End-of-life decisions for extremely low-gestational-age infants: why simple rules for complicated decisions should be avoided

Advocating for neonatology presence at births between 20 and 25 weeks of gestation

Extreme preterm births between 20 and 25 weeks' gestation present significant challenges in neonatal care and ethics. This manuscript advocates for neonatology presence from 20 weeks onwards to optimize outcomes. Neonatology attendance ensures accurate gestational age assessment, immediate intervention, and informed decision-making. Survival rates for extremely preterm infants have improved significantly, ranging from 0 to 37 % at 22 weeks to 31-78 % at 24 weeks. However, outcomes vary widely based on factors such as healthcare access and socioeconomic conditions. We propose using "preterm birth between 20 and 25 weeks" instead of "periviability" for clarity in clinical protocols and parental counseling. Ethical considerations, including potential overtreatment and parental autonomy, are addressed through clear guidelines. While challenges exist in implementing this approach, particularly in smaller or rural hospitals, solutions such as strengthening regional networks and telemedicine can address these issues. Despite concerns about resource allocation, we argue that the benefits of neonatologist attendance outweigh the challenges, providing the best opportunity for survival and optimal outcomes in these ethically complex situations.

Society for Maternal-Fetal Medicine Consult Series #71: Management of previable and periviable preterm prelabor rupture of membranes

Previable and periviable preterm prelabor rupture of membranes are challenging obstetrical complications to manage given the substantial risk of maternal morbidity and mortality, with no guarantee of fetal benefit. The following are the Society for Maternal-Fetal Medicine recommendations for the management of previable and periviable preterm prelabor rupture of membranes before the period when a trial of neonatal resuscitation and intensive care would be considered appropriate by the healthcare team and desired by the patient: (1) we recommend that pregnant patients with previable and periviable preterm prelabor rupture of membranes receive individualized counseling about the maternal and fetal risks and benefits of both abortion care and expectant management to guide an informed decision; all patients with previable and periviable preterm prelabor rupture of membranes should be offered abortion care, and expectant management can also be offered in the absence of contraindications (GRADE 1C); (2) we recommend antibiotics for pregnant individuals who choose expectant management after preterm prelabor rupture of membranes at ≥24 0/7 weeks of gestation (GRADE 1B); (3) antibiotics can be considered after preterm prelabor rupture of membranes at 20 0/7 to 23 6/7 weeks of gestation (GRADE 2C); (4) administration of antenatal corticosteroids and magnesium sulfate is not recommended until the time when a trial of neonatal resuscitation and intensive care would be considered appropriate by the healthcare team and desired by the patient (GRADE 1B); (5) serial amnioinfusions and amniopatch are considered investigational and should be used only in a clinical trial setting; they are not recommended for routine care of previable and periviable preterm prelabor rupture of membranes (GRADE 1B); (6) cerclage management after previable or periviable preterm prelabor rupture of membranes is similar to cerclage management after preterm prelabor rupture of membranes at later gestational ages; it is reasonable to either remove the cerclage or leave it in situ after discussing the risks and benefits and incorporating shared decision-making (GRADE 2C); and (7) in subsequent pregnancies after a history of previable or periviable preterm prelabor rupture of membranes, we recommend following guidelines for management of pregnant persons with a previous spontaneous preterm birth (GRADE 1C).

Navigating the post-Dobbs landscape: ethical considerations from a perinatal perspective

Restrictive abortion laws have impacts reaching far beyond the immediate sphere of reproductive health, with cascading effects on clinical and ethical aspects of neonatal care, as well as perinatal palliative care. These laws have the potential to alter how families and clinicians navigate prenatal and postnatal medical decisions after a complex fetal diagnosis is made. We present a hypothetical case to explore the nexus of abortion care and perinatal care of fetuses and infants with life-limiting conditions. We will highlight the potential impacts of limited abortion access on families anticipating the birth of these infants. We will also examine the legally and morally fraught gray zone of gestational viability where both abortion and resuscitation of live-born infants can potentially occur, per parental discretion. These scenarios are inexorably impacted by the rapidly changing legal landscape in the U.S., and highlight difficult ethical dilemmas which clinicians may increasingly need to navigate.

Improving Prediction of Survival for Extremely Premature Infants Born at 23 to 29 Weeks Gestational Age in the Neonatal Intensive Care Unit: Development and Evaluation of Machine Learning Models

BACKGROUND

Infants born at extremely preterm gestational ages are typically admitted to the neonatal intensive care unit (NICU) after initial resuscitation. The subsequent hospital course can be highly variable, and despite counseling aided by available risk calculators, there are significant challenges with shared decision-making regarding life support and transition to end-of-life care. Improving predictive models can help providers and families navigate these unique challenges.

OBJECTIVE

Machine learning methods have previously demonstrated added predictive value for determining intensive care unit outcomes, and their use allows consideration of a greater number of factors that potentially influence newborn outcomes, such as maternal characteristics. Machine learning-based models were analyzed for their ability to predict the survival of extremely preterm neonates at initial admission.

METHODS

Maternal and newborn information was extracted from the health records of infants born between 23 and 29 weeks of gestation in the Medical Information Mart for Intensive Care III (MIMIC-III) critical care database. Applicable machine learning models predicting survival during the initial NICU admission were developed and compared. The same type of model was also examined using only features that would be available prepartum for the purpose of survival prediction prior to an anticipated preterm birth. Features most correlated with the predicted outcome were determined when possible for each model.

RESULTS

Of included patients, 37 of 459 (8.1%) expired. The resulting random forest model showed higher predictive performance than the frequently used Score for Neonatal Acute Physiology With Perinatal Extension II (SNAPPE-II) NICU model when considering extremely preterm infants of very low birth weight. Several other machine learning models were found to have good performance but did not show a statistically significant difference from previously available models in this study. Feature importance varied by model, and those of greater importance included gestational age; birth weight; initial oxygenation level; elements of the APGAR (appearance, pulse, grimace, activity, and respiration) score; and amount of blood pressure support. Important prepartum features also included maternal age, steroid administration, and the presence of pregnancy complications.

CONCLUSIONS

Machine learning methods have the potential to provide robust prediction of survival in the context of extremely preterm births and allow for consideration of additional factors such as maternal clinical and socioeconomic information. Evaluation of larger, more diverse data sets may provide additional clarity on comparative performance.

