What Is the Opinion of the Health Care Personnel Regarding the Use of Different Assistive Tools to Improve the Quality of Neonatal Resuscitation?

Author:

Ortiz-Movilla Roberto1,Beato-Merino Maite2,Funes Moñux Rosa María3,Martínez-Bernat Lucía4,Domingo-Comeche Laura5,Royuela-Vicente Ana6,Román-Riechmann Enriqueta7,Marín-Gabriel Miguel Ángel1

Affiliation:

1. Pediatric Service, Neonatology Unit, Puerta de Hierro-Majadahonda University Hospital, Universidad Autónoma de Madrid, Majadahonda, Madrid, Spain

2. Pediatric Service, Neonatology Unit, Severo Ochoa University Hospital, Leganés, Madrid, Spain

3. Pediatric Service, Neonatology Unit, Príncipe de Asturias University Hospital, Universidad de Alcalá de Henares, Madrid, Spain

4. Pediatric Service, Neonatology Unit, Getafe University Hospital, Getafe, Madrid, Spain

5. Pediatric Service, Neonatology Unit, Fuenlabrada University Hospital, Fuenlabrada, Madrid, Spain

6. Biostatistics Unit, Puerta de Hierro Biomedical Research Institute, CIBERESP, Madrid, Spain

7. Pediatric Service, Puerta de Hierro-Majadahonda University Hospital, Universidad Autónoma de Madrid, Majadahonda, Madrid, Spain

Abstract

Objective It is important to determine whether the use of different quality improvement tools in neonatal resuscitation is well-received by health care teams and improves coordination and perceived quality of the stabilization of the newborn at birth. This study aimed to explore the satisfaction of personnel involved in resuscitation for infants under 32 weeks of gestational age (<32 wGA) at birth with the use of an assistance toolkit: Random Real-time Safety Audits (RRSA) of neonatal stabilization stations, the use of pre-resuscitation checklists, and the implementation of briefings and debriefings. Study Design A quasi-experimental, prospective, multicenter intervention study was conducted in five level III-A neonatal intensive care units in Madrid (Spain). The intervention involved conducting weekly RRSA of neonatal resuscitation stations and the systematic use of checklists, briefings, and debriefings during stabilization at birth for infants <32 wGA. The satisfaction with their use was analyzed through surveys conducted with the personnel responsible for resuscitating these newborns. These surveys were conducted both before and after the intervention phase (each lasting 1 year) and used a Likert scale response model to assess various aspects of the utility of the introduced assistance tools, team coordination, and perceived quality of the resuscitation. Results Comparison of data from 200 preintervention surveys and 155 postintervention surveys revealed statistically significant differences (p < 0.001) between the two phases. The postintervention phase scored higher in all aspects related to the effective utilization of these tools. Improvements were observed in team coordination and the perceived quality of neonatal resuscitation. These improved scores were consistent across personnel roles and years of experience. Conclusion Personnel attending to infants <32 wGA in the delivery room are satisfied with the application of RRSA, checklists, briefings, and debriefings in the neonatal resuscitation and perceive a higher level of quality in the stabilization of these newborns following the introduction of these tools. Key Points

Publisher

Georg Thieme Verlag KG

Reference28 articles.

1. Neonatal Life Support 2020 International Consensus on cardiopulmonary resuscitation and emergency cardiovascular care science with treatment recommendations;M H Wyckoff;Circulation,2020

2. Spanish guide for neonatal stabilization and resuscitation 2021: analysis, adaptation and consensus on international recommendations;G Zeballos Sarrato;An Pediatr (Engl Ed),2022

3. Delivery room quality improvement project improved compliance with best practices for a community NICU;C W Sauer;Sci Rep,2016

4. Benefits of recording and reviewing neonatal resuscitation: the providers' perspective;M C den Boer;Arch Dis Child Fetal Neonatal Ed,2019

5. Real time patient safety audits: improving safety every day;R Ursprung;Qual Saf Health Care,2005

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3