Communication Practices for Families With Languages Other Than English in US Neonatal Care Units.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: The lack of provision of culturally and linguistically appropriate services (CLAS) to families with languages other than English (LOE) is a highly modifiable driver of health care inequities. In a nationally representative sample of level 2 to 4 US NICUs, we examined patterns and predictors of communication practices for families with LOE and ascertained clinical leaders' beliefs about barriers to CLAS provision. METHODS: We surveyed clinical leaders from 500 randomly selected US NICUs. Responses were weighted by the number of eligible NICUs per region and nonresponse rates. Outcomes included: consistent parental language documentation (≥75% of the time versus <75%) and consistent professional interpreter use (in-person or remote interpretation ≥75% of the time versus <75%). We used logistic regression to examine the associations of predictors (region, hospital characteristics, and the proportion of racial and ethnic minority and families with LOE served) with outcomes. RESULTS: The overall response rate was 34%. A total of 63% of NICUs collected parental language data consistently, and 41% used interpreters consistently. Patterns of interpreter use varied by service hours and type of communication event. Teaching status, highest level of neonatal care, and larger NICU size were associated with consistent language documentation. Only a larger NICU size was associated with consistent interpreter use. Barriers to CLAS provision included untimely access to interpreter services and suboptimal quality of certain interpretation modalities. CONCLUSIONS: Implementation guidance, accountability for compliance with existing mandates, and interventions tailored to the NICU context are needed to reduce linguistic disparities.

"It's hard to wait": Provider perspectives on current genomic care in safety-net NICUs.

PURPOSE: Critically ill infants from marginalized populations disproportionately receive care in neonatal intensive care units (NICUs) that lack access to state-of-the-art genomic care, leading to inequitable outcomes. We sought provider perspectives to inform our implementation study (VIGOR) providing rapid genomic sequencing within these settings. METHODS: We conducted semistructured focus groups with neonatal and genetics providers at 6 NICUs at safety-net hospitals, informed by the Promoting Action on Research Implementation in Health Services framework, which incorporates evidence, context, and facilitation domains. We iteratively developed codes and themes until thematic saturation was reached. RESULTS: Regarding evidence, providers felt that genetic testing benefits infants and families. Regarding context, the major barriers identified to genomic care were genetic testing cost, lack of genetics expertise for disclosure and follow-up, and navigating the complexity of selecting and ordering genetic tests. Providers had negative feelings about the current status quo and inequity in genomic care across NICUs. Regarding facilitation, providers felt that a virtual support model such as VIGOR would address major barriers and foster family-centered care and collaboration. CONCLUSION: NICU providers at safety-net hospitals believe that access to state-of-the-art genomic care is critical for optimizing infant outcomes; yet, substantial barriers exist that the VIGOR study may address.

Unconditional cash transfers for preterm neonates: evidence, policy implications, and next steps for research.

To address socioeconomic disparities in the health outcomes of preterm infants, we must move beyond describing these disparities and focus on the development and implementation of interventions that disrupt the factors contributing to them. Unconditional cash transfers (UCTs), which provide unrestricted payments to individuals or households, can help mitigate income disparities and improve health outcomes. While UCTs have been utilized for other vulnerable populations, their full potential has yet to be realized for low-income families with preterm infants, who face significant financial strain. In this perspective, we review evidence supporting UCTs as an intervention for children in the U.S. (including those born term and preterm), discuss the potential benefits of recurring UCTs to low-income families of preterm infants, and propose a conceptual model through which UCTs may improve outcomes for preterm infants. We conclude with potential policy levers for implementing UCTs and key unanswered questions for researchers.