Ethical Dilemmas in Neonatal Care at the Limit of Viability

Advances in neonatal care have pushed the limit of viability to incrementally lower gestations over the last decades. However, surviving extremely premature neonates are prone to long-term neurodevelopmental handicaps. This makes ethics a crucial dimension of periviable birth management. At 22 weeks, survival ranges from 1 to 15%, and profound disabilities in survivors are common. Consequently, there is no beneficence-based obligation to offer any aggressive perinatal management. At 23 weeks, survival ranges from 8 to 54%, and survival without severe handicap ranges from 7 to 23%. If fetal indication for cesarean delivery appears, the procedure may be offered when neonatal resuscitation is planned. At a gestational age ≥24 weeks, up to 51% neonates are expected to survive the neonatal period. Survival without profound neurologic disability ranges from 12 to 38%. Beneficence-based obligation to intervene is reasonable at these gestations. Nevertheless, autonomy of parents should also be respected, and parental consent should be sought prior to any intervention. Optimal counselling of parents involves harmonized cooperation of obstetric and neonatal care providers. Every fetus/neonate and every pregnant woman are different and have the right to be considered individually when treatment decisions are being made.

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.

Professional Guidelines for the Care of Extremely Premature Neonates: Clinical Reasoning versus Ethical Theory

AbstractProfessional statements guide neonatal resuscitation thresholds at the border of viability. A 2015 systematic review of international guidelines by Guillen et al. found considerable variability between statements' clinical recommendations for infants at 23-24 weeks gestational age (GA). The authors concluded that differences in the type of data included were one potential source for differing resuscitation thresholds within this "ethical gray zone." How statements present ethical considerations that support their recommendations, and how this may account for variability, has not been as rigorously explored. We performed a mixed-methods exploratory analysis of 25 current international guidelines for neonatal resuscitation at 22+0-25+0 weeks GA. Qualitative analysis using a modified grounded theory yielded 34 distinct codes, eight categories, and four overarching themes. Three themes, consequentialism, principlism, and rights-based, consisted of concepts central to these ethical frameworks. The fourth theme, clinical reasoning, described counseling practices, medical management, outcomes data, and prognostic uncertainty, without any ethical context. The theme of clinical reasoning appeared in 22 of 25 guidelines. Ten guidelines lacked any ethical theme. Guidelines with an identified ethical theme were more likely to recommend comfort care than guidelines without an identified ethical theme, and recommended it at a higher average GA (22.7 weeks vs. 22.0 weeks, p = 0.03). Thus, how ethical concepts are incorporated into guidelines potentially impacts resuscitation thresholds. We argue that inclusion of explicit discussion of ethical considerations surrounding resuscitation in the "gray zone" would clarify values that inform recommendations and facilitate discussions about how neonatology ought to approach periviability as outcomes continue to evolve.

Extremely low gestational age neonates and resuscitation: survey on perspectives of Canadian neonatologists

OBJECTIVES

Resuscitation care planning for extremely low gestational age neonates (ELGANs) is complex and ethically charged. Increasing survival at lower gestational ages has had a significant impact on this complexity. It also has an impact on healthcare resource utilization and policy development in Canada. This study sought to determine the current attitudes and practices of neonatologists in Canada, and to assess moral distress associated with resuscitation decisions in the ELGAN population. It also aimed to explore the perspectives of adopting a shared decision-making approach where further data with regard to best interests and prognosis are gathered in an individualized manner after birth.

METHODS

Neonatologists in Canadian level III NICUs were surveyed in 2020.

RESULTS

Amongst the 65 responses, 78% expressed moral distress when parents request non-resuscitation at 24 weeks. Uncertainty around long-term outcomes in an era with improved chances of morbidity-free survival was the most prominent factor contributing to moral distress. 70% felt less moral distress deciding goals of care after the baby's initial resuscitation and preferred an individualized approach to palliation decisions based on postnatal course and assessment.

CONCLUSIONS

While most current guidelines still support the option of non-resuscitation for infants born at less than 25 weeks, we show evidence of moral distress among Canadian neonatologists that suggests the consideration of routine resuscitation from 24 weeks and above is a more ethical approach in the current era of improved outcomes. Canadian neonatologists identified less moral distress when goals of care are developed postnatally, with availability of more evidence for prognostication, instead of antenatally based primarily on gestational age.

Extremely Preterm Babies-Legal Aspects and Palliative Care at the Border of Viability

There are various legal considerations and rare decisions of courts in western countries concerning palliative care and the border of viability in cases of extremely preterm babies. Nevertheless, on the one hand, regulations and decisions of courts describe the conditions physicians have to accept. On the other hand, courts are also able to accept that every case can be special, and needs a unique answer. Therefore, the framework can be described as well as the medical disciplines, which should be involved in a particular case.

Trends in Active Treatment of Live-born Neonates Between 22 Weeks 0 Days and 25 Weeks 6 Days by Gestational Age and Maternal Race and Ethnicity in the US, 2014 to 2020

IMPORTANCE

Birth in the periviable period between 22 weeks 0 days and 25 weeks 6 days' gestation is a major source of neonatal morbidity and mortality, and the decision to initiate active life-saving treatment is challenging.

OBJECTIVE

To assess whether the frequency of active treatment among live-born neonates in the periviable period has changed over time and whether active treatment differed by gestational age at birth and race and ethnicity.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

Serial cross-sectional descriptive study using National Center for Health Statistics natality data from 2014 to 2020 for 61 908 singleton live births without clinical anomalies between 22 weeks 0 days and 25 weeks 6 days in the US.

EXPOSURES

Year of delivery, gestational age at birth, and race and ethnicity of the pregnant individual, stratified as non-Hispanic Asian/Pacific Islander, non-Hispanic Black, Hispanic/Latina, and non-Hispanic White.

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

Active treatment, determined by whether there was an attempt to treat the neonate and defined as a composite of surfactant therapy, immediate assisted ventilation at birth, assisted ventilation more than 6 hours in duration, and/or antibiotic therapy. Frequencies, mean annual percent change (APC), and adjusted risk ratios (aRRs) were estimated.

