A scoping review of parental values during prenatal decisions about treatment options after extremely premature birth.

AIM: To describe what is known in the literature about parental perspectives in making prenatal decisions regarding treatment after birth at the limit of viability, as a better understanding of parental values can help professionals support parents as they decide. METHODS: PubMed, Cochrane, Embase, CINAHL, PsycINFO and Web of Science were searched to identify relevant literature from 1 January 2010 to 22 April 2022 on parental decision making. Data were extracted from selected studies and organised into themes. The final themes were formed through collaboration with the parents of a premature infant born at 24 weeks. RESULTS: Of the 15,159 papers examined, 17 were included. Parental perspectives were described in terms of long-term outcomes for the infant, survival, protection against the burden of neonatal treatment, long-term impact on the family, religion and spiritual beliefs, to do everything possible, hope, sense of responsibility, wanting the best, doing what is right, giving a chance and the influence of experience. CONCLUSION: The extracted parental perspectives show the complexity of these decisions. Some perspectives were clear, but others were multi-interpretable. Increasing the understanding of common parental perspectives can help improve shared prenatal decisions and lead to further improvement and personalisation of the process.

Neonatal hypoglycaemia and body proportionality in small for gestational age newborns: a retrospective cohort study.

Small for gestational age (SGA) newborns are at risk of developing neonatal hypoglycaemia. SGA newborns comprise a heterogeneous group including both constitutionally small and pathologically growth restricted newborns. The process of fetal growth restriction may result in brain sparing at the expense of the rest of the body, resulting in disproportionally small newborns. The aim of this study was to discover whether body proportionality influences the risk of developing neonatal hypoglycaemia in SGA newborns. A retrospective cohort study was performed in 402 newborns who were SGA without additional risk factors for hypoglycaemia. Body proportionality was classified in two ways: (1) using symmetric (sSGA) or asymmetric (aSGA), defined as head circumference (HC) below or above the 10th percentile, respectively; (2) using cephalization index (HC/birth weight), standardized for gestational age. Hypoglycaemia was observed in 50% of aSGA and 40.9% of sSGA newborns (P-value 0.12). Standardized CI in newborns with hypoglycaemia was higher compared to newborns without hypoglycaemia (median 1.27 (1.21-1.35) versus 1.24 (1.20-1.29); (P 0.002)). Multivariate logistic regression analyses showed both CI and standardized CI to be associated with the occurrence of hypoglycaemia (OR 1.48 (1.24-1.77) and OR 1.44 (1.13-1.83), respectively). The majority of hypoglycaemic events (96.1%) occurred in the first 6 h after birth.   Conclusion: Body proportionality might be of influence, depending on the classification used. Larger prospective studies with a clear consensus definition of body proportionality are needed. What is Known: • Neonatal hypoglycaemia is an important complication in newborns. • Small for gestational age (SGA) newborns are more vulnerable to hypoglycaemia. What is New: • Higher incidence of hypoglycaemia was not observed in asymmetric SGA compared to symmetric SGA, but standardized cephalization index was associated with increased likelihood of hypoglycaemia. • Consensus-based definitions of body proportionality in newborns are needed.

What hinders and helps in the end-of-life decision-making process for children: Parents' and physicians' views.

AIM: To investigate the main factors which facilitate or hinder end-of-life decision-making (EoLDM) in neonates and children. METHODS: A qualitative inductive, thematic analysis was performed of interviews with a total of 73 parents and 71 physicians. The end-of-life decisions mainly concern decisions to withhold or withdraw life-sustaining treatment. RESULTS: The importance of taking sufficient time and exchanging clear, neutral and relevant information was main facilitators expressed by both parents and physicians. Lack of time, uncertain information and changing doctors were seen as important barriers by both parties. Most facilitators and barriers could be seen as two sides of the same coin, but not always. For example, some parents and physicians considered the fact that parents hold strong opinions as a barrier while others considered this a facilitator. Furthermore, parents and physicians showed differences. Parents especially underlined the importance of physician-related facilitators, such as a personalised approach, empathy and trust. On the contrary, physicians underlined the importance of the child's visible deterioration and parents' awareness of the seriousness of their child's condition and prognosis as facilitators of EoLDM. CONCLUSIONS: This study gained insight into what parents and physicians experience as the main barriers and facilitators in EoLDM for neonates and children.

