Caregivers attitudes for very premature infants: what if they knew?

Exploring and Supporting Parents' Stories of Loss in the NICU: A Narrative Study

Death is no stranger to the neonatal intensive care unit (NICU). Extreme prematurity, congenital abnormalities, and other complexities can turn what was hoped to be a very exciting moment in a family's life into one of despair and grief. There are many infants that not only do not survive but also have a medicalized death necessitating complex decision-making, weighing quality versus duration of life. We can learn from the stories of parents who chose palliative care for their children. In this narrative inquiry study, we elicited bereaved parents' stories and reflections on the lives of their children and the care they received in the NICU. From a narrative ethics perspective, their stories speak to normative aspects of parenting, decision-making, and receiving medical care that affect their moral sense-making of their NICU experiences as well as their longer-term living with the loss of their children. Their stories express the importance of having had meaningful time with their children, maintaining direct and frequent communication, acknowledging uncertainty, and emphasizing compassion as methods of providing support to parents as they navigate their bereavement.

Neonatal serious illness: operational definition

OBJECTIVES

(1) To operationalise our previously published definition of neonatal serious illness by applying it to a patient cohort and (2) to evaluate timing of palliative care consultation, goals of care discussions and meeting serious illness criteria.

METHODS

This was a retrospective chart review. Inborn neonates delivered between January 2006 and December 2020 who died prior to neonatal intensive care unit discharge were identified through EPIC query. Kruskal-Wallis and Mann-Whitney-U tests were used to compare time intervals relating to transition to serious illness across causes of death and other factors. χ2 tests were used to examine frequency of goals of care conversations by factors.

RESULTS

Eighty-eight per cent of patients met criteria for neonatal serious illness within 48 hours of life. There were no significant differences in transition to serious illness between preterm and term infants. Time to identification of serious illness varied significantly by cause of death. Palliative care was consulted for 5.7% of patients.

CONCLUSION

All patients met criteria for serious illness early in life based on our definition. This definition may be useful for identifying neonates with serious illness in time to provide support. Additional work is needed to apply this definition prospectively to explore its utility for clinical care and research.

Redefining Neurodevelopmental Impairment: Perspectives of Very Preterm Birth Stakeholders

Children born very preterm are at risk of severe neurodevelopmental impairment, a composite endpoint that includes cerebral palsy, developmental delay, and hearing and visual impairment defined by medical professionals. We aimed to describe preterm birth stakeholders' perspectives on this classification. Ten clinical scenarios describing 18-month-old children with different components of severe neurodevelopmental impairment and one scenario of a typically developing child (control) were distributed to parents and stakeholders using a snowball sampling technique. For each scenario, participants rated health on a scale from 0 to 10 and whether the scenario represented a severe condition. Results were analyzed descriptively and mean differences from the control scenario were compared using a linear mixed-effects model. Stakeholders (number = 827) completed 4553 scenarios. Median health scores for each scenario varied from 6 to 10. The rating for the cerebral palsy and language delay scenario was significantly lower (mean difference -4.3; 95% confidence interval: -4.4, -4.1) than the control. The proportion of respondents rating a scenario as "severe" ranged from 5% for cognitive delay to 55% for cerebral palsy and language delay. Most participants disagreed with the rating used in research to describe severe neurodevelopmental impairment in preterm children. The term should be redefined to align with stakeholder perceptions.

Neonatal and Obstetric Provider Perceptions and Management at 22 Weeks' Gestation

OBJECTIVE

 Active treatment for periviable infants may be influenced by neonatal and obstetric provider perceptions of prognosis. The two aims of this study are to (1) quantify prognostic discordance between provider and data-driven survival estimates and (2) evaluate if prognostic discordance is associated with the threshold probability of survival at which neonatal providers recommend active treatment or obstetric providers recommend antenatal corticosteroids.

STUDY DESIGN

 Provider survival estimates and threshold probabilities of survival for active treatment and antenatal steroid use were obtained from a case-based survey for an infant or pregnancy at 22 weeks' gestation that was administered at two Atlanta hospitals. Data-driven survival estimates, including ranges, were acquired through the National Institute of Child Health and Human Development Extremely Preterm Birth Outcomes Tool. Prognostic discordance was calculated as the difference between a provider and data-driven estimates and classified as pessimistic (provider estimate below data-driven estimate range), accurate (within range), or optimistic (above range). The association between prognostic discordance and the threshold probability of survival was evaluated using nonparametric tests.

