Current controversies in neonatal resuscitation

At the threshold of viability: to resuscitate or not to resuscitate - the perspectives of Israeli neonatologists

OBJECTIVE

This study aims to examine the perspectives of neonatologists in Israel regarding resuscitation of preterm infants born at 22-24 weeks gestation and their consideration of parental preferences. The factors that influence physicians' decisions on the verge of viability were investigated, and the extent to which their decisions align with the national clinical guidelines were determined.

STUDY DESIGN

Descriptive and correlative study using a 47-questions online questionnaire.

RESULTS

90 (71%) of 127 active neonatologists in Israel responded. 74%, 50% and 16% of the respondents believed that resuscitation and full treatment at birth are against the best interests of infants born at 22, 23 and 24 weeks gestation, respectively. Respondents' decisions regarding resuscitation of extremely preterm infants showed significant variation and were consistently in disagreement with either the national clinical guidelines or the perception of what is in the best interest of these newborns. Gender, experience, country of birth and the level of religiosity were all associated with respondents' preferences regarding treatment decisions. Personal values and concerns about legal issues were also believed to affect decision-making.

CONCLUSION

Significant variation was observed among Israeli neonatologists regarding delivery room management of extremely premature infants born at 22-24 weeks gestation, usually with a notable emphasis on respecting parents' wishes. The current national guidelines do not fully encompass the wide range of approaches. The country's guidelines should reflect the existing range of opinions, possibly through a broad survey of caregivers before setting the guidelines and recommendations.

Parents' experiences of palliative care decision-making in neonatal intensive care units: An interpretative phenomenological analysis

AIM

This work explores the experiences and meaning attributed by parents who underwent the decision-making process of withholding and/or withdrawing life-sustaining treatment for their newborn.

METHODS

Audio-recorded face-to-face interviews were led and analysed using interpretative phenomenological analysis. Eight families (seven mothers and five fathers) whose baby underwent withholding and/or withdrawing of life-sustaining treatment in three neonatal intensive care units from two regions in France were included.

RESULTS

The findings reveal two paradoxes within the meaning-making process of parents: role ambivalence and choice ambiguity. We contend that these paradoxes, along with the need to mitigate uncertainty, form protective psychological mechanisms that enable parents to cope with the decision, maintain their parental identity and prevent decisional regret.

CONCLUSION

Role ambivalence and choice ambiguity should be considered when shared decision-making in the neonatal intensive care unit. Recognising and addressing these paradoxical beliefs is essential for informing parent support practices and professional recommendations, as well as add to ethical discussions pertaining to parental autonomy and physicians' rapport to uncertainty.

Moral distress among neonatologists working in neonatal intensive care units in Greece: a qualitative study

BACKGROUND

Working as a neonatologist in a neonatal intensive care unit (NICU) is stressful and involves ethically challenging situations. These situations may cause neonatologists to experience high levels of moral distress, especially in the context of caring for extremely premature infants (EPIs). In Greece, moral distress among neonatologists working in NICUs remains understudied and warrants further exploration.

METHODS

This prospective qualitative study was conducted from March to August 2022. A combination of purposive and snowball sampling was used and data were collected by semi-structured interviews with twenty neonatologists. Data were classified and analyzed by thematic analysis approach.

RESULTS

A variety of distinct themes and subthemes emerged from the analysis of the interview data. Neonatologists face moral uncertainty. Furthermore, they prioritize their traditional (Hippocratic) role as healers. Importantly, neonatologists seek third-party support for their decisions to reduce their decision uncertainty. In addition, based on the analysis of the interview data, multiple predisposing factors that foster and facilitate neonatologists' moral distress emerged, as did multiple predisposing factors that are sometimes associated with neonatologists' constraint distress and sometimes associated with their uncertainty distress. The predisposing factors that foster and facilitate neonatologists' moral distress thus identified include the lack of previous experience on the part of neonatologists, the lack of clear and adequate clinical practice guidelines/recommendations/protocols, the scarcity of health care resources, the fact that in the context of neonatology, the infant's best interest and quality of life are difficult to identify, and the need to make decisions in a short time frame. NICU directors, neonatologists' colleagues working in the same NICU and parental wishes and attitudes were identified as predisposing factors that are sometimes associated with neonatologists' constraint distress and sometimes associated with their uncertainty distress. Ultimately, neonatologists become more resistant to moral distress over time.

CONCLUSIONS

We concluded that neonatologists' moral distress should be conceptualized in the broad sense of the term and is closely associated with multiple predisposing factors. Such distress is greatly affected by interpersonal relationships. A variety of distinct themes and subthemes were identified, which, for the most part, were consistent with the findings of previous research. However, we identified some nuances that are of practical importance. The results of this study may serve as a starting point for future research.