Assessment of feasibility and acceptability of family-centered care implemented at a neonatal intensive care unit in India.
Family participatory care, child rights, newborn-parent unity
India
Neonatal health
Neonatal intensive care unit
Newborn care, family-centered care
Special newborn care unit
Journal
BMC pediatrics
ISSN: 1471-2431
Titre abrégé: BMC Pediatr
Pays: England
ID NLM: 100967804
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
13 04 2021
13 04 2021
Historique:
received:
06
12
2020
accepted:
02
04
2021
entrez:
14
4
2021
pubmed:
15
4
2021
medline:
28
5
2021
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
A family-centered care (FCC) parent participation program that ensures an infant is not separated from parents against their will was developed for the caring of their small or sick newborn at a neonatal intensive care unit (NICU) in Delhi, India. Healthcare provider sensitization training directed at psychosocial and tangible support and an audio-visual training tool for parent-attendants were developed that included: 1) handwashing, infection prevention, protocol for entry; 2) developmentally supportive care, breastfeeding, expression of breastmilk and assisted feeding; 3) kangaroo mother care; and 4) preparation for discharge and care at home. The study aimed to examine the feasibility and acceptability of the FCC model in a NICU in India. A prospective cohort design collected quantitative data on each parent-attendant/infant dyad at enrollment, during the NICU stay, and at discharge. Feasibility of the FCC program was measured by assessing the participation of parent-attendants and healthcare providers, and whether training components were implemented as intended. Acceptability was measured by the proportion of parent-attendants who participated in the trainings and their ability to accurately complete program activities. Of 395 NICU admissions during the study period, eligible participants included 333 parent-attendant/infant dyads, 24 doctors, and 21 nurses. Of the 1242 planned parent-attendant training sessions, 939 (75.6%) were held, indicating that program fidelity was high, and the majority of trainings were implemented as intended. While 50% of parent-attendants completed all 4 FCC training sessions, 95% completed sessions 1 and 2; 60% of the total participating parent-attendants completed session 3, and 75% completed session 4. Compliance rates were over 96% for 5 of 10 FCC parent-attendant activities, and 60 to 78% for the remaining 5 activities. FCC was feasible to implement in this setting and was acceptable to participating parent-attendants and healthcare providers. Parents participated in trainings conducted by NICU providers and engaged in essential care to their infants in the NICU. A standard care approach and behavior norms for healthcare providers directed psychosocial and tangible support to parent-attendants so that a child is not separated from his or her parents against their will while receiving advanced care in the NICU.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
A family-centered care (FCC) parent participation program that ensures an infant is not separated from parents against their will was developed for the caring of their small or sick newborn at a neonatal intensive care unit (NICU) in Delhi, India. Healthcare provider sensitization training directed at psychosocial and tangible support and an audio-visual training tool for parent-attendants were developed that included: 1) handwashing, infection prevention, protocol for entry; 2) developmentally supportive care, breastfeeding, expression of breastmilk and assisted feeding; 3) kangaroo mother care; and 4) preparation for discharge and care at home. The study aimed to examine the feasibility and acceptability of the FCC model in a NICU in India.
METHODS
A prospective cohort design collected quantitative data on each parent-attendant/infant dyad at enrollment, during the NICU stay, and at discharge. Feasibility of the FCC program was measured by assessing the participation of parent-attendants and healthcare providers, and whether training components were implemented as intended. Acceptability was measured by the proportion of parent-attendants who participated in the trainings and their ability to accurately complete program activities.
RESULTS
Of 395 NICU admissions during the study period, eligible participants included 333 parent-attendant/infant dyads, 24 doctors, and 21 nurses. Of the 1242 planned parent-attendant training sessions, 939 (75.6%) were held, indicating that program fidelity was high, and the majority of trainings were implemented as intended. While 50% of parent-attendants completed all 4 FCC training sessions, 95% completed sessions 1 and 2; 60% of the total participating parent-attendants completed session 3, and 75% completed session 4. Compliance rates were over 96% for 5 of 10 FCC parent-attendant activities, and 60 to 78% for the remaining 5 activities.
