Should less invasive surfactant administration (LISA) become routine practice in US neonatal units?

The harmful effects of mechanical ventilation (MV) on the preterm lung are well established. Avoiding MV at birth and stabilization on continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP) decreases the composite outcome of death or bronchopulmonary dysplasia. Although preterm infants are increasingly being admitted to the neonatal intensive care unit on CPAP, centers differ in the ability to manage infants primarily on CPAP. Over the last decade, less invasive surfactant administration (LISA), a method of administering surfactant with a thin catheter, has been devised and has been shown to decrease the need for MV and improve outcomes compared to surfactant administration via an endotracheal tube following intubation. While LISA has been widely adopted in Europe and other countries, its use is not widespread in the United States. This article provides a summary of the existing evidence on LISA, and practical guidance for US units choosing to implement a change of practice incorporating optimization of CPAP and LISA. IMPACT: The accumulated body of evidence for less invasive surfactant administration (LISA), a widespread practice in other countries, justifies its use as an alternative to intubation and surfactant administration in US neonatal units. This article summarizes the current evidence for LISA, identifies gaps in knowledge, and offers practical tips for the implementation of LISA as part of a comprehensive non-invasive respiratory support strategy. This article will help neonatal units in the US develop guidelines for LISA, provide optimal respiratory support for infants with respiratory distress syndrome, improve short- and long-term outcomes of preterm infants, and potentially decrease costs of NICU care.

Designing behavioral interventions using the capability-opportunity-motivation-behavior model and the theoretical domains framework to optimize oxygen saturation maintenance by NICU providers.

Objective: Despite evidence-based guidelines, SpO2 maintenance-related practices of care providers remain inconsistent. Our aim was to evaluate the impact of interprofessional learning workshops, bedside coaching, and neonatal intensive care unit (NICU) level enablers on targeted behavioral change of NICU staff, focusing on SpO2 maintenance. Methods: NICU is a specialized area of the hospital with sophisticated monitors where multidisciplinary staff provide round-the-clock care for sick and preterm infants. As a subset of a quality improvement project to improve SpO2 maintenance and reduce desaturation events, three targeted evidence-based staff behaviors were deemed as important based on established capability-opportunity-motivation-behavior and theoretical domains framework models: setting SpO2 alarm limits, using SpO2 alarm management algorithms, and reporting daily summaries of SpO2 during rounds. We conducted interprofessional workshops, provided bedside coaching, and altered unit NICU processes (guidelines, automated SpO2 histogram printouts, defined staff standard work) and measured demonstrable changes in staff reaction, learning, and behaviors by direct observation of behaviors and survey questionnaires. Results: Two hundred and seventy-five (87%) and 210 (80%) of NICU staff attended workshops and received bedside coaching, respectively. The proportion of staff expressing satisfaction with workshop and bedside coaching was 85% and 82%, respectively. The proportion of staff reporting improvement in their knowledge and confidence related to SpO2 maintenance increased significantly following the workshop. Targeted behaviors related to SpO2 maintenance like setting appropriate alarm limits, adhering to SpO2 management algorithm, and reporting daily SpO2 summaries during rounds increased from 80% to 96%, 0% to 64%, and 20% to 70%, respectively. Conclusion: Focused behavioral change interventions aimed at improving staff capability, opportunity, and motivation resulted in a demonstrable change in targeted staff behaviors related to SpO2 maintenance. Further research is needed to establish ways of optimizing intended staff behaviors while implementing care bundles in a given setting.

Care Bundle to Improve Oxygen Maintenance and Events.

Prolonged periods spent outside the target range of oxygen saturation (SpO2) in preterm infants, along with frequent desaturation events, predispose them to retinopathy of prematurity (ROP) and long-term neurodevelopmental impairment. The primary aim of this study was to increase the mean time spent within the target SpO2 range (WTR) by 10% and to reduce the frequency of desaturation events by 5 events per patient day, respectively, within 18 months of implementing a care bundle. Methods: This study was completed in a 46-bed neonatal intensive care unit (NICU), involving 246 staff members and led by a quality improvement team. The change interventions included implementing new practice guidelines, reviewing daily summaries of SpO2 maintenance, daily infant wellness assessment, standardizing workflow, and responding to SpO2 alarms. In addition, we collected staff satisfaction and compliance with change interventions, resource use, and morbidity and mortality data at discharge. Results: The mean time spent WTR increased from 65.3% to 75.3%, and the frequency of desaturation events decreased from 25.1 to 16.5 events per patient day, respectively, with a higher magnitude of benefit in infants on days with supplemental oxygen. Postimplementation, the duration of high-frequency ventilation and supplemental oxygen were lower, but morbidity and mortality rates were similar. Staff satisfaction with training workshops, coaching, use of the infant wellness assessment tool, and SpO2 alarm management algorithms were 74%, 82%, 80%, and 74%, respectively. Conclusion: Implementing a care bundle to improve oxygen maintenance and reduce desaturation events increased the time spent WTR and reduced the frequency of desaturation events.

Diagnostic Error: Why Now?

Diagnostic errors remain relatively understudied and underappreciated. They are particularly concerning in the intensive care unit, where they are more likely to result in harm to patients. There is a lack of consensus on the definition of diagnostic error, and current methods to quantify diagnostic error have numerous limitations as noted in the sentinel report by the National Academy of Medicine. Although definitive definition and measurement remain elusive goals, increasing our understanding of diagnostic error is crucial if we are to make progress in reducing the incidence and harm caused by errors in diagnosis.

Frequency of diagnostic errors in the neonatal intensive care unit: a retrospective cohort study.

OBJECTIVE: To determine the frequency and etiology of diagnostic errors during the first 7 days of admission for inborn neonatal intensive care unit (NICU) patients. STUDY DESIGN: We conducted a retrospective cohort study of 600 consecutive inborn admissions. A physician used the "Safer Dx NICU Instrument" to review the electronic health record for the first 7 days of admission, and categorized cases as "yes," "unclear," or "no" for diagnostic error. A secondary reviewer evaluated all "yes" charts plus a random sample of charts in the other categories. Subsequently, all secondary reviewers reviewed records with discordance between primary and secondary review to arrive at consensus. RESULTS: We identified 37 diagnostic errors (6.2% of study patients) with "substantial agreement" between reviewers (κ = 0.66). The most common diagnostic process breakdown was missed maternal history (51%). CONCLUSION: The frequency of diagnostic error in inborn NICU patients during the first 7 days of admission is 6.2%.

I can't breathe.

The phrase "I can't breathe" has become a national slogan in recent months for those who are protesting against racial discrimination across the world. For clinicians caring for neonates, this phrase should serve as a reminder about the stark disparities in health outcomes and health services for black infants and their families that have persisted for decades in spite of a voluminous amount of literature describing these disparities and the factors contributing to them. It should galvanize us into action within the neonatal intensive care unit and beyond to ensure equal treatment for all patients and their families, and to take measures to compensate for the disparities.