The new European resuscitation council guidelines on newborn resuscitation and support of the transition of infants at birth: An educational article.

In this educational article, we summarize the changes in the new European Resuscitation Council guidelines on Newborn Resuscitation and Support of the Transition of Infants at Birth, emphasizing important aspects for the pediatric anesthesiologist including umbilical cord management, airway management, inflation pressure, and oxygen in relation with gestational age and situation. Using a fictitious case to illustrate the main points, we give a summary of the changes and the evidence behind them.

Digital decision aid for prenatal counseling in imminent extreme premature labor: development and pilot testing.

BACKGROUND: In case of extreme premature delivery at 24 weeks of gestation, both early intensive care and palliative comfort care for the neonate are considered treatment options. Prenatal counseling, preferably using shared decision making, is needed to agree on the treatment option in case labor progresses. This article described the development of a digital decision aid (DA) to support pregnant women, partners and clinicians in prenatal counseling for imminent extreme premature labor. METHODS: This DA is developed following the International Patient Decision Aid Standards. The Dutch treatment guideline and the Dutch recommendations for prenatal counseling in extreme prematurity were used as basis. Development of the first prototype was done by expert clinicians and patients, further improvements were done after alpha testing with involved clinicians, patients and other experts (n = 12), and beta testing with non-involved clinicians and patients (n = 15). RESULTS: The final version includes information, probabilities and figures depending on users' preferences. Furthermore, it elicits patient values and provides guidance to aid parents and professionals in making a decision for either early intensive care or palliative comfort care in threatening extreme premature delivery. CONCLUSION: A decision aid was developed to support prenatal counseling regarding the decision on early intensive care versus palliative comfort care in case of extreme premature delivery at 24 weeks gestation. It was well accepted by parents and healthcare professionals. Our multimedia, digital DA is openly available online to support prenatal counseling and personalized, shared decision-making in imminent extreme premature labor.

Validation of an Instrument for Real-Time Assessment of Neonatal Intubation Skills: A Randomized Controlled Simulation Study.

OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to evaluate the construct validity and reliability of real-time assessment of a previously developed neonatal intubation scoring instrument (NISI). STUDY DESIGN: We performed a randomized controlled simulation study at a simulation-based research and training facility. Twenty-four clinicians experienced in neonatal intubation ("experts") and 11 medical students ("novices") performed two identical elective intubations on a neonatal patient simulator. Subjects were randomly assigned to either the intervention group, receiving predefined feedback between the two intubations, or the control group, receiving no feedback. Using the previously developed NISI, all intubations were assessed, both in real time and remotely on video. Construct validity was evaluated by (1) comparing the intubation performances, expressed as percentage scores, with and without feedback, and (2) correlating the intubation performances with the subjects' level of experience. The intrarater reliability, expressed as intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC), of real-time assessment compared with video-based assessment was determined. RESULTS: The intervention group contained 18 subjects, the control group 17. Background characteristics and baseline intubation scores were comparable in both groups. The median (IQR) change in percentage scores between the first and second intubation was significantly different between the intervention and control group (11.6% [4.7-22.8%] vs. 1.4% [0.0-5.7%], respectively; p = 0.013). The 95% CI for this 10.2% difference was 2.2 to 21.4%. The subjects' experience level correlated significantly with their percentage scores (Spearman's R = 0.70; p <0.01). ICC's were 0.95 (95% CI: 0.89-0.97) and 0.94 (95% CI: 0.89-0.97) for the first and second intubation, respectively. CONCLUSION: Our NISI has construct validity and is reliable for real-time assessment. KEY POINTS: · Our neonatal intubation scoring instrument has construct validity.. · Our instrument can be reliably employed to assess neonatal intubation skills directly in real time.. · It is suitable for formative assessment, i.e., providing direct feedback during procedural training..

Healthcare professionals' knowledge of the systematic ABCDE approach: a cross-sectional study.