RESULTS

 We had 137 neonatal respondents (51% response rate) and 57 obstetric responses (23% response rate). The overall median prognostic discordance was 1.5% (interquartile range: 17, 13) and 52 (27%) of all respondents were pessimistic, 100 (52%) were accurate, and 42 (22%) were optimistic. The survival threshold above which neonatal and obstetric providers recommended active treatment or antenatal corticosteroids was 30% (20-45%) and 10% (0-20%), respectively. Thresholds did not significantly differ among the three prognostic discordance groups (p = 0.45 for neonatal and p = 0.53 for obstetric providers). There was also no significant correlation between the magnitude of prognostic discordance and thresholds.

CONCLUSION

 Prognostic discordance exists among both neonatal and obstetric providers. However, this discordance is not associated with the threshold probability of survival at which providers recommend active treatment or antenatal corticosteroids at 22 weeks' gestation.

KEY POINTS

· Prognostic discordance at 22 weeks' gestation exists for neonatal and obstetric providers.. · Prognostic discordance is not associated with survival thresholds for neonatal active treatment.. · Prognostic discordance is not associated with survival thresholds for the use of antenatal corticosteroids..

Paradoxes of professional autonomy: a qualitative study of U.S. neonatologists from 1978-2017

The professional autonomy of physicians often requires they take responsibility for life and death decisions, but they must also find ways to avoid bearing the full weight of such decisions. We conducted in-person, semi-structured interviews with neonatologists (n = 20) in four waves between 1978 and 2017 in a single Midwestern U.S. city. Using open coding analysis, we found over time that neonatologists described changes in their sense of professional autonomy and responsibility for decisions with life and death consequences. Through the early 1990s, as neonatology consolidated as a profession, physicians simultaneously enjoyed high levels of professional discretion and responsibility and were often constrained by bioethics and the law. By 2010s, high involvement of parents and collaboration with multiple subspecialties diffused the burden felt by individual practitioners, but neonatology's professional autonomy was correlatively diminished. Decision-making in the NICU over four decades reveal a complex relationship between the professional autonomy of neonatologist and the burden they bear, with some instances of ceding autonomy as a protective measure and other situations of unwelcomed erosion of professional autonomy that neonatologists see as complicating provision of care.

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.

Physician characteristics influence the trends in resuscitation decisions at different ages

AIM

We examined how physicians in different medical specialties would evaluate treatment decisions for vulnerable patients in need of resuscitation.

METHODS

A survey depicting six acutely ill patients from newborn infant to aged, all in need of resuscitation with similar prognoses, was distributed (in 2009) to a representative sample of 1650 members of the Norwegian Medical Association and 676 members of the Norwegian Pediatric Association.

RESULTS

There were 1335 respondents (57% participation rate). The majority of respondents across all specialties thought resuscitation was in the best interest of a 24 weeks' gestation preterm infant and would resuscitate the patient, but would also accept palliative care on the family's demand. Accepting a family's refusal of resuscitation was more common for the newborn infants. Specialists were overall similar in their answers, but specialty, age and gender were associated with different answers for the patients at both ends of the age spectrum.

CONCLUSION

Resuscitation decisions for the very young do not always seem to follow the best interest principle. Specialty and personal characteristics still have an impact on how we consider important ethical issues. We must be cognisant of our own valuations and how they may influence care.

Resilience Rather than Medical Factors: How Parents Predict Quality of Life of Their Sick Newborn

OBJECTIVE

To assess the influence of resiliency and stress on parental perspectives of the future quality of life (QOL) of neonatal intensive care unit (NICU) newborns at high risk of neurodevelopmental disability.

STUDY DESIGN

We conducted a prospective multicenter questionnaire study. Perspectives from parents of newborns at high risk of disability as per neonatal follow-up criteria were compared with a low-risk group consisting of parents of all other NICU newborns. Parental anxiety and resiliency, measured using Brief Symptom Inventory and Sense of Coherence scales, respectively, were associated with QOL projections.

RESULTS

Parents returned 129 (81%) questionnaires. Parents considering their newborn as currently sicker were more stressed (P = .011) and worried about future physical (P < .001) and mental (P < .001) health, QOL (P < .001), coping (P = .019), and financial (P < .001) and emotional (P = .002) impact on the family. Ooverall, there was no difference between parents of high-risk and low-risk newborns on QOL projections. Almost all parents projected a good future QOL. Less resilient parents projected more pain (P = .04), more financial (P = .019), and emotional (P = .031) impact on their family, and were 10 times more likely to predict that their newborn would remain chronically ill.

