Defining the Epidemiology of Safety Risks in Neonatal Intensive Care Unit Patients Requiring Surgery

Systematic review and meta-analysis: Evaluating the influence of intrahepatic cholestasis of pregnancy on obstetric and neonatal outcomes

BACKGROUND

Intrahepatic cholestasis of pregnancy (ICP) is a serious liver conditions that negatively impacts obstetric and neonatal outcomes. Elevated levels of bile acid, particularly glycine conjugate, may compromise blood flow and cause functional hypoxia-ischemia.

AIMS

This meta-analysis aims to assess the association between ICP and key pregnancy outcomes including emergency caesarian sections (C-sections), preeclampsia, hemorrhage, preterm birth, small for gestational age, admission rate to neonatal intensive care union (NICU), gestational age, and stillbirth.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Literature search across five databases (PubMed, Embase, Web of Science) was done to detect relevant studies published up until June 2023. Meta-analysis of the identified studies was done using a random-effects model, and the results presented as Odds ratio (OR).

RESULTS

A literature search identified 662 studies. Of them, 21 met the inclusion criteria. There was a significant association between ICP and odds of C-section (OR: 1.42, p <0.001), preeclampsia (OR: 2.64, p <0.001), NICU admission (OR: 2.1, p <0.001), and pre-term birth (OR: 2.64, p <0.001). ICP was not associated with postpartum hemmorhage (OR: 1.31, p = 0.13), small for gestational age (OR: 0.87, p = 0.07), stillbirth (OR: 1.49, p = 0.29).

CONCLUSIONS

Our results confirm the adverse effects of ICP on co-existing pregnancy complications, obstetric and neonatal outcomes. ICP in associated with severe complications including increased rates of preeclampsia, emergency C-sections, preterm births, l gestational periods and higher rates of NICU admissions. These results may assist healthcare professionals in formulating comprehensive care guidelines for expectant mothers and newborns.

Perioperative critical events and morbidity associated with anesthesia in early life: Subgroup analysis of United Kingdom participation in the NEonate and Children audiT of Anaesthesia pRactice IN Europe (NECTARINE) prospective multicenter observational study

BACKGROUND

The NEonate and Children audiT of Anaesthesia pRactice IN Europe (NECTARINE) prospective observational study reported critical events requiring intervention during 35.2% of 6542 anesthetic episodes in 5609 infants up to 60 weeks postmenstrual age. The United Kingdom (UK) was one of 31 participating countries.

METHODS

Subgroup analysis of UK NECTARINE cases (12.8% of cohort) to identify perioperative critical events that triggered medical interventions. Secondary aims were to describe UK practice, identify factors more commonly associated with critical events, and compare 30-day morbidity and mortality between participating UK and nonUK centers.

RESULTS

Seventeen UK centers recruited 722 patients (68.7% male, 36.1% born preterm, and 48.1% congenital anomalies) undergoing anesthesia for 876 surgical or diagnostic procedures at 25-60 weeks postmenstrual age. Repeat anesthesia/surgery was common: 17.6% patients prior to and 14.4% during the recruitment period. Perioperative critical events triggered interventions in 300/876 (34.3%) cases. Cardiovascular instability (16.9% of cases) and/or reduced oxygenation (11.4%) were more common in younger patients and those with co-morbidities or requiring preoperative intensive support. A higher proportion of UK than nonUK cases were graded as ASA-Physical Status scores >2 or requiring urgent or emergency procedures, and 39% required postoperative intensive care. Thirty-day morbidity (complications in 17.2%) and mortality (8/715, 1.1%) did not differ from nonUK participants.

CONCLUSIONS

Perioperative critical events and co-morbidities are common in neonates and young infants. Thirty-day morbidity and mortality data did not demonstrate national differences in outcome. Identifying factors associated with increased risk informs preoperative assessment, resource allocation, and discussions between clinicians and families.

Ascertaining Design Requirements for Postoperative Care Transition Interventions

BACKGROUND

Handoffs or care transitions from the operating room (OR) to intensive care unit (ICU) are fragmented and vulnerable to communication errors. Although protocols and checklists for standardization help reduce errors, such interventions suffer from limited sustainability. An unexplored aspect is the potential role of developing personalized postoperative transition interventions using artificial intelligence (AI)-generated risks.

OBJECTIVES

This study was aimed to (1) identify factors affecting sustainability of handoff standardization, (2) utilize a human-centered approach to develop design ideas and prototyping requirements for a sustainable handoff intervention, and (3) explore the potential role for AI risk assessment during handoffs.

METHODS

We conducted four design workshops with 24 participants representing OR and ICU teams at a large medical academic center. Data collection phases were (1) open-ended questions, (2) closed card sorting of handoff information elements, and (3) scenario-based design ideation and prototyping for a handoff intervention. Data were analyzed using thematic analysis. Card sorts were further tallied to characterize handoff information elements as core, flexible, or unnecessary.

RESULTS

Limited protocol awareness among clinicians and lack of an interdisciplinary electronic health record (EHR)-integrated handoff intervention prevented long-term sustainability of handoff standardization. Clinicians argued for a handoff intervention comprised of core elements (included for all patients) and flexible elements (tailored by patient condition and risks). They also identified unnecessary elements that could be omitted during handoffs. Similarities and differences in handoff intervention requirements among physicians and nurses were noted; in particular, clinicians expressed divergent views on the role of AI-generated postoperative risks.

CONCLUSION

Current postoperative handoff interventions focus largely on standardization of information transfer and handoff processes. Our design approach allowed us to visualize accurate models of user expectations for effective interdisciplinary communication. Insights from this study point toward EHR-integrated, "flexibly standardized" care transition interventions that can automatically generate a patient-centered summary and risk-based report.