BACKGROUND: The Airway, Breathing, Circulation, Disability and Exposure (ABCDE) approach is a universal, priority-based approach for the assessment and treatment of critically ill patients. Although the ABCDE approach is widely recommended, adherence in practice appears to be suboptimal. The cause of this non-compliance is unknown. As knowledge is a prerequisite for adherence, the aim of this study was to assess healthcare professionals' knowledge of the ABCDE approach. METHODS: A cross-sectional study was conducted at the Radboud University Medical Center, the Netherlands. A digital multiple-choice assessment tool of the ABCDE approach was developed by an expert panel through a mini-Delphi method and validated by performing test item statistics and an expert-novice comparison. The validated test was sent to healthcare professionals (nurses, residents and medical specialists) of the participating departments: Anaesthesiology, Paediatrics, Emergency Department and the Neonatal, Paediatric and Adult Intensive Care Units. Primary outcome was the test score, reflecting individual level of knowledge. Descriptive statistics, regression analysis and ANOVA were used. RESULTS: Test validation showed a Cronbach's alpha of 0.71 and an expert-novice comparison of 91.9% (standard deviation (SD) 9.1) and 72.4% (15.2) respectively (p < 0.001). Of 954 eligible participants, 240 filled out the questionnaire. The mean (SD) test score (% of correct answers) was 80.1% (12.2). Nurses had significantly lower scores (74.9% (10.9)) than residents (92.3% (7.5)) and medical specialists (88.0% (8.6)) (p < 0.001). The Neonatal Intensive Care Unit (75.9% (12.6)) and Adult Intensive Care Unit (77.4% (11.2)) had significantly lower scores than Paediatric Intensive Care Unit (85.6% (10.6)), Emergency Department (85.5% (10.4)) and Anaesthesiology (85.3% (10.6)) (p < 0.05). Younger participants scored higher than older participants (-0.30% (-0.46;-0.15) in test score/year increase in age). CONCLUSION: Scores of a validated knowledge test regarding the ABCDE approach vary among healthcare professionals caring for critically ill patients. Type of department, profession category and age had a significant influence on the test score. Further research should relate theoretical knowledge level to clinical practice. Tailored interventions to increase ABCDE-related knowledge are recommended.

Performing newborn life support in advance of neonatal advanced life support course-back to basics?

In this retrospective analysis, the Newborn Life Support (NLS) test scenario performance of participants of the Dutch Neonatal Advanced Life Support (NALS) course was assessed. Characteristics of participants and total amount of failures were collected. Failures were subdivided in (1) errors of omission; (2) errors of commission; and (3) unspecified if data was missing. Pearson's chi-squared test was used to assess differences between participant groups. In total, 23 out of 86 participants (27%) failed their NLS test scenario. Life support course instructors in general (20/21) passed their test scenario more often compared to other participants (43/65) (p = 0.008). In total 110 fail items were recorded; the most common errors being not assessing heart rate (error of omission) (n = 47) and inadequate performance of airway management (error of commission) (n = 24).Conclusion: A substantial part of NALS participants failed their NLS test scenario. Errors of omission could be reduced by the availability of a checklist/NLS algorithm. Life support course instructors possibly make less errors of commission due to retention of skills by teaching these skills at least twice a year. Therefore, our study suggests that neonatal basic life support skills should be retained by local assurance of training programmes. What is Known: • Retention of skills after life support courses decreases after three months. • Adherence to newborn life support guidelines is suboptimal. What is New: • NLS performance is suboptimal in participants for advanced neonatal life support. • Most common failures are not assessing heart rate and inadequate airway management.

Validation of an Assessment Instrument for Pediatric Basic Life Support.