RESULTS

Of 26 986 716 live births, 61 908 (0.2%) were periviable live births included in this study: 5% were Asian/Pacific Islander, 37% Black, 24% Hispanic, and 34% White; and 14% were born at 22 weeks, 21% at 23 weeks, 30% at 24 weeks, and 34% at 25 weeks. Fifty-two percent of neonates received active treatment. From 2014 to 2020, the overall frequency (mean APC per year) of active treatment increased significantly (3.9% [95% CI, 3.0% to 4.9%]), as well as among all racial and ethnic subgroups (Asian/Pacific Islander: 3.4% [95% CI, 0.8% to 6.0%]); Black: 4.7% [95% CI, 3.4% to 5.9%]; Hispanic: 4.7% [95% CI, 3.4% to 5.9%]; and White: 3.1% [95% CI, 1.1% to 4.4%]) and among each gestational age range (22 weeks: 14.4% [95% CI, 11.1% to 17.7%] and 25 weeks: 2.9% [95% CI, 1.5% to 4.2%]). Compared with neonates born to White individuals (57.0%), neonates born to Asian/Pacific Islander (46.2%; risk difference [RD], -10.81 [95% CI, -12.75 to -8.88]; aRR, 0.82 [95% CI, [0.79-0.86]), Black (51.6%; RD, -5.42 [95% CI, -6.36 to -4.50]; aRR, 0.90 [95% CI, 0.89 to 0.92]), and Hispanic (48.0%; RD, -9.03 [95% CI, -10.07 to -7.99]; aRR, 0.83 [95% CI, 0.81 to 0.85]) individuals were significantly less likely to receive active treatment.

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

From 2014 to 2020 in the US, the frequency of active treatment among neonates born alive between 22 weeks 0 days and 25 weeks 6 days significantly increased, and there were differences in rates of active treatment by race and ethnicity.

The Hypertensive Disorders of Pregnancy: A Focus on Definitions for Clinical Nephrologists

About 5-10% of pregnancies are complicated by one of the hypertensive disorders of pregnancy. The women who experience these disorders have a greater risk of having or developing kidney diseases than women with normotensive pregnancies. While international guidelines do not provide clear indications for a nephrology work-up after pregnancy, this is increasingly being advised by nephrology societies. The definitions of the hypertensive disorders of pregnancy have changed greatly in recent years. The objective of this short review is to gather and comment upon the main definitions of the hypertensive disorders of pregnancy as a support for nephrologists, who are increasingly involved in the short- and long-term management of women with these disorders.

Dutch guidelines on care for extremely premature infants: Navigating between personalisation and standardization

OBJECTIVE

There is no international consensus on what type of guideline is preferred for care at the limit of viability. We aimed to conceptualize what type of guideline is preferred by Dutch healthcare professionals: 1) none; 2) gestational-age-based; 3) gestational-age-based-plus; or 4) prognosis-based via a survey instrument. Additional questions were asked to explore the grey zone and attitudes towards treatment variation.

FINDING

769 surveys were received. Most of the respondents (72.8%) preferred a gestational-age-based-plus guideline. Around 50% preferred 24^+0/7 weeks gestational age as the lower limit of the grey zone, whereas 26^+0/7 weeks was the most preferred upper limit. Professionals considered treatment variation acceptable when it is based upon parental values, but unacceptable when it is based upon the hospital's policy or the physician's opinion.

CONCLUSION

In contrast to the current Dutch guideline, our results suggest that there is a preference to take into account individual factors besides gestational age.

Optimism bias in understanding neonatal prognoses

OBJECTIVE

Discrepancies between physician and parent neonatal prognostic expectations are common. Optimism bias is a possible explanation.

STUDY DESIGN

Parents interpreted hypothetical neonatal prognoses in an online survey.

RESULTS

Good prognoses tended to be interpreted accurately, while poor prognoses were interpreted as less than the stated value. One-third of participants consistently overstated survival for the three lowest prognoses, compared to the sample as a whole. Three significant predictors of such optimistic interpretations were single-parent status (OR 0.39; 95% CI 0.2-0.75; p = 0.005), African-American descent (OR 3.78; 95% CI 1.63-8.98; p = 0.002) and the belief that physicians misrepresented prognoses (OR 3.11; 95% CI 1.47-6.65; p = 0.003). Participants' explanations echoed research on optimism bias in clinical and decision science studies.

CONCLUSION

Participants accepted positive prognoses for critically ill neonates, but reinterpreted negative ones as being unduly pessimistic demonstrating optimism bias.

Maternal grief in cross-cultural context: Selective neglect, replaceable infants and lifesaving names

Scheper-Hughes divides mothers onto "better off" vis-à-vis "poor" mothers stuck in "old" reproductive strategy with high fertility. Cultural construction of mother love allows the latter group to neglect their "worst bets" to death without grief. Based on the bio-evolutionary theory, Hrdy hints that "modern" Western mothers, guided by ethical behavior, care for unviable infants while mothers in "non-Western societies" might dispose them of due to innate responses. This article warns against such binary division of mothers. Ethnographic research indicates that notions of replaceable infants, fatalism, appreciation of infant vitality, and lifesaving names are examples of human responses to adverse circumstances.

Neonatology in Austria: ethics to improve practice

In the world of Austrian neonatal intensive care units, the role of ethics is recognized only partially. The normatively tense cases that are at the backdrop of this essay concern the situations around the limit of viability (weeks 22 + 0 days to 25 + 6 days of gestation), which is the point in the development of an extremely preterm infant at which there are chances of extra-uterine survival. This essay first outlines the key explicit ethical challenges that are mainly concerned with notions of uncertainty and best interest. Then, it attempts to elucidate the less explicit ethical challenges related to the notion of nudging in the neonatal practice and argue that the role of ethics needs to be recognized more—with the focus on the role of virtue ethics—in order to improve the practice of neonatal medicine.

Values clarification: Eliciting the values that inform and influence parents' treatment decisions for periviable birth

BACKGROUND

Values clarification can assist families facing the threat of periviable delivery in navigating the complexity of competing values related to death, disability, and quality of life (QOL).

OBJECTIVE

We piloted values clarification exercises to inform resuscitation decision making and qualitatively assess perceptions of QOL.

METHODS

We conducted a mixed-method study of women with threatened periviable delivery (22 0/7-24 6/7 weeks) and their important others (IOs). Participants engaged in three values clarification activities as part of a semi-structured interview-(a) Card sorting nine conditions as an acceptable/unacceptable QOL for a child; (b) Rating/ranking seven common concerns in periviable decision making (scale 0-10, not at all to extremely important); and (c) "Agreed/disagreed" with six statements regarding end-of-life treatment, disability, and QOL. Participants were also asked to define "QOL" and describe their perceptions of a good and poor QOL for their child. Analysis was conducted using SAS version 9.4 and NVivo 12.

