Dataset Information

Neonatal care during the COVID-19 pandemic - a global survey of parents' experiences regarding infant and family-centred developmental care.

ABSTRACT:

Background

The COVID-19 pandemic restrictions affect provision and quality of neonatal care. This global study explores parents' experiences regarding the impact of the restrictions on key characteristics of infant and family-centred developmental care (IFCDC) during the first year of the pandemic.

Methods

For this cross-sectional study, a pre-tested online survey with 52 questions and translated into 23 languages was used to collect data between August and November 2020. Parents of sick or preterm infants born during the pandemic and receiving special/intensive care were eligible for participation. Data analysis included descriptive statistics and statistical testing based on different levels of restrictive measures.

Findings

In total, 2103 participants from 56 countries provided interpretable data. Fifty-two percent of respondents were not allowed to have another person present during birth. Percentages increased with the extent of restrictions in the respondents' country of residence (p = 0·002). Twenty-one percent of total respondents indicated that no-one was allowed to be present with the infant receiving special/intensive care. The frequency (p < 0·001) and duration (p = 0·001) of permitted presence largely depended on the extent of restrictions. The more restrictive the policy measures were, the more the respondents worried about the pandemic situation during pregnancy and after birth.

Interpretation

COVID-19 related restrictions severely challenged evidence-based cornerstones of IFCDC, such as separating parents/ legal guardians and their newborns. Our findings must therefore be considered by public health experts and policy makers alike to reduce unnecessary suffering, calling for a zero separation policy.

Funding

EFCNI received an earmarked donation by Novartis Pharma AG in support of this study.

SUBMITTER: Kostenzer J

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8355909 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:ObjectivesThe COVID-19 pandemic has disrupted healthcare systems, challenging neonatal care provision globally. Curtailed visitation policies are known to negatively affect the medical and emotional care of sick, preterm and low birth weight infants, compromising the achievement of the 2030 Development Agenda. Focusing on infant and family-centred developmental care (IFCDC), we explored parents' experiences of the disruptions affecting newborns in need of special or intensive care during the first year of the pandemic.DesignCross-sectional study using an electronic, web-based questionnaire.SettingMulticountry online-survey.MethodsData were collected between August and November 2020 using a pretested online, multilingual questionnaire. The target group consisted of parents of preterm, sick or low birth weight infants born during the first year of the COVID-19 pandemic and who received special/intensive care. The analysis followed a descriptive quantitative approach.ResultsIn total, 1148 participants from 12 countries (Australia, Brazil, Canada, China, France, Italy, Mexico, New Zealand, Poland, Sweden, Turkey and Ukraine) were eligible for analysis. We identified significant country-specific differences, showing that the application of IFCDC is less prone to disruptions in some countries than in others. For example, parental presence was affected: 27% of the total respondents indicated that no one was allowed to be present with the infant receiving special/intensive care. In Australia, Canada, France, New Zealand and Sweden, both the mother and the father (in more than 90% of cases) were allowed access to the newborn, whereas participants indicated that no one was allowed to be present in China (52%), Poland (39%), Turkey (49%) and Ukraine (32%).ConclusionsThe application of IFCDC during the COVID-19 pandemic differs between countries. There is an urgent need to reconsider separation policies and to strengthen the IFCDC approach worldwide to ensure that the 2030 Development Agenda is achieved.

Project description:OBJECTIVE:To investigate critical care physicians' experiences and perspectives regarding follow-up meetings with parents after a child's death in the pediatric intensive care unit. Parents of children who die in the pediatric intensive care unit often desire a follow-up meeting with the physicians who cared for their child. DESIGN:Semistructured, audio-recorded telephone interviews. SETTING:Six clinical centers affiliated with the Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development Collaborative Pediatric Critical Care Research Network. PARTICIPANTS:Seventy critical care physicians (i.e., attendings and fellows) practicing or training at a Child Health and Human Development Collaborative Pediatric Critical Care Research Network clinical center between February 1, 2008 and June 30, 2008. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS:Twenty-three (33%) physicians reported never participating in a follow-up meeting with bereaved parents; 22 (31%) participated in one to five meetings; and 25 (36%) participated in more than five meetings. Of those with prior experience, 44 (94%) met with parents at the hospital and 40 (85%) met within 3 months of the death. Meeting content included discussing autopsy, parent questions, hospital course, cause of death, genetic risk, bereavement services, and legal or administrative issues; providing emotional support; and receiving parent feedback. Forty (85%) physicians perceived the meetings to be beneficial to families, and 35 (74%) to physicians. Barriers included time and scheduling, family and physician unwillingness, distance and transportation, language and cultural issues, parent anger, and lack of a system for meeting initiation and planning. CONCLUSIONS:Critical care physicians have a wide range of experience conducting follow-up meetings with bereaved parents. Although physicians perceive benefits to follow-up meetings, barriers exist that interfere with their implementation in clinical practice.

Project description:BackgroundDiagnosis and treatment for developmental dysplasia of the hip (DDH) varies greatly depending on condition severity, age at diagnosis, and professional opinion. Little is known about patient experiences across the globe. We aimed to characterize global patient and caregiver experiences during DDH care and to highlight patient-identified priorities.MethodsWe developed a cross-sectional survey in collaboration with 7 DDH outreach organizations. DDH patients and/or their caregivers (above 18 y old) were invited to complete an international online survey about their experiences. Participants were recruited through web media of all collaborating organizations. Data collection took place over 3 months. Descriptive statistics were used to analyze quantitative results. Qualitative content analysis was used to categorize open-ended responses.ResultsA total of 739 participants completed the survey, representing 638 (86.3%) parents/guardians of DDH patients, and 101 (13.7%) patients. Three hundred eighty-six (52.2%) participants received diagnosis by 3 months of age; mean age of diagnosis was 15.96 months (90% confidence interval=12.04, 19.91). Of 211 participants with family history of DDH, 68 (32.3%) did not receive DDH screening. Of 187 patients born breech, 82 (43.9%) did not receive DDH screening. In total, 36/94 (38.3%) participants with both family history and breech birth did not receive DDH screening. Most participants reported treatment (696/730, 95.3%), including bracing (n=461) surgery (n=364), and/or closed reduction (n=141). A total of 144 patients reported >1 surgery; 82 reported >3 surgeries. Participants reported a range of 1 to 400 visits to health care professionals for DDH care across 1 to 66 years. Lack of information and resources on treatment practicalities and timelines, along with emotional burden of diagnosis, were greatest challenges reported.ConclusionResults demonstrate that DDH diagnosis and treatment can pose significant burden on patients and caregivers. Reliable public information is needed to support those affected. Global educational efforts are needed to raise awareness of DDH risk factors, signs, and symptoms among care providers, to increase awareness and improve identification, screening, and monitoring of at-risk children.