OBJECTIVES: To develop a valid and reliable instrument for the assessment of pediatric basic life support (PBLS). METHODS: An assessment instrument for PBLS was developed, based on 3 existing scoring systems and the European Resuscitation Council PBLS guideline. We tested if experienced PBLS instructors performed better than medical students on a standard PBLS examination on a low-fidelity pediatric manikin (construct validity). To pass the examination, 15 penalty points or less were required. The examinations were videotaped. One researcher assessed all videos once, and approximately half of them twice (intrarater reliability). A second researcher independently assessed part of the videos (interrater reliability). The time needed to assess 1 examination was determined. RESULTS: Face and content validity were established, because PBLS experts reached consensus on the instrument and because the instrument incorporated all items of the European Resuscitation Council algorithm. Of the 157 medical students that were scored, 98 (62.4%) passed the examination. Fourteen PBLS instructors were scored; all passed (100%). Pass rate (62.4% vs 100%) and median penalty points (15 [interquartile range, 10-22.5] vs 7.5 [interquartile range, 1.25-10]) were significantly different between students and instructors (P = 0.005 and <0.001, respectively). Reassessment demonstrated a κ for intrarater reliability of 0.62 (95% confidence interval, 0.45-0.81) (substantial agreement); κ for interrater reliability was 0.51 (95% confidence interval, 0.09-0.93) (moderate agreement). It took approximately 3 minutes to assess 1 videotaped examination. CONCLUSIONS: Our instrument for the (video-based) assessment of PBLS is valid and sufficiently reliable. It is also designed to be practical, time-efficient, and applicable in various settings, including resource limited.

Adherence to the ABCDE approach in relation to the method of instruction: a randomized controlled simulation study.

BACKGROUND: The Airway, Breathing, Circulation, Disability, and Exposure (ABCDE) approach is widely recommended and taught in many resuscitation courses. This study assessed the adherence to the ABCDE algorithm and whether this was affected by the instruction method used to teach this approach. METHODS: Randomized controlled trial in which simulation was used as investigational method. Between June 2017 and January 2018, neonatal healthcare providers routinely participated in simulated neonatal advanced life support (NALS) scenarios, using a high-fidelity manikin. They were randomly assigned to a video-based instruction (intervention group) or a conventional lecture (control group) as the method of instruction. One blinded researcher evaluated the adherence to the ABCDE approach on video with an assessment tool specifically designed and tested for this study. The primary outcomes were: 1) the overall adherence and 2) the between-group difference in individual adherence to the ABCDE approach, both expressed as a percentage score. Secondary outcomes were: 1) the scores of each profession category (nurses, neonatal ward clinicians, fellows/neonatologists) and 2) the scores for the separate domains (A, B, C, D, and E) of the algorithm. RESULTS: Seventy-two participants were assessed. Overall mean (SD) percentage score (i.e. overall adherence) was 31.5% (19.0). The video-based instruction group (28 participants) adhered better to the ABCDE approach than the lecture group (44 participants), with mean (SD) scores of 38.8% (18.7) and 27.8% (18.2), respectively (p = 0.026). The difference in adherence between both groups could mainly be attributed to differences in the adherence to domain B (p = 0.023) and C (p = 0.007). Neonatal ward clinicians (39.9% (18.2)) showed better adherence than nurses (25.0% (15.2)), independent of the study group (p = 0.010). CONCLUSIONS: Overall adherence to the ABCDE algorithm was rather low. Video-based instruction resulted in better adherence to the ABCDE approach during NALS training than lecturing. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ISRCTN registry, trial ID ISRCTN95998973 , retrospectively registered on October 13th, 2020.

Neonatal resuscitation guideline adherence: simulation study and framework for improvement.

