Preschool outcome in children born very prematurely and cared for according to the Newborn Individualized Developmental Care and Assessment Program (NIDCAP).

AIM: Care based on the Newborn Individualized Developmental Care and Assessment Program (NIDCAP) has been reported to exert a positive impact on the development of prematurely born infants. The aim of the present investigation was to determine the effect of such care on the development at preschool age of children born with a gestational age of less than 32 wk. METHODS: All surviving infants in a randomised controlled trial with infants born at a postmenstrual age less than 32 wk (11 in the NIDCAP group and 15 in the control group) were examined at 66.3 (6.0) mo corrected for prematurity [mean (SD)]. In the assessment we employed the Wechsler Preschool and Primary Scale of Intelligence-Revised (WPPSI-R) for cognition, Movement Assessment Battery for Children (Movement ABC) for motor function, subtests of the NEPSY test battery for attention and distractibility, and the WHO definitions of impairment, disability and handicap. Exact binary logistic regression was employed. RESULTS: There were no significant differences between the intervention group in Full-Scale IQ 93.4 (14.2) [mean (SD)] versus the control group 89.6 (27.2), Verbal IQ 93.6 (16.4) versus 93.7 (26.8) or Performance IQ 94.3 (14.7) versus 86.3 (24.8). In the NIDCAP group 8/13 (62%) survived without disability and for the children with conventional care this ratio was 7/19 (37%). The corresponding ratios for surviving without mental retardation were 10/13 (77%) and 11/19 (58%), and for surviving without attention deficits 10/13 (77%) and 10/19 (53%). Overall, the differences were not statistically significant, although the odds ratio for surviving with normal behaviour was statistical significant after correcting for group imbalances in gestational age, gender, growth retardation and educational level of the parents. CONCLUSION: Our trial suggests a positive impact by NIDCAP on behaviour at preschool age in a sample of infants born very prematurely. However, due to problems of recruitment less than half of the anticipated subjects were included in the study, which implies a low power and calls for caution in interpreting our findings. Larger trials in different cultural contexts are warranted.

No indications of increased quiet sleep in infants receiving care based on the newborn individualized developmental care and assessment program (NIDCAP).

UNLABELLED: It has been proposed that the developmentally supportive care of very-low-birthweight (VLBW) infants provided by the Newborn Individualized Developmental Care and Assessment Program (NIDCAP) can improve the infants' opportunities for rest and sleep. The aim of the present study was to determine whether quiet sleep (QS) in VLBW infants is affected by NIDCAP care. Twenty-two infants with a gestational age of <32 wk at birth randomly received either NIDCAP (n = 11) or conventional care (n = 11). These two groups were comparable (mean (SD)) with respect to birthweight (1021 (240) vs 913 (362)g, respectively) and gestational age (27.1 (1.7) vs 26.4 (1.8) wk). The infants in the NIDCAP group were cared for in a separate room by a group of specially trained nurses and subjected to weekly NIDCAP observations until they reached a postconceptional age (PCA) of 36 wk. Quiet sleep (QS) was assessed from 24-h amplitude-integrated EEGs recorded at 32 and 36 wk of PCA. The percentage of time [mean (SD)] spent in QS at 32 wk of PCA was 33.5 (2.6) % for the NIDCAP group and 33.3 (6.9) % for the control infants (ns). At 36 wk, the corresponding values were 24.5 (3.2) % and 25.7 (4.7) %, respectively (ns). The number of QS periods/24 h decreased equally in both groups in association with maturation: from 24.6 (3.3) to 16.8 (1.8) and from 25.0 (5.8) to 17.5 (3.3), at 32 wk, and 36 wk of PCA, respectively (NS). CONCLUSIONS: There were no indications of increased QS at 32 or 36 wk of postconceptional age among VLBW infants who received care based on NIDCAP.

Living conditions in early infancy in Denmark, Norway and Sweden 1992-95: results from the Nordic Epidemiological SIDS study.

The objective was to study living conditions of infants and their families in Scandinavia in the 1990s and to assess similarities and differences among the three Scandinavian countries. The emphasis is on health and normality rather than on diseases and other deviations from well-being. The subjects are the 869 controls in the Nordic Epidemiological SIDS study carried out between 1 September 1992 and 31 August 1995 in Norway, Denmark and Sweden. The controls were matched with the 244 SIDS cases for sex, age and maternity hospital. Parents of the SIDS cases and the controls filled in the same questionnaire on family, pregnancy, delivery, the neonatal and the post-perinatal period. The most striking findings were that 99% of the mothers went to regular maternity controls, 97% to well-baby clinics and 84% breastfed exclusively. On the other hand, 11% drank alcohol more than once a month during pregnancy and 29% smoked during pregnancy. Compared to official statistics, to the extent they exist, the differences were small. The material contains valuable information on normal infant care in Scandinavia in the 1990s. Living conditions of infants in Scandinavia are similar in the three countries. Differences exist, but only to a small extent.

A randomized, controlled trial to evaluate the effects of the newborn individualized developmental care and assessment program in a Swedish setting.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: Family-centered developmentally supportive care of very low birth weight infants, provided by the Newborn Individualized Developmental Care and Assessment Program (NIDCAP) has been reported to have positive medical and economic impacts. Our aim was to investigate its effect on need of ventilatory assistance, growth, and hospitalization in a Swedish setting. METHODS: Preterm infants born between September 1994 and April 1997 with a gestational age <32 weeks and with a need of ventilatory assistance at 24 hours were randomly assigned to either NIDCAP (n = 12) or conventional care (n = 13). The 2 groups were comparable (median [range]) with respect to birth weight (1083 [630-1411] vs 840[636-1939 g]), head circumference (24.0 [22.3-26.5] vs 24.0 [21. 1-30.0 cm]), gestational age (27.6 [24.0-28.7] vs 26.1 [23.9-30.3] weeks), female/male ratio (3/9 vs 9/8) and Clinical Risk Index for Babies (4.0 [0-11] vs 6.0 [2-15]). The infants in the intervention group were cared for in a separate room by a group of specially trained nurses. Formal weekly observations of these infants starting within 3 days after birth and continuing until 36 weeks postconception were used to develop individualized care plans. These plans provided recommendations as to how care might be attuned to the current developmental stage of the infant and how the family might be supported and stimulated to participate in this care. The treatment of the 2 groups was in all other respects identical. RESULTS: The duration of mechanical ventilation (median [range] was 2.8 [0-36.7] days in the intervention group vs 4.8 [.1-29.8] days; not significant [NS]) among the controls and continuous positive airway pressure was applied for 26.1 (6.9-52.0) vs 43.9 (5.0-65.1) days. Supplementary oxygen was withdrawn at 33.0 (29.3-35.7) vs 38.1 (33.1-44.9) weeks of postconceptional age (PCA). The weight gain up to 35 weeks of PCA was 13.0 (6.7-21.0) vs 9.8 (6.8-16.6) g/day (NS). The head growth up to 35 weeks of PCA was.73 (.56-1.3) vs.63 (.56-. 77) cm/week (NS). The age of the infant at discharge was 38.3 (36. 1-57.7) vs 41.0 (36.9-48.4) weeks of PCA (NS). CONCLUSIONS: NIDCAP does not seem to have detrimental effects on Swedish very low birth weight infants in comparison with conventional care. Indeed, NIDCAP might even be advantageous.