CONCLUSIONS
FCC was feasible to implement in this setting and was acceptable to participating parent-attendants and healthcare providers. Parents participated in trainings conducted by NICU providers and engaged in essential care to their infants in the NICU. A standard care approach and behavior norms for healthcare providers directed psychosocial and tangible support to parent-attendants so that a child is not separated from his or her parents against their will while receiving advanced care in the NICU.
Identifiants
pubmed: 33849477
doi: 10.1186/s12887-021-02644-w
pii: 10.1186/s12887-021-02644-w
pmc: PMC8042842
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Research Support, U.S. Gov't, Non-P.H.S.
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
171Subventions
Organisme : U.S.A.I.D.(US)
ID : AID-OAA-A-14-00049
Références
Acta Paediatr. 2012 Oct;101(10):1032-7
pubmed: 22812674
Lancet. 2005 Mar 5-11;365(9462):891-900
pubmed: 15752534
Indian J Community Med. 2016 Jan-Mar;41(1):11-5
pubmed: 26917867
Am J Crit Care. 2018 Jan;27(1):52-58
pubmed: 29292276
Int J Community Based Nurs Midwifery. 2014 Oct;2(4):268-78
pubmed: 25349870
BMC Pregnancy Childbirth. 2013;13 Suppl 1:S12
pubmed: 23445639
Nurs Womens Health. 2016 Apr-May;20(2):158-66
pubmed: 27067932
Iran J Pediatr. 2016 Jul 26;26(5):e3960
pubmed: 28203324
BMC Health Serv Res. 2019 Mar 21;19(1):184
pubmed: 30898170
Ital J Pediatr. 2017 Apr 17;43(1):36
pubmed: 28412958
Adv Neonatal Care. 2018 Jun;18(3):208-214
pubmed: 29596071
Acta Paediatr. 1999 Apr;88(4):353-5
pubmed: 10342526
J Perinatol. 2017 Dec;37(12):1259-1264
pubmed: 28796241
J Clin Diagn Res. 2015 Jan;9(1):SC04-8
pubmed: 25738051
Pediatr Res. 2020 Sep;88(3):421-428
pubmed: 32380505
Scand J Caring Sci. 2018 Sep;32(3):1012-1017
pubmed: 29131378
Semin Perinatol. 2011 Feb;35(1):20-8
pubmed: 21255703
Indian Pediatr. 2017 Jun 15;54(6):455-459
pubmed: 28667715
J Health Popul Nutr. 2011 Oct;29(5):500-9
pubmed: 22106756
J Perinat Neonatal Nurs. 2017 Jul/Sep;31(3):274-280
pubmed: 28737547
Pediatrics. 2010 Feb;125(2):e278-85
pubmed: 20100748
J Perinatol. 2007 Dec;27 Suppl 2:S32-7
pubmed: 18034178
BMC Pregnancy Childbirth. 2010 Feb 23;10 Suppl 1:S1
pubmed: 20233382
Rev Lat Am Enfermagem. 2016 Aug 8;24:e2753
pubmed: 27508921
Lancet. 2005 Mar 12-18;365(9463):977-88
pubmed: 15767001
BMC Pediatr. 2020 Nov 28;20(1):535
pubmed: 33246430
J UOEH. 2017;39(3):235-240
pubmed: 28904275
J Perinat Neonatal Nurs. 2017 Jan/Mar;31(1):75-85
pubmed: 28121762
Early Hum Dev. 2014 Sep;90 Suppl 2:S45-6
pubmed: 25220127
J Gen Intern Med. 2010 Jun;25(6):601-12
pubmed: 20467909
CMAJ. 2014 Aug 5;186(11):845-7
pubmed: 24710910
J Pediatr. 2021 Jan;228:36-43.e2
pubmed: 32898578
Early Hum Dev. 2014 Dec;90(12):863-7
pubmed: 25463833
Pediatrics. 2003 Sep;112(3 Pt 1):691-7
pubmed: 12949306