We wanted to assess newborn life support (NLS) knowledge and guideline adherence, and provide strategies to improve (neonatal) resuscitation guideline adherence. Pediatricians completed 17 multiple-choice questions (MCQ). They performed a simulated NLS scenario, using a high-fidelity manikin. The literature was systematically searched for publications regarding guideline adherence. Forty-six pediatricians participated: 45 completed the MCQ, 34 performed the scenario. Seventy-one percent (median, IQR 56-82) of the MCQ were answered correctly. Fifty-six percent performed inflation breaths ≤ 60 s, 24% delivered inflation breaths of 2-3 s, and 85% used adequate inspiratory pressures. Airway patency was ensured 83% (IQR 76-92) of the time. Median events/min, compression rate, and percentage of effective compressions were 138/min (IQR 130-145), 120/min (IQR 114-120), and 38% (IQR 24-48), respectively. Other adherence percentages were temperature management 50%, auscultation of initial heart rate 100%, pulse oximeter use 94%, oxygen increase 74%, and correct epinephrine dose 82%. Ten publications were identified and used for our framework. The framework may inspire clinicians, educators, researchers, and guideline developers in their attempt to improve resuscitation guideline adherence. It contains many feasible strategies to enhance professionals' knowledge, skills, self-efficacy, and team performance, as well as recommendations regarding equipment, environment, and guideline development/dissemination.Conclusion: NLS guideline adherence among pediatricians needs improvement. Our framework is meant to promote resuscitation guideline adherence. What is Known: • Inadequate newborn life support (NLS) may contribute to (long-term) pulmonary and cerebral damage. • Video-based assessment of neonatal resuscitations has shown that deviations from the NLS guideline occur frequently; this assessment method has its audiovisual shortcomings. What is New: • The resuscitation quality metrics provided by our high-fidelity manikin suggest that the adherence of Dutch general pediatricians to the NLS guideline is suboptimal. • We constructed a comprehensive framework, containing multiple strategies to improve (neonatal) resuscitation guideline adherence.

From population reference to national standard: new and improved birthweight charts.

BACKGROUND: Antenatal detection of intrauterine growth restriction remains a major obstetrical challenge, with the majority of cases not detected before birth. In these infants with undetected intrauterine growth restriction, the diagnosis must be made after birth. Clinicians use birthweight charts to identify infants as small-for-gestational-age if their birthweights are below a predefined threshold for gestational age. The choice of birthweight chart strongly affects the classification of small-for-gestational-age infants and has an impact on both research findings and clinical practice. Despite extensive literature on pathological risk factors associated with small-for-gestational-age, controversy exists regarding the exclusion of affected infants from a reference population. OBJECTIVE: This study aims to identify pathological risk factors for abnormal fetal growth, to quantify their effects, and to use these findings to calculate prescriptive birthweight charts for the Dutch population. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We performed a retrospective cross-sectional study, using routinely collected data of 2,712,301 infants born in The Netherlands between 2000 and 2014. Risk factors for abnormal fetal growth were identified and categorized in 7 groups: multiple gestation, hypertensive disorders, diabetes, other pre-existing maternal medical conditions, maternal substance (ab)use, medical conditions related to the pregnancy, and congenital malformations. The effects of these risk factors on mean birthweight were assessed using linear regression. Prescriptive birthweight charts were derived from live-born singleton infants, born to ostensibly healthy mothers after uncomplicated pregnancies and spontaneous onset of labor. The Box-Cox-t distribution was used to model birthweight and to calculate sex-specific percentiles. The new charts were compared to various existing birthweight and fetal-weight charts. RESULTS: We excluded 111,621 infants because of missing data on birthweight, gestational age or sex, stillbirth, or a gestational age not between 23 and 42 weeks. Of the 2,599,640 potentially eligible infants, 969,552 (37.3%) had 1 or more risk factors for abnormal fetal growth and were subsequently excluded. Large absolute differences were observed between the mean birthweights of infants with and without these risk factors, with different patterns for term and preterm infants. The final low-risk population consisted of 1,629,776 live-born singleton infants (50.9% male), from which sex-specific percentiles were calculated. Median and 10th percentiles closely approximated fetal-weight charts but consistently exceeded existing birthweight charts. CONCLUSION: Excluding risk factors that cause lower birthweights results in prescriptive birthweight charts that are more akin to fetal-weight charts, enabling proper discrimination between normal and abnormal birthweight. This proof of concept can be applied to other populations.

Primum non nocere: earlier cessation of glucose monitoring is possible.

