Newborn intensive care survivors: a review and a plan for collaboration in Texas.

BACKGROUND: Neonatal intensive care is a remarkable success story with dramatic improvements in survival rates for preterm newborns. Significant efforts and resources are invested to improve mortality and morbidity but much remains to be learned about the short and long-term effects of neonatal intensive care unit (NICU) interventions. Published guidelines recommend that infants discharged from the NICU be in an organized follow-up program that tracks medical and neurodevelopmental outcomes. Yet, there are no standardized guidelines for provision of follow-up services for high-risk infants. The National Institute of Child Health and Human Development Neonatal Research Network and the Vermont Oxford Network have made strides toward standardizing practices and conducting outcomes research, but only include a subset of developmental follow-up programs with a focus on extremely preterm infants. Several studies have been conducted to gain a better understanding of current practices in developmental follow-up. Some of the major themes in these studies are the lack of personnel and funding to provide comprehensive follow-up care; feeding difficulties as a primary issue for NICU survivors, families, and programs; wide variability in referral and follow-up care practices; and calls for standardized, systematic developmental surveillance to improve outcomes. FINDINGS: We convened a one-day summit to discuss developmental follow-up practices in Texas involving four academic and three nonacademic centers. All seven centers described variable age and weight criteria for follow-up of NICU patients and a unique set of developmental practices, including duration of follow-up, types and timing of developmental assessments administered, education and communication with families and other health care providers, and referrals for services. Needs identified by the centers focused on two main themes: resources and comprehensive care. Participants identified key challenges for developmental follow-up, generated recommendations to address these challenges, and outlined components of a quality program. CONCLUSIONS: The long-term goal is to ensure that all children maximize their potential; a goal supported through quality, comprehensive developmental follow-up care and outcomes research to continuously improve evidence-based practices. We aim to contribute to this goal through a statewide working group collaborating on research to standardize practices and inform policies that truly benefit children and their families.

Effect of antenatal treatment of maternal periodontitis on early childhood neurodevelopment.

OBJECTIVE: To determine if antenatal treatment of maternal periodontitis affects early childhood neurodevelopment. STUDY DESIGN: We evaluated neurodevelopment of 331 24-month-old children born to women who participated in a randomized trial of antenatal (167) or postpartum (164) treatment of periodontitis. Children within groups defined by maternal treatment were designated as high risk for abnormal neurodevelopment (n = 96; birth at ≤34(6)/7 weeks' gestation or small for gestational age following birth at term) or low risk (n = 235; appropriate birth weight and ≥37 weeks' gestation). We measured neurodevelopment using the Bayley Scale of Infant and Toddler Development III (BSID III) and neurological examination. Treatment effect was analyzed using a chi-square or Fisher exact test. Between-group mean scores were compared using Student t test. RESULTS: There were no differences in the incidence of neuromotor or sensory (visual or hearing) impairment or scores on the BSID III between groups. Low-risk children in the antenatal treatment group had higher language scores than those in the postpartum treatment group (92.9 versus 89.2; p = 0.05). CONCLUSION: Antenatal treatment of maternal periodontitis does not appear to affect neurodevelopment at 24 months of age. The slight improvement in language development in low-risk children may be an artifact or not clinically relevant.

Postdischarge growth and development in a predominantly Hispanic, very low birth weight population.

OBJECTIVES: The goals were to assess postdischarge growth and developmental progress of very low birth weight (birth weight: <1500 g) premature infants in a predominantly Hispanic population and to identify predictors for neurodevelopmental impairment at 3 years of age. METHODS: A cohort of 135 very low birth weight infants (gestational age: 23 to 35 weeks) were monitored to 3 years of age. Maternal and neonatal characteristics, anthropometric z scores, and developmental performance (using corrected age until 24 months) were analyzed collectively and according to gestational age groups. Specific criteria for failure to thrive and microcephaly were used. RESULTS: A characteristic pattern of poor weight gain in the first 12 months was followed by accelerated weight gain starting at 18 months, whereas head growth decreased at 18 months, with recovery beginning at 30 months of age. Infants born at gestational age of or=27 weeks achieved catch-up growth by 30 months of age. Mean developmental scores also decreased in infancy, with improvements in motor development emerging at 18 months and cognitive skills at 30 months. Growth z scores, particularly for head growth, correlated with developmental scores. Infants born at gestational age of