RESULTS

All mild disabilities were an acceptable QOL, while two-thirds of participants considered long-term mechanical ventilation unacceptable. Although pregnant women rated "Impact on Your Physical/Mental Health" (average 5.6) and IOs rated "Financial Concerns" the highest (average 6.6), both groups ranked "Financial Concerns" as the most important concern (median 5.0 and 6.0, respectively). Most participants agreed that "Any amount of life is better than no life at all" (pregnant women 62.1%; IOs 75.0%) and disagreed that resuscitation would cause "Too much suffering" for their child (pregnant women 71.4%; IOs 80.0%). Half were familiar with the phrase "QOL". Although the majority described a good QOL in terms of emotional well-being (eg "loved", "happy", "supported"), a poor QOL was described in terms of functionality (eg "dependent" and "confined"). Additionally, financial stability emerged as a distinctive theme when IOs discussed poor QOL.

CONCLUSION

The study offers important insights on parental perspectives in periviable decision making and potential values clarification tools for decision support.

Should Extremely Premature Babies Get Ventilators During the COVID-19 Crisis?

In a crisis, societal needs take precedence over a patient's best interests. Triage guidelines, however, differ on whether limited resources should focus on maximizing lives or life-years. Choosing between these two approaches has implications for neonatology. Neonatal units have ventilators, some adaptable for adults. This raises the question of whether, in crisis conditions, guidelines for treating extremely premature babies should be altered to free-up ventilators. Some adults who need ventilators will have a survival rate higher than some extremely premature babies. But surviving babies will likely live longer, maximizing life-years. Empiric evidence demonstrates that these babies can derive significant survival benefits from ventilation when compared to adults. When "triaging" or choosing between patients, justice demands fair guidelines. Premature babies do not deserve special consideration; they deserve equal consideration. Solidarity is crucial but must consider needs specific to patient populations and avoid biases against people with disabilities and extremely premature babies.

Regional and Racial-Ethnic Differences in Perinatal Interventions Among Periviable Births

OBJECTIVE

To examine whether there are: 1) regional differences in three perinatal interventions that reflect active treatment among periviable gestations and 2) racial-ethnic differences in the receipt of these perinatal interventions after accounting for hospital region.

METHODS

We conducted a retrospective study on neonates born at 776 U.S. centers that participated in the Vermont Oxford Network (2006-2017) with a gestational age of 22-25 weeks. The primary outcome was postnatal life support. Secondary outcomes included maternal administration of antenatal corticosteroids and cesarean delivery. We examined rates and 99% CI of the three outcomes by region. We also calculated the adjusted relative risks (aRRs) and 99% CIs for the three outcomes by race and ethnicity within each region using modified Poisson regression models with robust variance estimation.

RESULTS

Major regional variation exists in the use of the three interventions at 22 and 23 weeks of gestation but not at 24 and 25 weeks. For example, at 22 weeks of gestation, rates of life support in the South (38.3%; 99% CI 36.3-40.2) and the Midwest (32.7%; 99% CI 30.4-35.0) were higher than in the Northeast (20.2%; 99% CI 17.6-22.8) and the West (22.2%; 99% CI 20.0-24.4). Particularly in the Northeast, black and Hispanic neonates born at 22 or 23 weeks of gestation had a higher provision of postnatal life support than white neonates (at 22 weeks: black: aRR 1.84 [99% CI 1.33-2.56], Hispanic: aRR 1.80 [1.23-2.64]; at 23 weeks: black: aRR 1.14 [99% CI 1.08-1.20], Hispanic: aRR 1.12 [1.05-1.19]). In the West, black and Hispanic neonates born at 23 weeks of gestation also had a higher provision of life support (black: aRR 1.11 [99% CI 1.03-1.19]; Hispanic: aRR 1.10 [1.04-1.16]).

CONCLUSION

Major regional variation exists in perinatal interventions when managing 22- and 23-week neonates. In the Northeast and the West regions, minority neonates born at 22 and 23 weeks of gestation had higher provision of postnatal life support.

Survival after delivery room cardiopulmonary resuscitation: A national registry study

AIMS

Survival after delivery room cardiopulmonary resuscitation (DR-CPR) is not well characterized in full-term infants, and survival outcomes after DR-CPR have not been defined across the spectrum of gestation. The study objectives were to define gestational age (GA) specific survival following DR-CPR and to assess the association between GA and DR-CPR characteristics and survival outcomes.

METHODS

Retrospective cohort study of prospectively collected data in the American Heart Association Get With the Guidelines-Resuscitation registry. Newborn infants without congenital abnormalities who received greater than 1 min of chest compressions for DR-CPR were included. GA was stratified by categorical subgroups: ≥36 weeks; 33-35^6/7 weeks; 29-32^6/7 weeks; 25-28^6/7 weeks; 22-24^6/7 weeks. The primary outcome was survival to hospital discharge; the secondary outcome was return of circulation (ROC).

RESULTS

Among 1022 infants who received DR-CPR, 83% experienced ROC and 64% survived to hospital discharge. GA-stratified hospital survival rates were 83% (≥36 weeks), 66% (33-35 weeks), 60% (29-32 weeks), 52% (25-28 weeks), and 25% (22-24 weeks). Compared with GA ≥ 36 weeks, lower GA was independently associated with decreasing odds of survival (33-35 weeks: adjusted Odds Ratio [aOR] 0.46, 95% Confidence Interval [CI] 0.26-0.81; 29-32 weeks: aOR 0.40, 95% CI 0.23-0.69; 25-28 weeks: aOR 0.21, 95% CI 0.11-0.41; 22-24 weeks: aOR 0.06, 95% CI 0.03-0.10).

CONCLUSIONS

In this national registry of infants who received delivery room cardiopulmonary resuscitation (DR-CPR), 83% survived the event and two-thirds survived to hospital discharge. These results contribute to defining survival outcomes following DR-CPR across the continuum of gestation.

The impact of decision quality on mental health following periviable delivery

PURPOSE

To assess the relationship between decision quality and mental health outcomes for women and their important others (IO) 3 months following periviable birth.

METHOD

Mental health outcomes were assessed prior to delivery and at 3 months postpartum using depression (PHQ-9), anxiety (GAD-7), and post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) (IES-22) scales. Decision quality was measured in terms of Decisional Conflict, Control, Regret, and Satisfaction with Decision. Descriptive analyses and linear regression modeling were conducted using SAS version 9.4.

RESULT

We recruited 30 eligible women and 16 IOs. Participants had mild anxiety and depression, and symptoms of PTSD were among bereaved parents. Participants with lower decision control had higher levels of depression (women: p = 0.014; IOs: p = 0.059) and anxiety (women: p = 0.053; IOs: p = 0.032). Depression was also associated with higher decisional regret (women: p = 0.073; IOs: p = 0.023).

