The cost of long-term follow-up of high-risk infants for research studies.

AIMS: Neonatal intensive care is expensive, and thus it is essential that its long-term outcomes are measured. The costs of follow-up studies for high-risk children who survive are unknown. This study aims to determine current costs for the assessment of health and development of children followed up in our research programme. METHODS: Costs were determined for children involved in the research follow-up programme at the Royal Women's Hospital, Melbourne, over the 6-month period between 1st January 2012 and 30th June 2012. The time required for health professionals involved in assessments in early and later childhood was estimated, and converted into dollar costs. Costs for equipment and data management were added. Estimated costs were compared with actual costs of running the research follow-up programme. RESULTS: A total of 134 children were assessed over the 6-month period. The estimated average cost per child assessed was $1184, much higher than was expected. The estimated cost to assess a toddler was $1149, whereas for an 11-year-old it was $1443, the difference attributable to the longer psychological and paediatric assessments. The actual average cost per child assessed was $1623. The shortfall of $439 between the actual and estimated average costs per child arose chiefly because of the need to pay staff even when participants were late or failed to attend. CONCLUSIONS: The average costs of assessing children at each age for research studies are much higher than expected. These data are useful for planning similar long-term follow-up assessments for high-risk children.

Improving compliance with pulse oximetry alarm limits for very preterm infants?

OBJECTIVE: To determine if participation in a randomised controlled trial of different oxygen saturation targets improved compliance with oximeter alarm limit guidelines. DESIGN: Eligible infants were born after the commencement of the BOOST II trial. Data on alarm limits were collected on all infants <32 weeks' gestational age or birth weight <1500 g, who were born at The Royal Women's Hospital, Melbourne between February and June 2007, and receiving supplemental oxygen at the time of the audit. The proportions of infants in oxygen with correct alarm limits (upper 94%; lower 85% or 86%) were compared, between those in the BOOST II trial and those who were not, and with an earlier audit. RESULTS: Of 100 infants surveyed, 56 had received oxygen (mean gestational age at birth 26.7 weeks, mean birth weight 913 g). Compliance with lower limits was good in both periods, irrespective of post-menstrual age or participation in the trial. Compliance with upper limits improved after trial commencement, but only for infants enrolled in the trial and only whilst they were <36 weeks' post-menstrual age. CONCLUSIONS: Starting a clinical trial of oxygen targeting was associated with improved compliance with upper alarm limits for participants receiving supplemental oxygen, but only whilst they were <36 weeks; with little effect outside the trial.

Compliance with alarm limits for pulse oximetry in very preterm infants.

OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to determine the rate of compliance with hospital guidelines for alarm limits for pulse oximetry in preterm infants on oxygen therapy. METHODS: All infants admitted to the nurseries at the Royal Women's Hospital, Melbourne, Australia, with gestational age <32 weeks or birth weight <1500 g between August 2005 and February 2006 were eligible for inclusion. Data on the alarm limits set for infants on oxygen therapy were collected prospectively. The target saturation range recommended in written hospital guidelines was 88% to 92%, with alarm limits set at 85% and 94%. RESULTS: Data were prospectively collected for 144 subjects with mean (SD) gestational age 29.3 (2.4) weeks and birth weight 1226 (354) g; 1073 alarm limits were collected when infants were on oxygen. The lower alarm limit was set correctly 91.1% of the time. In contrast, the upper alarm limit was set correctly only 23.3% of the time: 76.5% of the time it was too high, and 23.8% of the time it was set at 100%. Infants with an upper alarm limit set correctly on a particular day had a significantly lower birth weight, gestational age, postmenstrual age, and postnatal age than infants who had the upper alarm limit set too high. Use of assisted ventilation, higher inspired oxygen concentrations, and more frequent changes in inspired oxygen concentration were all associated with improved odds of having an appropriately set upper alarm limit. CONCLUSIONS: This study suggests that current guidelines regarding the upper pulse oximeter alarm limit for infants receiving oxygen might be commonly exceeded, although compliance might be better for infants at higher risk of adverse outcomes. However, there might be less variation from guidelines for the lower alarm limit.