CONCLUSIONS

Parental projection of future QOL of NICU newborns is not associated with risk of disability. Most parents predict overall a good future QOL and focus more on familial impact. The Sense of Coherence scale may be used in clinical settings to identify less resilient parents.

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.

Population-Based Outcomes Data for Counseling at the Margin of Gestational Viability

OBJECTIVE

To survey neonatologists as to how many use population-based outcomes data to counsel families before and after the birth of 22- to 25-week preterm infants.

STUDY DESIGN

An anonymous online survey was distributed to 1022 neonatologists in the US. Questions addressed the use of population-based outcome data in prenatal and postnatal counseling.

RESULTS

Ninety-one percent of neonatologists reported using population-based outcomes data for counseling. The National Institute of Child Health and Human Development Neonatal Research Network Outcomes Data is most commonly used (65%) with institutional databases (14.5%) the second choice. Most participants (89%) reported that these data influence their counseling, but it was less clear whether specific estimates of mortality and morbidity influenced families; 36% of neonatologist felt that these data have little or no impact on families. Seventy-one percent reported that outcomes data estimates confirmed their own predictions, but among those who reported having their assumptions challenged, most had previously been overly pessimistic. Participants place a high value on gestational age and family preference in counseling; however, among neonatologists in high-volume centers, the presence of fetal complications was also reported to be an important factor. A large portion of respondents reported using prenatal population-based outcomes data in the neonatal intensive care unit.

CONCLUSION

Despite uncertainty about their value and impact, neonatologists use population-based outcomes data and provide specific estimates of survival and morbidity in consultation before and after extremely preterm birth. How best to integrate these data into comprehensive, family-centered counseling of infants at the margin of viability is an important area of further study.

Neonatal nurses' response to a hypothetical premature birth situation: What if it was my baby?

BACKGROUND:

Evolving technology and scientific advancement have increased the chances of survival of the extremely premature baby; however, such survival can be associated with some severe long-term morbidities.

RESEARCH QUESTION:

The research investigates the caregiving and ethical dilemmas faced by neonatal nurses when caring for extremely premature babies (defined as ≤24 weeks' gestation). This article explores the issues arising for neonatal nurses when they considered the philosophical question of 'what if it was me and my baby', or what they believed they would do in the hypothetical situation of going into premature labour and delivering an extremely premature baby.

PARTICIPANTS:

Data were collected via a questionnaire to Australian neonatal nurses and semi-structured interviews with 24 neonatal nurses in New South Wales, Australia.

ETHICAL CONSIDERATIONS:

Relevant ethical approvals have been obtained by the researchers.

FINDINGS:

A qualitative approach was used to analyse the data. The theme 'imagined futures' was generated which comprised three sub-themes: 'choice is important', 'not subjecting their own baby to treatment' and 'nurses and outcome predictions'. The results offer an important and unique understanding into the perceptions of nursing staff who care for extremely premature babies and their family, see them go home and witness their evolving outcomes. The results show that previous clinical and personal experiences led the nurses in the study to choose to have the belief that if in a similar situation, they would choose not to have their own baby resuscitated and subjected to the very treatment that they provide to other babies.

CONCLUSION:

The theme 'imagined futures' offers an overall understanding of how neonatal nurses imagine what the life of the extremely premature baby and his or her family will be like after discharge from neonatal intensive care. The nurses' past experience has led them to believe that they would not want this life for themselves and their baby, if they were to deliver at 24 weeks' gestation or less.

Attitudes of Parents and Health Care Workers to Major Surgery for High-Risk Preterm Infants

OBJECTIVES

To assess preferences of health care workers (HCWs) and parents of term and preterm infants to adverse health outcomes, and how perceived surgical mortality influences decision-making.

STUDY DESIGN

A total of 536 participants (157 HCWs, 201 parents of term infants, and 178 parents of preterm infants) were recruited to take part in a structured interview. Preferences related to treatment of a critically ill preterm infant with necrotizing enterocolitis were measured by health state rank permutation analysis and pivotal risk analysis. Between-group and subgroup comparisons were performed.