CONCLUSION

Our findings suggest that decision quality is associated with mental health outcomes for families who experience periviable delivery.

Effect of written outcome information on attitude of perinatal healthcare professionals at the limit of viability: a randomized study

Background

Differences in perception and potential disagreements between parents and professionals regarding the attitude for resuscitation at the limit of viability are common. This study evaluated in healthcare professionals whether the decision to resuscitate at the limit of viability (intensive care versus comfort care) are influenced by the way information on incurred risks is given or received.

Methods

This is a prospective randomized controlled study. This study evaluated the attitude of healthcare professionals by testing the effect of information given through graphic fact sheets formulated either optimistically or pessimistically. The written educational fact sheet included three graphical presentations of survival and complication/morbidity by gestational age. The questionnaire was submitted over a period of 4 months to 5 and 6-year medical students from the Geneva University as well as physicians and nurses of the neonatal unit at the University Hospitals of Geneva. Our sample included 102 healthcare professionals.

Results

Forty-nine responders (48%) were students (response rate of 33.1%), 32 (31%) paediatricians (response rate of 91.4%) and 21 (20%) nurses in NICU (response rate of 50%). The received risk tended to be more severe in both groups compared to the graphically presented facts and current guidelines, although optimistic representation favoured the perception of “survival without disability” at 23 to 25 weeks. Therapeutic attitudes did not differ between groups, but healthcare professionals with children were more restrained and students more aggressive at very low gestational ages.

Conclusion

Written information on mortality and morbidity given to healthcare professionals in graphic form encourages them to overestimate the risk. However, perception in healthcare staff may not be directly transferable to parental perception during counselling as the later are usually naïve to the data received. This parental information are always communicated in ways that subtly shape the decisions that follow.

Does It Matter if This Baby Is 22 or 23 Weeks?

A 530-g girl born at 22 weeks and 6 days' gestation (determined by an ultrasound at 11 weeks) was admitted to the NICU. Her mother had received prenatal steroids. At 12 hours of age, she was stable on low ventilator settings. Her blood pressure was fine. Her urine output was good. After counseling, her parents voiced understanding of the risks and wanted all available life-supporting measures. Many nurses were distressed that doctors were trying to save a "22-weeker." In the past, 4 infants born at 22 weeks' gestation had been admitted to that NICU, and all had died. The attending physician on call had to deal with many sick infants and the nurses' moral distress.

Neurologic Outcome After Prematurity: Perspectives of Parents and Clinicians

BACKGROUND

Parents and clinicians caring for premature infants face high-stakes and time-sensitive decisions about care. We aimed to characterize how parents and clinicians discuss outcome in the context of decision-making for premature infants.

METHODS

In this qualitative descriptive study, we used a case-based, prospective design. Cases of extreme prematurity were targeted. Parents and clinicians completed semistructured interviews about care decisions longitudinally in the first year of life. Interview data were analyzed by using directed content analysis.

RESULTS

Sixteen parents and 53 clinicians of 10 infants completed 178 interviews (n = 115 parent; n = 63 clinician). Two primary themes emerged. First, parents and clinicians discussed prognostic information differently from each other. Parents focused on whether their infant would survive, whereas clinicians concentrated on neurologic outcome and the potential for life with disability. Parent discussion of the future was broad and rooted in hope and spirituality. Clinician prognostic language was narrowly focused and probabilistic. Second, we identified barriers and facilitators to a shared understanding of infant outcome. Clinicians perceived that parents were unaware of or unable to process important information about the big picture. Parents valued consistent therapeutic relationships; transitions of care and underused roles of the care team undermined this consistency. Clinical uncertainty forced parents and clinicians to "wait and see" about the future.

CONCLUSIONS

Parents and clinicians discuss and weigh information about the future differently from each other as they consider choices for extremely premature infants. Future work should characterize the impact of these differences on prognostic communication and decision-making.

Professional ethics: the case of neonatology

Neonatal professionals encounter many ethical challenges especially when it comes to interventions at the limit of viability (weeks 22-25 of gestation). At times, these challenges make the moral dilemmas in neonatology tragic and they require a particular set of intellectual and moral virtues. Intellectual virtues of episteme and phronesis, together with moral virtues of courage, compassion, keeping fidelity to trust, and integrity were highlighted as key virtues of the neonatal professional. Recognition of the role of ethics requires a recognition that answering the obvious question (what shall we do?) does not always suffice. Acknowledging the tragic question (is any of the alternatives open to us free from serious moral wrongdoing) and recognizing the ethical dilemmas, where the lines between right and wrong are blurred, leads to actions taken towards establishing ethics frameworks to support decision-making. In neonatology units, such organizational support can help in allowing the team members to recognize the ethical dilemmas, avoid moral distress, and improve team cohesion and the quality of care provided. Only when the organizational structure allows ethical dilemmas to be recognized, adequate decisions can be made.

End-of-Life Decisions 20 Years after EURONIC: Neonatologists' Self-Reported Practices, Attitudes, and Treatment Choices in Germany, Switzerland, and Austria

OBJECTIVE

To assess changes in attitudes of neonatologists regarding the care of extremely preterm infants and parental involvement over the last 20 years.

STUDY DESIGN

Internet-based survey (2016) involving 170 tertiary neonatal intensive care units in Austria, Switzerland, and Germany using the European Project on Parents' Information and Ethical Decision Making in Neonatal Intensive Care Units questionnaire (German edition) with minor modifications to the original survey from 1996 to 1997.

RESULTS

The 2016 survey included 104 respondents (52.5% response rate). In 2016, significantly more neonatologists reported having ever withheld intensive care treatment (99% vs 69%) and withdrawn mechanical ventilation (96% vs 61%) or life-saving drugs (99% vs 79%), compared with neonatologists surveyed in 1996-1997. Fewer considered limiting intensive care as a slippery slope possibly leading to abuse (18% vs 48%). In the situation of a deteriorating clinical condition despite all treatment, significantly more neonatologists would ask parental opinion about continuation of intensive care (49% vs 18%). In 2016, 21% of German neonatologists would resuscitate a hypothetical infant at the limits of viability, even against parental wishes.

CONCLUSIONS

Withholding or withdrawing intensive care for extremely preterm infants at the limits of viability with parental involvement has become more acceptable than it was 20 years ago. However, resuscitating extremely preterm infants against parental wishes remains an option for up to one-fifth of the responding neonatologists in this survey.

