Which newborn infants are too expensive to treat? Camosy and rationing in intensive care

Costs of Neonatal Medical Complexity: Impact on New Parent Stress and Decision-Making

OBJECTIVE

 Parents of children with medical complexity experience substantial financial burdens. It is unclear how neonatal intensive care unit (NICU) clinicians prepare new parents of medically complex infants for this reality. This study explored new parent awareness of health care costs, desire to discuss costs with clinicians, and impact of costs on parents' medical decision-making.

STUDY DESIGN

 The study design comprised semistructured interviews and surveys of parents of infants with medical complexity currently or previously in a NICU. Conventional content analysis was performed on interview transcripts, and descriptive analyses were applied to surveys.

RESULTS

 Thematic saturation was reached with 27 families (15 NICU families and 12 post-NICU families) of diverse race/ethnicity/education/household income. Most were worried about their infants' current/future medical expenses and approximately half wanted to discuss finances with clinicians, only one parent had. While finances were not part of most parent's NICU decision-making, some later regretted this and wished cost had been incorporated into treatment choices. The family desire to discuss costs did not vary by family financial status. Parents described their infant's health care costs as: "We are drowning"; and "We'll never pay it off."

CONCLUSION

 Most parents were worried about current and future medical expenses related to their infant's evolving medical complexity. Many wanted to discuss costs with clinicians; almost none had. NICU clinicians should prepare families for the future financial realities of pediatric medical complexity.

KEY POINTS

· Many families want to discuss costs with NICU clinicians.. · Some families want costs to be a part of medical decisions.. · Few families currently discuss costs with NICU providers..

Rationing potentially inappropriate treatment in newborn intensive care in developed countries

In newborn intensive care, parents sometimes request treatment that professionals regard as 'futile' or 'potentially inappropriate'. One reason not to provide potentially inappropriate treatment is because it would be excessively costly relative to its benefit. Some public health systems around the world assess the cost-effectiveness of treatments and selectively fund those treatments that fall within a set threshold. This article explores the application of such thresholds to questions in newborn intensive care: (i) when a newborn infant's chance of survival is too small; (ii) how long treatment should continue; (iii) when quality of life is too low; and (iv) when newborn infants are too premature for cost-effective intensive care. This analysis yields some potentially surprising conclusions. Newborn intensive care may be cost-effective even in the setting of very low probability of survival, very poor predicted quality of life, for protracted periods of time, or for the most premature of newborns.

Ethical Dilemmas in Postnatal Treatment of Severe Congenital Hydrocephalus

Severe congenital hydrocephalus manifests as accumulation of a large amount of excess fluid in the brain. It is a paradigmatic example of a condition in which diagnosis is relatively straightforward and long-term survival is usually associated with severe disability. It might be thought that, should parents agree, palliative care and limitation of treatment would be clearly permissible on the basis of the best interests of the infant. However, severe congenital hydrocephalus illustrates some of the neuroethical challenges in pediatrics. The permissibility of withholding or withdrawing treatment is limited by uncertainty in prognosis and the possibility of “palliative harm.” Conversely, although there are some situations in which treatment is contrary to the interests of the child, or unreasonable on the grounds of limited resources, acute surgical treatment of hydrocephalus rarely falls into that category.

Disability, discrimination and death: is it justified to ration life saving treatment for disabled newborn infants?

Disability might be relevant to decisions about life support in intensive care in several ways. It might affect the chance of treatment being successful, or a patient’s life expectancy with treatment. It may affect whether treatment is in a patient’s best interests. However, even if treatment would be of overall benefit it may be unaffordable and consequently unable to be provided. In this paper we will draw on the example of neonatal intensive care, and ask whether or when it is justified to ration life-saving treatment on the basis of disability. We argue that predicted disability is relevant both indirectly and directly to rationing decisions.