR:0.99, 95%CI:0.94-1.05) and Norway (RR:1.00, 95%CI:0.92-1.10), where rates remained stable and in Australia where rates increased (RR:1.19, 95%CI:1.11-1.28). Argentina, China, and Singapore had limited or no adoption of virtual care, whereas the remaining INTRePID countries varied in the extent of virtual care utilization. In Peru, virtual visits accounted for 7.34% (95%CI:7.33%-7.35%) of all interactions in the initial year of the pandemic, dipping to 5.22% (95%CI:5.21%-5.23%) in the subsequent year. However, in Canada 75.30% (95%CI:75.20%-75.40%) of the visits in the first year were virtual, decreasing to 62.77% (95%CI:62.66%-62.88%) in the second year. Diabetes, hypertension and/or hyperlipidemia and general health exams were in the top 10 reasons for visits in 2019 for all countries. Anxiety, depression and/or other mental health related reasons were among the top 10 reasons for virtual visits in all countries that had virtual care. CONCLUSIONS: The pandemic resulted in changes in reasons for visits to primary care, with virtual care mitigating visit volume disruptions in many countries.

Changes in primary care visits for respiratory illness during the COVID-19 pandemic: a multinational study by the International Consortium of Primary Care Big Data Researchers (INTRePID).

Objectives: The majority of patients with respiratory illness are seen in primary care settings. Given COVID-19 is predominantly a respiratory illness, the INTernational ConsoRtium of Primary Care BIg Data Researchers (INTRePID), assessed the pandemic impact on primary care visits for respiratory illnesses. Design: Definitions for respiratory illness types were agreed on collectively. Monthly visit counts with diagnosis were shared centrally for analysis. Setting: Primary care settings in Argentina, Australia, Canada, China, Norway, Peru, Singapore, Sweden and the United States. Participants: Over 38 million patients seen in primary care settings in INTRePID countries before and during the pandemic, from January 1st, 2018, to December 31st, 2021. Main outcome measures: Relative change in the monthly mean number of visits before and after the onset of the pandemic for acute infectious respiratory disease visits including influenza, upper and lower respiratory tract infections and chronic respiratory disease visits including asthma, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, respiratory allergies, and other respiratory diseases. Results: INTRePID countries reported a marked decrease in the average monthly visits for respiratory illness. Changes in visits varied from -10.9% [95% confidence interval (CI): -33.1 to +11.3%] in Norway to -79.9% (95% CI: -86.4% to -73.4%) in China for acute infectious respiratory disease visits and - 2.1% (95% CI: -12.1 to +7.8%) in Peru to -59.9% (95% CI: -68.6% to -51.3%) in China for chronic respiratory illness visits. While seasonal variation in allergic respiratory illness continued during the pandemic, there was essentially no spike in influenza illness during the first 2 years of the pandemic. Conclusion: The COVID-19 pandemic had a major impact on primary care visits for respiratory presentations. Primary care continued to provide services for respiratory illness, although there was a decrease in infectious illness during the COVID pandemic. Understanding the role of primary care may provide valuable information for COVID-19 recovery efforts and planning for future global emergencies.

Evaluating Patients' and Neonatologists' Satisfaction With the Use of Telemedicine for Neonatology Prenatal Consultations During the COVID-19 Pandemic.

Background: During the COVID-19 pandemic, telemedicine plays a critical role in providing safe, effective healthcare services, while reinforcing social distancing and optimizing the use of personal protective equipment. In this context, the Oklahoma Children's Hospital implemented virtual neonatology prenatal visits for pregnant women with a diagnosis of fetal anomalies. While tele-consultations have been broadly used with a high degree of acceptance in rural and remote areas, satisfaction has not been assessed in this particular scenario, where patients and physicians discussing sensitive healthcare information had to rapidly adjust to this new modality. Objectives: To evaluate patients' and neonatologists' satisfaction with virtual prenatal consultations in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic and to compare satisfaction levels of patients receiving virtual consultation with those receiving in-person consults. Methods: This cross-sectional study evaluated patients' and neonatologists' satisfaction with virtual consultations. Participants included pregnant women with diagnosis of fetal anomalies who received neonatology prenatal consultations at Oklahoma Children's Hospital, either in-person or through telemedicine, from May to mid-November 2020, and neonatologists providing virtual prenatal consultations in the same period. Virtual visits were delivered via Zoom Pro™. Patients and physicians who agreed to participate rated acceptability completing an anonymous 5-point Likert scale survey. Item frequencies and means for categories of items were computed by group (video-consult patients, in-person patients, physicians) and analyzed, using Welch's t for unequal sample size. Results: Overall consultation quality was rated good or excellent by 35 (100%) video-consult patients and 12 (100%) in-person patients. Patient group means computed on six 5-point Likert items about patient-physician communication did not differ significantly, video-consult: M = 28.71 (2.22); in-person consult: M = 28.92 (1.78) (p = 0.753263). All eight physicians (100%) agreed or strongly agreed that telemedicine was effective, using a 5-point Likert scale, and their combined consultation quality score computed on 10 survey questions was high: M = 46.4 (3.11). Conclusion: Despite patient inexperience with tele-consultations, the quick implementation of telemedicine, and the sensitive reason for the visit, patients and physicians were highly satisfied with virtual visits. Telemedicine is a safe, effective alternative for providing neonatology prenatal consultations for pregnant women with diagnosis of fetal anomalies during the pandemic.