Outcomes of infants born at borderline viability (23-25 weeks gestation) who received cardiopulmonary resuscitation at birth

AIM

The practice of providing advanced resuscitative measures to infants born at borderline viability (23-25⁺⁶ weeks gestation) varies among clinicians due to perception of futility. The aim of our study was to compare mortality and major morbidities in infants born at borderline viability who did not receive cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) in the delivery room (No DR-CPR) as compared to those who did (DR-CPR).

METHODS

A retrospective analysis of prospectively collected data of infants born between 23 and 25⁺⁶ weeks gestation who were resuscitated at birth at the study centre or admitted to neonatal intensive care unit from peripheral hospitals, over 8 years (2007-2014). The primary outcome was survival, free of disability at 2 years corrected age and secondary outcomes were survival at discharge and neonatal morbidities.

RESULTS

Of 123 infants in the study cohort, 21 received DR-CPR. In unadjusted analysis, there was increased mortality rate in the DR-CPR group which was statistically insignificant (26.5 vs. 42.9%, P = 0.15). After adjustment for potential confounders, there was no significant difference in the mortality rate with odds ratio of 1.10 (confidence interval: 0.34-3.53, P = 0.86). Among infants who received DR-CPR for >2 min, the mortality rate was significantly higher (25.2 vs. 56.3%, P = 0.01). Survival free of disability was similar in two groups (50.9 vs. 47.6%, P = 0.78).

CONCLUSIONS

Among infants born at borderline viability, the vast majority of infants did not receive CPR and, if CPR was prolonged for >2 min, mortality was increased. Among survivors of the small DR-CPR group, early neurodevelopmental outcomes were comparable to the No DR-CPR group.

In Search of Consistency: Scandinavian Approaches to Resuscitation of Extremely Preterm Infants

Guidelines around the resuscitation of extremely preterm infants have been developed, in part, to ensure consistency in decision-making between hospitals and health professionals. However, such guidelines can also be used to highlight other forms of inconsistency: between countries and between practices in different areas of medicine. In this article, we highlight the ethical advantages (and disadvantages) of consistency. We argue that an internationally uniform approach to ethically complex decisions is neither likely nor desirable.

End-of-life decisions and practices for very preterm infants in the Wallonia-Brussels Federation of Belgium

Background

Very preterm birth (24 to < 32 week’s gestation) is a major public health issue due to its prevalence, the clinical and ethical questions it raises and the associated costs. It raises two major clinical and ethical dilemma: (i) during the perinatal period, whether or not to actively manage a baby born very prematurely and (ii) during the postnatal period, whether or not to continue a curative treatment plan initiated at birth. The Wallonia-Brussels Federation in Belgium counts 11 neonatal intensive care units.

Methods

An inventory of key practices was compiled on the basis of an online questionnaire that was sent to the 65 neonatologists working in these units. The questionnaire investigated care-related decisions and practices during the antenatal, perinatal and postnatal periods, as well as personal opinions on the possibility of standardising and/or legislating for end-of-life decisions and practices. The participation rate was 89% (n = 58).

Results

The results show a high level of homogeneity pointing to overall agreement on the main principles governing curative practice and the gestational age that can be actively managed given the current state of knowledge. There was, however, greater diversity regarding principles governing the transition to end-of-life care, as well as opinions about the need for a common protocol or law to govern such practices.

Conclusion

Our results reflect the uncertainty inherent in the complex and diverse situations that are encountered in this extreme area of clinical practice, and call for qualitative research and expert debates to further document and make recommendations for best practices regarding several “gray zones” of end-of-life care in neonatology, so that high quality palliative care may be granted to all neonates concerned with end-of-life decisions.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (10.1186/s12887-018-1168-x) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Physicians Perceptions of Shared Decision-Making in Neonatal and Pediatric Critical Care

BACKGROUND

Most children die in neonatal and pediatric intensive care units after decisions are made to withhold or withdraw life-sustaining treatments. These decisions can be challenging when there are different views about the child's best interest and when there is a lack of clarity about how best to also consider the interests of the family.

OBJECTIVE

To understand how neonatal and pediatric critical care physicians balance and integrate the interests of the child and family in decisions about life-sustaining treatments.

METHODS

Semistructured interviews were conducted with 22 physicians from neonatal, pediatric, and cardiothoracic intensive care units in a single quaternary care pediatric hospital. Transcribed interviews were analyzed using content and thematic analysis.

RESULTS

We identified 3 main themes: (1) beliefs about child and family interests; (2) disagreement about the child's best interest; and (3) decision-making strategies, including limiting options, being directive, staying neutral, and allowing parents to come to their own conclusions. Physicians described challenges to implementing shared decision-making including unequal power and authority, clinical uncertainty, and complexity of balancing child and family interests. They acknowledged determining the level of engagement in shared decision-making with parents (vs routine engagement) based on their perceptions of the best interests of the child and parent.

CONCLUSIONS

Due to power imbalances, families' values and preferences may not be integrated in decisions or families may be excluded from discussions about goals of care. We suggest that a systematic approach to identify parental preferences and needs for decisional roles and information may reduce variability in parental involvement.

Ethical considerations in the care of complicated twin pregnancies

Twin gestations are increasing in prevalence worldwide, and are potentially subject to medical complications which present uniquely complex ethical and psychosocial challenges for the pregnant patient and obstetrician to navigate. In this article, we explore these issues as they relate to medical decision-making in cases of discordant growth and discordant anomalies in both monochorionic and dichorionic twin pregnancies, including those affected by twin-twin transfusion syndrome, with particular attention to scenarios in which the individual fetuses hold competing interests. For each of these scenarios, we consider how decisions may positively or negatively impact one or both fetuses, and how familiarity with population outcomes, as well as sensitivity to the complex psychosocial circumstances surrounding these pregnancies, can support and inform shared decision-making.

Ethical implications of the use of decision aids for antenatal counseling at the limits of gestational viability

Shared decision-making is a recent priority in neonatology. However, its implementation is at an early stage. Decision aids are tools designed to assist in shared decision-making. They help patients competently participate in making healthcare decisions. There are limited studies in neonatology on the formal use of decision aids as used in adult medicine. Decision aids are relatively new, even in adult medicine where they were pioneered; therefore, there is a lack of systematic oversight to their development and use. Despite evidence reporting a powerful effect on patients' decisions, decision aids are not subject to quality control, leading to potentially enormous ethical implications. These include: (i) possible introduction of developers' biases; (ii) use of outdated or incorrect information; (iii) misuse to steer a patient towards less expensive treatments; (iv) clinician liability if negative patient outcomes occur, since decision aids are currently not standard of care.