RESULTS

HCWs rank adverse health states less favorably than parents of preterm infants, consistently ranking 2 of the most adverse health states worse than death. Pivotal risk values of HCWs for all health states were consistently the lowest of the 3 groups. High operative mortality was associated uniformly with reduction in pivotal risks for all groups both in favorable and adverse health states. Subgroup analyses revealed significant discrepancies in preferences between fathers and mothers as well as doctors and nurses. Regular religious practice was significantly associated with increased pivotal risks in parental subgroups.

CONCLUSIONS

As discrepancies in health state preferences existed between subgroups (ie, doctors vs nurses, mothers vs fathers) and perceived operative mortality consistently biased parental and HCW health state preferences, we recommend that HCWs should first identify differences regarding patient management before interviewing the parents together. HCWs should be aware of inadvertently biasing parents when discussing the risks and outcomes of surgery in conjunction with the overall long-term prognosis of the underlying condition.

Communication with parents concerning withholding or withdrawing of life-sustaining interventions in neonatology

The nature and content of the conversations between the healthcare team and the parents concerning withholding or withdrawing of life-sustaining interventions for neonates vary greatly. These depend upon the status of the infant; for some neonates, death may be imminent, while other infants may be relatively stable, yet with a potential risk for surviving with severe disability. Healthcare providers also need to communicate with prospective parents before the birth of premature infants or neonates with uncertain outcomes. Many authors recommend that parents of fragile neonates receive detailed information about the potential outcomes of their children and the choices they have provided in an unbiased and empathetic manner. However, the exact manner this is to be achieved in clinical practice remains unclear. Parents and healthcare providers may have different values regarding the provision of life-sustaining interventions. However, parents base their decisions on many factors, not just probabilities. The role of emotions, regret, hope, quality of life, resilience, and relationships is rarely discussed. End-of-life discussions with parents should be individualized and personalized. This article suggests ways to personalize these conversations. The mnemonic "SOBPIE" may help providers have fruitful discussions: (1) What is the Situation? Is the baby imminently dying? Should withholding or withdrawing life-sustaining interventions be considered? (2) Opinions and options: personal biases of healthcare professionals and alternatives for patients. (3) Basic human interactions. (4) Parents: their story, their concerns, their needs, and their goals. (5) Information: meeting parental informational needs and providing balanced information. (6) Emotions: relational aspects of decision making which include the following: emotions, social supports, coping with uncertainty, adaptation, and resilience. In this paper, we consider some aspects of this complex process.

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

Interventions for extremely preterm infants bring up many ethical questions. Guidelines for intervention in the "periviable" period generally divide infants using predefined categories, such as "futile," "beneficial," and "gray zone" based on completed 7-day periods of gestation; however, such definitions often differ among countries. The ethical justification for using gestational age as the determination of the category boundaries is rarely discussed. Rational criteria used to make decisions regarding life-sustaining interventions must incorporate other important prognostic information. Precise guidelines based on imprecise data are not rational. Gestational age-based guidelines include an implicit judgment of what is deemed to be an unacceptably poor chance of "intact" survival but fail to explore the determination of acceptability. Furthermore, unclear definitions of severe disability, the difficulty, or impossibility, of accurately predicting outcome in the prenatal or immediate postnatal period make such simplistic formulae inappropriate. Similarly, if guidelines for intervention for the newborn are based on the "qualitative futility" of survival, it should be explicitly stated and justified according to established ethical guidelines. They should discuss whether newborn infants are morally different to older individuals or explain why thresholds recommended for intervention are different to recommendations for those in older persons. The aim should be to establish individualized goals of care with families while recognizing uncertainty, rather than acting on labels derived from gestational age categories alone.

Have the boundaries of the 'grey zone' of perinatal resuscitation changed for extremely preterm infants over 20 years?

AIM

To determine the boundaries of the grey zone of discretionary resuscitation over the past 20 years.

BACKGROUND

As the likelihood of survival improves over time, the BW- and GA-specific boundaries of discretionary nonresuscitation should fall.

HYPOTHESIS

Between 1988 and 2008 reductions in BW- and GA-specific mortality would drive a parallel reduction in BW and GA boundaries of discretionary resuscitation.

METHODS

We determined the likelihood of resuscitation and survival to NICU discharge for all infants born <700 g or <26 gestational weeks from 1988 to 2008. In addition, for 1988, 1993, 1998, 2003 and 2008, we determined the BW and GA for the 10 smallest infants who were resuscitated, and the 10 largest infants who were not resuscitated. We excluded any infant born with congenital anomaly.

