Resuscitators' opinions on using a respiratory function monitor during neonatal resuscitation.
neonatal resuscitation
respiratory function monitor
training
user experience
Journal
Acta paediatrica (Oslo, Norway : 1992)
ISSN: 1651-2227
Titre abrégé: Acta Paediatr
Pays: Norway
ID NLM: 9205968
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
01 2023
01 2023
Historique:
revised:
06
09
2022
received:
14
06
2022
accepted:
29
09
2022
pubmed:
1
10
2022
medline:
15
12
2022
entrez:
30
9
2022
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
The aim of this study was to assess the resuscitators' opinions of the usefulness and clinical value of using a respiratory function monitor (RFM) when resuscitating extremely preterm infants with positive pressure ventilation. The link to an online survey was sent to 106 resuscitators from six countries who were involved in a multicentre trial that compared the percentage of inflations within a predefined target range with and without the RFM. The resuscitators were asked to assess the usefulness and clinical value of the RFM. The survey was online for 4 months after the trial ended in May 2019. The survey was completed by 74 (70%) resuscitators of which 99% considered the RFM to be helpful during neonatal resuscitation and 92% indicated that it influenced their decision-making. The majority (76%) indicated that using the RFM improved their practice and made resuscitation more effective, even when the RFM was not available. Inadequate training was the key issue that limited the effectiveness of the RFM: 45% felt insufficiently trained, and 78% felt more training in using and interpreting the RFM would have been beneficial. Resuscitators considered the RFM to be helpful to guide neonatal resuscitation, but sufficient training was required to achieve the maximum benefit.
Identifiants
pubmed: 36177808
doi: 10.1111/apa.16559
pmc: PMC10092741
doi:
Types de publication
Multicenter Study
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
63-68Informations de copyright
© 2022 The Authors. Acta Paediatrica published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of Foundation Acta Paediatrica.
Références
Arch Dis Child Fetal Neonatal Ed. 2020 Nov;105(6):666-668
pubmed: 32616559
Neonatology. 2020;117(2):151-158
pubmed: 31593960
Arch Dis Child Fetal Neonatal Ed. 2021 Jul;106(4):346-351
pubmed: 33514631
Semin Fetal Neonatal Med. 2018 Oct;23(5):340-346
pubmed: 29705089
Acta Paediatr. 2023 Jan;112(1):63-68
pubmed: 36177808
J Pediatr. 2012 Mar;160(3):377-381.e2
pubmed: 22056350
Front Pediatr. 2016 Apr 18;4:38
pubmed: 27148507
Resuscitation. 2012 Sep;83(9):1135-9
pubmed: 22322286
Arch Dis Child Fetal Neonatal Ed. 2019 Sep;104(5):F528-F534
pubmed: 30504441
Arch Dis Child Fetal Neonatal Ed. 2008 Sep;93(5):F380-1
pubmed: 18192329
Resuscitation. 2021 Oct;167:317-325
pubmed: 34302924
J Perinat Med. 2018 Oct 25;46(8):934-941
pubmed: 29451862
Front Pediatr. 2020 Sep 16;8:560
pubmed: 33042913
Simul Healthc. 2011 Dec;6(6):327-36
pubmed: 21937960
Eur J Pediatr. 2015 Feb;174(2):205-8
pubmed: 25029987
Clin Pediatr (Phila). 2013 Aug;52(8):747-52
pubmed: 23671270
Am J Perinatol. 2019 Nov;36(13):1368-1376
pubmed: 30620944
Arch Dis Child Fetal Neonatal Ed. 2019 Nov;104(6):F582-F586
pubmed: 30636691