Opportunities and difficulties for counseling at the margins of viability

At the margins of viability, the interaction between physicians and families presents challenges but also opportunities for success. The counseling team often focuses on data: morbidity and mortality statistics and the course of a typical infant in the neonatal intensive care unit. Data that are generated on the population level can be difficult to align with the multiple facets of an individual infant's trajectory. It is also information that can be difficult to present because of framing biases and the complexities of intuiting statistical information on a personal level. Families also do not arrive as a blank slate but rather arrive with notions of prematurity generated from the culture they live in. Mothers and fathers often want to focus on hope, their changing role as parents, and in their desire to be a family. Multi-timepoint counseling provides the opportunity to address these goals and continue communication as the trajectories of infants, families and the counseling team change.

Provider Perspectives Regarding Resuscitation Decisions for Neonates and Other Vulnerable Patients

OBJECTIVES

To use structured surveys to assess the perspectives of pediatric residents and neonatal nurses on resuscitation decisions for vulnerable patients, including neonates.

STUDY DESIGN

Pediatric providers were surveyed using scenarios for 6 critically ill patients of different ages with outcomes explicitly described. Providers were asked (1) whether resuscitation was in each patient's best interest; (2) whether they would accept families' wishes for comfort care (no resuscitation); and (3) to rank patients in order of priority for resuscitation. In a structured interview, each participant explained how they evaluated patient interests and when applicable, why their answers differed for neonates. Interviews were audiotaped; transcripts were analyzed using thematic analysis and mixed methods.

RESULTS

Eighty pediatric residents and neonatal nurses participated (response rate 74%). When making life and death decisions, participants considered (1) patient characteristics (96%), (2) personal experience/biases (85%), (3) family's wishes and desires (81%), (4) disease characteristics (74%), and (5) societal perspectives (36%). These factors were not in favor of sick neonates: of the participants, 85% reported having negative biases toward neonates and 60% did not read, misinterpreted, and/or distrusted neonatal outcome statistics. Additional factors used to justify comfort care for neonates included limited personhood and lack of relationships/attachment (73%); prioritization of family's best interest, and social acceptability of death (36%). When these preconceptions were discussed, 70% of respondents reported they would change their answers in favor of neonates.

CONCLUSIONS

Resuscitation decisions for neonates are based on many factors, such as considerations of personhood and family's interests (that are not traditional indicators of benefit), which may explain why decision making is different for the neonatal population.

Personalized Decision Making: Practical Recommendations for Antenatal Counseling for Fragile Neonates

Emphasis has been placed on engaging parents in processes of shared decision making for delivery room management decisions of critically ill neonates whose outcomes are uncertain and unpredictable. The goal of antenatal consultation should rather be to adapt to parental needs and empower them through a personalized decision-making process. This can be done by acknowledging individuality and diversity while respecting the best interests of neonates. The goal is for parents to feel like they have agency and ability and are good parents, before birth, at birth, and after, either in the NICU or until the death of their child.

CRIANÇAS COM MÚLTIPLAS MALFORMAÇÕES CONGÊNITAS: QUAIS SÃO OS LIMITES ENTRE OBSTINAÇÃO TERAPÊUTICA E TRATAMENTO DE BENEFÍCIO DUVIDOSO?

Objective:

Therapeutic approach of children with multiple malformations poses many dilemmas, making it difficult to build a line between the treatment of uncertain benefit and therapeutic obstinacy. The aim of this paper was to highlight possible sources of uncertainty in the decision-making process, for this group of children.

Case description:

An 11-month-old boy, born with multiple birth defects and abandoned by his parents, has never been discharged home. He has complex congenital heart disease, main left bronchus stenosis and imperforate anus. He is under technological support and has gone through many surgical procedures. The complete correction of the cardiac defect seems unlikely, and every attempt to wean the ventilator has failed.

Comments:

The first two main sources of uncertainty in the management of children with multiple birth defects are related to an uncertain prognosis. There is a lack of empirical data, due to the multiple possibilities of anatomic or functional organ involvement, with few similar cases described. Prognosis is also unpredictable for neuro-developmental evolution, as well as the capacity for the development and regeneration of other organs. Another source of uncertainty is how to qualify the present and future life as worth living, by weighing the costs and benefits. The fourth source of uncertainty is who has the decision: physicians or parents? Finally, if a treatment is defined futile then, how to limit support? No single framework exists to help these delicate decision-making processes. We propose, then, that physicians should be committed to develop their own perception skills in order to understand patient’s manifestations of needs and family values.

International variations in application of the best-interest standard across the age spectrum

OBJECTIVE

Ethically and legally, assertions that resuscitation is in a patient's best interest should be inversely correlated with willingness to forego intensive care (and accept comfort care) at the surrogate's request. Previous single country studies have demonstrated a relative devaluation of neonates when compared with other critically ill patients.

STUDY DESIGN

In this international study, physicians in Argentina, Australia, Canada, Ireland, The Netherlands, Norway and the United States were presented with eight hypothetical vignettes of incompetent critically ill patients of different ages. They were asked to make assessments about best interest, respect for surrogate autonomy and to rank the patients in a triage scenario.

RESULTS

In total, 2237 physicians responded (average response rate 61%). In all countries and scenarios, participants did not accept to withhold resuscitation if they estimated it was in the patient's best interest, except for scenarios involving neonates. Young children (other than neonates) were given high priority for resuscitation, regardless of existing disability. For neonates, surrogate autonomy outweighed assessment of best interest. In all countries, a 2-month-old-infant with meningitis and a multiply disabled 7-year old were resuscitated first in the triage scenario, with more variable ranking of the two neonates, which were ranked below patients with considerably worse prognosis.

CONCLUSIONS

The value placed on the life of newborns is less than that expected according to predicted clinical outcomes and current legal and ethical theory relative to best interests. Value assessments on the basis of age, disability and prognosis appear to transcend culture, politics and religion in this domain.