RESULTS

Mortality fell from 80% in 1988 to 28% in 2008, and as expected, the percentage who were resuscitated rose from 63% in 1988-93 to 95% in 2004-2008. However, unexpectedly, over the 20-year study period, the smallest infants who were resuscitated despite extreme immaturity did not change (450-550 g and 23-24 weeks) and the largest infants not resuscitated did not change (600-700 g and 23-24 weeks.

CONCLUSION

Neither the BW nor GA boundaries of the grey zone of discretionary resuscitation have fallen over the past 20 years. Factors guiding resuscitation at the border of viability are complex and incompletely understood.

Ethics, choices, and decisions in acute medicine: a national survey of Norwegian physicians' attitudes

OBJECTIVE

To study the attitudes of Norwegian physicians to resuscitation of hypothetical patients all at risk of neurological sequelae.

DESIGN

Mail-based survey.

SETTING

A cohort of Norwegian physicians who are representative of the national physician corps.

INTERVENTIONS

A total of 1650 Norwegian physicians (7% of practicing physicians in Norway) received a written questionnaire describing six scenarios of patients all in need of emergency life-saving intervention. Respondents were asked whether they would resuscitate; whether such resuscitation was in the patient's best interest; whether a surrogate's refusal of intervention would be accepted; and whether they would have wanted resuscitation if the patient were their own child, their spouse, or themselves. Positive or negative responses on a four-point Likert scale were recorded.

MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS

A total of 1,069 respondents (response rate, 65%). Physicians responding to these scenarios were a) more inclined to resuscitate an anonymous patient than if the patient were themselves or their kin; b) willing to resuscitate although they do not consider this intervention to be in the patient's best interest; c) willing to refrain from resuscitation on surrogate request in spite of a reasonably good prognosis; d) willing to accept surrogate's refusal of resuscitation in spite of a stated opinion that such intervention would be in the patient's best interest; and e) less willing to resuscitate newborn infants compared with older children and adults (except the aged) with similar prognoses.

CONCLUSION

There appear to be differences in medical thinking about best interest, surrogate decision making, and the relative value of lives as far as these are applied to acute, life-saving treatment.

Divergent views of hope influencing communications between parents and hospital providers

This study evaluated parents' and health care providers' (HCPs) descriptions of hope following counseling of parents at risk of delivering an extremely premature infant. Data came from a longitudinal multiple case study investigation that examined the decision making and support needs of 40 families and their providers. Semistructured interviews were conducted before and after delivery. Divergent viewpoints of hope were found between parents and many HCPs and were subsequently coded using content analysis. Parents relied on hope as an emotional motivator, whereas most HCPs described parents' notions of hope as out of touch with reality. Parents perceived that such divergent beliefs about the role of hope negatively shaped communicative interactions and reduced trust with some of their providers. A deeper understanding of how varying views of hope might shape communications will uncover future research questions and lead to theory-based interventions aimed at improving the process of discussing difficult news with parents.

Why do we treat the newborn differently?

End-of-life decisions are often taken in neonatology, based on widely accepted guidelines, to avoiding futile therapies. Usually, the criteria upon which these guidelines rely are different from those used for older patients, even when patients require a guardian to decide on their behalf. Main differences are the weight of parental interests and the probabilistic base of the choice. A careful analysis of the literature found three main reasons of this difference: the obsolescence of the guidelines criteria, the difficulty to distinguish between parents' and babies' interests and the neonatologist's responsibility to prolong a life with the prospective of severe disability. In conclusion, the future guidelines for newborn end-of-life decisions should follow at least the same moral criteria used for older patients.

The attitudes of neonatal nurses towards extremely preterm infants

AIM

The paper is a report of a study of the attitudes of neonatal nurses towards extremely preterm infants.

BACKGROUND

Alongside advancing survival at extremely preterm gestational ages, ethical debates concerning the provision of invasive care have proliferated in light of the high morbidity. Despite nurses being the healthcare professionals who work closest with the infant and their family, their potential influence is usually ignored when determining how parents come to decisions about future care for their extremely premature infant.

METHODS

A Q methodology was employed to explore the attitudes of neonatal nurses towards caring for extremely preterm infants. Data were collected between 2007 and 2008 and analysed using PQMethod and Card Content Analysis.