Newborns are at relatively high risk for developing hypoglycaemia in the first 24 h after birth. Well-known risk factors are prematurity, small for gestational age (SGA) or large for gestational age (LGA), and maternal pre-existent or gestational diabetes mellitus. Prolonged hypoglycaemia is associated with poor neurodevelopmental outcomes; hence, prevention through proper monitoring and treatment is important. Given the ongoing debate concerning frequency and duration of screening for neonatal hypoglycaemia, therefore, we investigated the frequency and duration of glucose monitoring safe to discover neonatal hypoglycaemia in different risk groups. Data of newborns at risk for hypoglycaemia were retrospectively collected and analysed. Blood glucose concentrations were measured 1, 3, 6, 12, and 24 h after birth. Moderate hypoglycaemia was defined as a blood glucose concentration of < 2.2 mM and severe hypoglycaemia as a concentration of < 1.5 mM. Of 1570 newborns, 762 (48.5%) had at least one episode of hypoglycaemia in the first 24 h after birth; 30.6% of them had severe hypoglycaemia (all in the first 9 h after birth). Only three SGA and two LGA newborns had a first moderate asymptomatic hypoglycaemic episode beyond 12 h after birth. The incidence of hypoglycaemia increased with accumulation of multiple risk factors. CONCLUSION: Safety of limiting the monitoring to 12 h still has to be carefully evaluated in the presence of SGA or LGA newborns; however, our results suggest that 12 h is enough for late preterm newborns (> 34 weeks) and maternal diabetes. What is Known: • Newborns are at relatively high risk for developing hypoglycaemia and such hypoglycaemia is associated with adverse neurodevelopmental outcomes. • Proper glucose monitoring and prompt treatment in case of neonatal hypoglycaemia are necessary. What is New: • Glucose monitoring 12 h after birth is proficient for most newborns at risk. • Maternal diabetes leads to the highest risk of early neonatal hypoglycaemia and newborns with more than one risk factor are at increased risk of hypoglycaemia.

Retention of knowledge and skills in pediatric basic life support amongst pediatricians.

Retention of resuscitation skills is usually assessed at a predefined moment, which enables participants to prepare themselves, possibly introducing bias. In this multicenter study, we evaluated the retention of knowledge and skills in pediatric basic life support (PBLS) amongst 58 pediatricians and pediatric residents with an unannounced examination. Practical PBLS skills were assessed with a validated scoring instrument, theoretical knowledge with a 10-item multiple-choice test (MCQ). Participants self-assessed their PBLS capabilities using five-point Likert scales. Background data were collected with a questionnaire. Of our participants, 21% passed the practical PBLS exam: 29% failed on compressions/ventilations, 31% on other parts of the algorithm, 19% on both. Sixty-nine percent passed the theoretical test. Participants who more recently completed a PBLS course performed significantly better on the MCQ (p = 0.03). This association was less clear-cut for performance on the practical exam (p = 0.11). Older, attending pediatricians with more years of experience in pediatrics performed less well than their younger colleagues (p < 0.05). Fifty-one percent of the participants considered themselves competent in PBLS. No correlation was found between self-assessed PBLS capabilities and actual performance on the practical exam (p = 0.25). CONCLUSION: Retention of PBLS skills appears to be poor amongst pediatricians and residents, whereas PBLS knowledge is retained somewhat better. What is Known: • Pediatricians and pediatric residents are not always competent in pediatric basic life support (PBLS) in daily practice. Poor retention of skills supposedly accounts for this incompetence. Without regular exposure, resuscitation skills usually deteriorate within 3 to 6 months after training. • Examination of resuscitation skills usually takes place after training. Also, in most studies evaluating retention of skills, participants are tested at a predefined moment. Inasmuch as participants are able to prepare themselves, these assessments do not reflect the ad hoc resuscitation capabilities of pediatricians and residents. What is New: • In this study, pediatricians and pediatric residents had to complete an unannounced PBLS exam at variable time intervals from last certification. Retention of PBLS skills was rather poor (pass rate 21%). • The PBLS skills of older, attending pediatricians with many working years in pediatrics appeared to be inferior to those of their younger colleagues.

Correction to: Preferred prenatal counselling at the limits of viability: a survey among Dutch perinatal professionals.

CORRECTION: Following publication of the original article [1], the corresponding authors wrote to say that there was a mistake in the transfer of her article to PubMed: her name is R Geurtzen, but the pdf-file names her as ms R Geurtzen and pubmed names her as MR Geurtzen.