Measuring and communicating meaningful outcomes in neonatology: A family perspective

Medium- and long-term outcomes have been collected and described among survivors of neonatal intensive care units for decades, for a number of purposes: (1) quality control within units, (2) comparisons of outcomes between NICUs, (3) clinical trials (whether an intervention improves outcomes), (4) end-of-life decision-making, (5) to better understand the effects of neonatal conditions and/or interventions on organs and/or long-term health, and finally (6) to better prepare parents for the future. However, the outcomes evaluated have been selected by investigators, based on feasibility, availability, cost, stability, and on what investigators consider to be important. Many of the routinely measured outcomes have major limitations: they may not correlate well with long-term difficulties, they may artificially divide continuous outcomes into dichotomous ones, and may have no clear relationship with quality of life and functioning of children and their families. Several investigations, such as routine term cerebral resonance imaging for preterm infants, have also not yet been shown to improve the outcome of children nor their families. In this article, the most common variables used in neonatology as well as some variables which are rarely measured but may be of equal importance for families are presented. The manner in which these outcomes are communicated to families will be examined, as well as recommendations to optimize communication with parents.

Early neurodevelopmental outcomes of extremely preterm infants

Infants born at extreme preterm gestation are at risk for both death and disability. Although rates of survival have improved for this population, and some evidence suggests a trend toward decreased neuromotor impairment over the past decades, a significant improvement in overall early neurodevelopmental outcome has not yet been realized. This review will examine the rates and types of neurodevelopmental impairment seen after extremely preterm birth, including neurosensory, motor, cognitive, and behavioral outcomes. We focus on early outcomes in the first 18-36 months of life, as the majority of large neonatal studies examining neurodevelopmental outcomes stop at this age. However, this early age is clearly just a first glimpse into lifetime outcomes; the neurodevelopmental effects of extreme prematurity may last through school age, adolescence, and beyond. Importantly, prematurity appears to be an independent risk factor for adverse development, but this population demonstrates considerable variability in the types and severity of impairments. Understanding both the nature and prevalence of neurodevelopmental impairment among extremely preterm infants is important because it can lead to targeted interventions that in turn may lead to improved outcomes.

Shared decision making for infants born at the threshold of viability: a prognosis-based guideline

OBJECTIVE

Making prenatal decisions regarding resuscitation of extremely premature infants, based on gestational age alone is inadequate. We developed a prognosis-based guideline.

STUDY DESIGN

We followed a five step approach and used the AGREE II framework: (1) systematic review and critical appraisal of published guidelines; (2) identification of key medical factors for decision making; (3) systematic reviews; (4) creation of a multi-disciplinary working group and (5) external consultation and appraisal.

RESULT

No published guideline met high-quality appraisal criteria. Survival, neurodevelopmental disability, quality of life of child and parents, and maternal mortality and risk of long-term morbidity were identified as key for quality decision-making. Eighteen stakeholders (including parents) advocated for the incorporation of parents' values and preferences in the process.

CONCLUSION

A novel framework, based on prognosis, was generated to guide when early intensive and palliative care may both be offered to expectant parents. Pre-implementation assessment is underway to identify barriers and facilitators to putting in practice.

Neonatal end of life care in a tertiary care centre in Canada: a brief report

OBJECTIVE

To describe the processes followed by a neonatal team engaging parents with respect to end of life care of babies in whom long term survival was negligible or impossible; and to describe feedback from these parents after death of their child.

METHODS

A retrospective review was conducted of health records of neonates who had died receiving palliative care over a period of 5 years at a tertiary neonatal centre. Specific inclusion criteria were determined in advance that identified care given by a dedicated group of caregivers.

RESULTS

Thirty infants met eligibility criteria. After excluding one outlier an average of 4 discussions occurred with families before an end of life decision was arrived at. Switching from aggressive care to comfort care was a more common decision-making route than having palliative care from the outset. Ninety per cent of families indicated satisfaction with the decision making process at follow-up and more than half of them returned later to meet with the NICU team. Some concerns were expressed about the availability of neonatologists at weekends.

CONCLUSIONS

A compassionate and humane approach to the family with honesty and empathy creates a positive environment for decision-making. An available, experienced team willing to engage families repeatedly is beneficial. Initiating intensive care with subsequent palliative care is acceptable to families and caregivers.

The attitudes of neonatologists towards extremely preterm infants: a Q methodological study

OBJECTIVES

The attitudes and biases of doctors may affect decision making within Neonatal Intensive Care. We studied the attitudes of neonatologists in order to understand how they prioritise different factors contributing to decision making for extremely preterm babies.

DESIGN

Twenty-five neonatologists (11 consultants and 14 senior trainees) participated in a Q methodological study about decision making that involved the ranking of 53 statements from agree to disagree in a unimodal shaped grid. Results were explored by person factor analysis using principle component analysis.

RESULTS

The model of best fit comprised 23 participants contributing a three-factor model, which represented three different attitudes towards decision making and accounted for 59% of the variance. Fourteen statements were ranked in statistically significant similar positions by 23 participants; consensus statements included placing the baby and family at the centre of care, limitation of intervention based upon perceived risk and non-mandatory intervention at birth. Factor 1 participants (n=12) believed that treatment should not be limited based on gestational age and technology should be used to improve treatment. Five factor 2 participants identified strongly with a limit of 24 weeks for treatment, one of whom being polar opposite, believing in treatment at all costs at all gestations. The remaining six factor 3 participants identified strongly with statements that treatment should be withheld on quality of life grounds.

CONCLUSIONS

This study has identified differences in attitudes towards decision making between individual neonatologists and trainees that may impact how decisions are communicated to families.

Attitudes of Australian neonatologists to resuscitation of extremely preterm infants

AIM

We aimed to investigate how Australian neonatologists made decisions when incompetent patients of different ages needed resuscitation.

METHODS

A survey including vignettes of eight incompetent patients requiring resuscitation was sent to 140 neonatologists. Patients ranged from a very preterm infant to 80 years old. While some had existing impairments, all faced risk of death or neurological sequelae. Respondents indicated whether they would resuscitate, whether they believed resuscitation was in the patients' best interests, whether they would want intervention for a family member and whether they would comply with families' wishes to withhold resuscitation. They were also asked how they would rank the eight patients in a triage situation.

RESULTS

Seventy-eight per cent of specialists completed the survey. The majority of respondents gave priority to the resuscitation of children over adults. Less than 40% would agree to withhold resuscitation at families' request for all children except for the preterm infant, where 96% would comply with families' wishes to withhold intensive care despite 77% believing resuscitation to be in the infant's best interest.

CONCLUSION

This study found inconsistencies between physicians' perceptions of the patient's best interest regarding resuscitation and their willingness to comply with families' wishes to withhold resuscitation and give comfort care. Accepting a family's refusal of resuscitation was more marked for the premature infant, even among respondents who thought that resuscitation was in the patient's best interest. These findings are consistent with other international studies.