RESULTS

Thirty-six nurses from six neonatal units in the United Kingdom participated. Although there was consensus around the professional role of the nurse, when faced with the complexities of neonatal nursing three distinguishing factors emerged: the importance of parental choice in decision-making, the belief that technology should be used to assess response to treatment, and the belief that healthcare professionals should undertake difficult decisions.

CONCLUSION

Neonatal nurses report unexpected difficulties in upholding their professionally defined role through highly complex and ever varied decision-making processes. Recognition of individual attitudes to the care of extremely preterm infants and the role of the family in the face of difficult decisions should facilitate more open communication between the nurse and the parents and improve the experience of both the nurse and the family during these emotional situations.

The quality of life of young children and infants with chronic medical problems: review of the literature

The question "what makes a good quality of life?" is a philosophical one which could be thought immune to scientific investigations. However, over the last few decades there has been great progress in developing tools to quantify quality of life (QoL) to make comparisons between different health states, evaluate the effectiveness of medical interventions, and describe the life trajectories of individuals or groups. Using a series of vignettes, we explore and review the biomedical literature to demonstrate how QoL is affected by chronic health conditions in childhood, and how it evolves as individuals pass into adulthood. Individuals experiencing serious chronic illnesses generally have reduced health-related QoL: their health status has significant repercussions of their everyday life, but scores are usually much better than healthy individuals expect, and better than physicians predict. Global QoL is more than a health status concept. QoL is a complex relationship between objectivity and subjectivity; it requires substantial and valid facts, and it defines itself by an interpretation of health within different schemes of values: societal, medical, and those of the subject themselves. QoL is dynamic; purely physical influences diminish as individuals age, and psychosocial factors become much more important. Resilience frequently allows adaptation to adverse health states, leading to acceptable QoL for most children with disabilities.

Attitudes toward neonatal intensive care treatment of preterm infants with a high risk of developing long-term disabilities

OBJECTIVES

To assess (1) the differences in attitudes toward disabilities of 3 groups of subjects involved in neonatal care decision-making: health care workers, mothers of term infants, and parents of preterm infants, and (2) the impact of subject characteristics on these attitudes including parental education level, religion, and severity of disability.

METHODS

Five hundred seventy-eight subjects were interviewed, of whom 135 were health care workers, 155 were mothers of term infants, and 288 were parents of preterm infants. We assessed between-group differences of the (1) health state ranking permutations, (2) proportion of subjects willing to save the infant at all costs, (3) pivotal risks of each group to the 5 health states comprising varying combinations of mental, physical, and social disabilities, and (4) impact of personal characteristics on decision-making.

RESULTS

Most health care workers ranked the most severe disability health state as worse than death, whereas most parents of preterm infants ranked death as the worst outcome. Significantly more parents of preterm infants chose to save the infant at all costs, compared with mothers of term infants and health care workers, and the pivotal risks of the parents of preterm infants group were highest for all health states. Religious worship was associated with increased probability of saving at all costs and pivotal risks. Increased severity of neonatal complications was associated with decreased probability of saving at all costs and pivotal risks in parents of preterm infants.

CONCLUSIONS

Our findings suggest that parents of preterm infants as a group were most likely to save the infant at all costs and prepared to tolerate more severe disability health states. However, personal characteristics, in particular religious belief and severity of neonatal complications, have overriding influence on these attitudes. We suggest inclusion of experienced parents of preterm infants for more effective counseling of parents in making life-and-death decisions.

Flaws in the assessment of the best interests of the newborn

We examined the literature on ethical decisions regarding neonates, to assess whether personal beliefs and prejudices influence end-of-life decisions taken by caregivers. Studies show that religion and familiarity with disability influence caregivers' decisions, whereas the influx of already being a parent, age, sex and professional experience is controverse. Caregivers' attitudes towards end-of-life decisions are also affected by personal concerns about litigation, prejudices and their view of disability. The concept of 'poor quality of life' is widely used as a reference in end-of-life decisions, but this can be interpreted differently, leaving room for a wide range of personal viewpoints. In most cases, parents' opinions are considered important and are sometimes the main determinant in decision making. However, it is unclear whether parents' decisions are based on their own wishes or on the best interests of the newborn.

CONCLUSION

In neonatal end-of-life decisions, patients may not receive cures based only on their best interests.