Preferred prenatal counselling at the limits of viability: a survey among Dutch perinatal professionals.

BACKGROUND: Since 2010, intensive care can be offered in the Netherlands at 24+0 weeks gestation (with parental consent) but the Dutch guideline lacks recommendations on organization, content and preferred decision-making of the counselling. Our aim is to explore preferred prenatal counselling at the limits of viability by Dutch perinatal professionals and compare this to current care. METHODS: Online nationwide survey as part of the PreCo study (2013) amongst obstetricians and neonatologists in all Dutch level III perinatal care centers (n = 205).The survey regarded prenatal counselling at the limits of viability and focused on the domains of organization, content and decision-making in both current and preferred practice. RESULTS: One hundred twenty-two surveys were returned out of 205 eligible professionals (response rate 60%). Organization-wise: more than 80% of all professionals preferred (but currently missed) having protocols for several aspects of counselling, joint counselling by both neonatologist and obstetrician, and the use of supportive materials. Most professionals preferred using national or local data (70%) on outcome statistics for the counselling content, in contrast to the international statistics currently used (74%). Current decisions on initiation care were mostly made together (in 99% parents and doctor). This shared decision model was preferred by 95% of the professionals. CONCLUSIONS: Dutch perinatal professionals would prefer more protocolized counselling, joint counselling, supportive material and local outcome statistics. Further studies on both barriers to perform adequate counselling, as well as on Dutch outcome statistics and parents' opinions are needed in order to develop a national framework. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Clinicaltrials.gov, NCT02782650 , retrospectively registered May 2016.

Perspectives on periviability counselling and decision-making differed between neonatologists in the United States and the Netherlands.

AIM: American guidelines suggest that neonatal resuscitation be considered at 23 weeks of gestation, one week earlier than in the Netherlands, but how counselling practices differ at the threshold of viability is unknown. This pilot study compared prenatal periviability counselling in the two countries. METHODS: In 2013, a cross-sectional survey was sent to 121 Dutch neonatologists as part of a nationwide evaluation of prenatal counselling. In this pilot study, the same survey was sent to a convenience sample of 31 American neonatologists in 2014. The results were used to compare the organisation, content and decision-making processes in prenatal counselling at 24 weeks of gestation between the two countries. RESULTS: The survey was completed by 17 (55%) American and 77 (64%) Dutch neonatologists. American neonatologists preferred to meet with parents more frequently, for longer periods of time, and to discuss more intensive care topics, including long-term complications, than Dutch neonatologists. Neonatologists from both countries preferred shared decision-making when deciding whether to initiate intensive care. CONCLUSION: Neonatologists in the United States and the Netherlands differed in their approach to prenatal counselling at 24 weeks of gestation. Cross-cultural differences may play a role.

Prescriptive birthweight charts can improve the prediction of adverse outcomes in very preterm infants who are small for gestational age.

AIM: We compared three anthropometric charts to determine which provided the best predictions for adverse outcomes in very preterm small for gestational age (SGA) infants to address a lack of consensus on this subject. METHODS: This was a retrospective cohort study of infants born below 32 weeks, who were admitted to two-level three neonatal intensive care units in The Netherlands from 2008 to 2013. The birthweights of 1720 infants were classified as SGA using a conventional, gender-specific birthweight chart, based on births in The Netherlands between 2000 and 2007, a prescriptive, gender-specific birthweight chart, based on the same data but without risk factors for intrauterine growth restriction (IUGR), and a non-gender-specific foetal weight chart derived from American ultrasonographic measurements. RESULTS: The conventional, prescriptive and foetal weight charts classified 126 (7.3%), 494 (28.7%) and 630 (36.6%) infants as SGA. The prescriptive chart, which excluded IUGR, identified 368 SGA infants with significantly increased risks of neonatal mortality and morbidity. The 136 SGA infants just classified by the American foetal weight chart were not at increased risk. CONCLUSION: The prescriptive birthweight chart, which excluded infants with IUGR, was the most effective chart when it came to identifying clinically important risk increases in SGA infants.